[Truthiness24]

I think that the dry sidepot example is an isolated instance of a situation where even unobservant players will remember your actions and adjust. It is in this sort of spot when your analogy about blitzing on third down is most illustrative. But in more common circumstances (eg what do I do with this hand in this pot), where the "villain" isn't really going to remember the hand -- usually because the villain won -- I think that getting too clever too often costs more than it helps in the long run.

I've never read a book on game theory. Can you refer me to a book or a site that would be accessible to a newbie?

I agree that it is more fun to play against good or "optimal" opponents. I wouldn't have it any other way. But it is painful in the wallet, esp when they are more observant than you. (See my "tracking software" thread from last night.)

Btw, you call the reverse or the SOL to keep the defense "honest." It doesn't matter if it works -- the point is to open up the defense for your conventional game. The reverse is like an advertising bet where you show down junk for your opponents to note.