This is probably one of the best threads ever in the beginners circle.
Glad you are getting use out of this thread. I was afraid I'd be boring the pants off people. With such helpful guys, I feel it's best to ask even those questions that are just mildly puzzling. Every little helps.

I like to prod and probe and get opinion and test the boundaries - so that I really understand - even if I'm sure I have a good grasp anyway. I've always done it, and it's a process that'e really helped me to excel in other areas so here's hoping it works in poker too!



They are being sarcastic. He was named "Action" because he is renowned for his conservative style
I know. That is why I questioned him being called tight aggressive when he's a rock.



If villain will call 100% of the time and you are 100% you're ahead then you want to bet the maximum (all-in). However that's not the case. If you're 100% ahead and he calls the $10 bet 75% of the time, you're eV is 10*0.75 = $7.5. If only calls the $20 bet 25% of the time, your ev is $5 and it's better to bet less
Which goes back to what I said about what you think your opponent is likely to do to ensure you get paid off. Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't see it being imperative to learn and conduct EV formula in play, rather I prefer to go with feel as to how much I can extract.



the top pros recommend not limping in their books because they know they are dealing with beginners, and are trying to sell books.
Maybe you're right. I just don't see how Harrington, Brunson and everybody else is aiming just at beginners. of course, there are times to vary and slow play: so as to not be easily read, are out of position, have a small pair etc but I am not convinced that wherever you look, people advocate anything but limping purely because they are aiming at beginners and want to sell books.