This is kinda open for everyone to comment and discuss, but I'm reading through some Sklansky and some questions are arising... I know the answers will become more apparent with practice and more reading but wanted to gather some info from anyone willing to share...

1) When addressing bet sizing, Sklansky mentions the obvious of not sizing your bet too large to drive the opponent out of the pot. This is geared towards the best hand, but when you believe you have say 50% of villians range beat, is it better to bet to keep them in the pot for the 50% of range you have beat or bet to potentially force the fold for the other 50%? Did that even make sense? Ok, let me state it another way... say you put villian on pocket pair, AT+ and the board doesn't help him... you are holding TT... are you betting to protect against the upper half of his range or possibly encourage the fold of part of that upper half, if you feel he puts you onto a set?

2) Bet sizing to max your expectation seems very complicated... I think I understand the theory behind it but this seems difficult to put into practice... any thoughts?

3) The Hammer... Sklansky talks about the hammer of future bets... basically if I get this right, it involves going into your games as deep stacked as possible to ensure you still have that threat of big money behind... or am I oversimplifying this?

Ok, they are all probably obvious answers, but I was reading during lunch hour and this is where I got to...