[oldschool]

[ QUOTE ]
Example 1: 200nl 9 handed, games are standard pokerstars nitty: You openlimp AA in second position, and a good aggro player raises in late position. It folds to you and you reraise to pot.

Even though you have the nuts, you have not put yourself in a good spot. Here's why:

You are on a very narrow range. Even if you occasionally mix it up and limp-reraise with 22 and a suited connector from time to time, KK+ still makes a very large amount of your range. Even if you limpreraise a really wide range, likely your PERCEIVED range will be very strong, and this is very bad for getting value with AA.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that this logic is flawed (although not incorrect)-i think if you limp reraise a wide range and yet have a very high percieved hand strength you will lose value with AA ablsolutly, but youll gain stealing value with lots of other hands(the ones that you limp reraise)
[ QUOTE ]
What is the best play? I think at this point its common knowledge that this is a standard lead. Why? Because we'd do it with a very wide range of hands in this spot, including sets, draws, 99-JJ, and total air. In our overall gameplan here, leading the flop is a good play with a lot of hands. Checkraising is basically terrible because the flop checks through a lot, resulting in a bad spot, and also the nit will bet, we'll raise, and that will also result in a crappy spot because he'll fold an overpair if he's any good.

[/ QUOTE ] Yet another fairly stylistic difference we have but once again i think you are focusing too much on one aspect of play and not the other. the problem with the (standard lead) is that if you chk you have given villian [censored] tons of information abour your range, and since you insist that narrowing your range means your in a bad spot, well then any time you chk that flop you are putting yourself in bad spots even though you intend to fold everytimes its highly exploitable, although once again i do agree that a flop lead is a good play atleast halaf the time
[ QUOTE ]
Notice that in all of this that im basically completely ignoring our equity in the pot, and our need to maximize eV THIS STREET. An example would be if you flatcall a late position raise out of the blinds with 33 and the flop comes down K74r. 33 is probably 60% vs villains range, but if he's any good we can't c/c his continuation bet. Surely the optimal play would be to see a turn since we probably have the best hand, but in actuality we are put in so many "bad spots" on later streets that this is a c/f.


[/ QUOTE ]

The advice in this specific hand i once again agree with and disagree with, and weve already talked about thsi before but. You trying to quantify your hands equity against villians whole range is useless. and heres why....
When you and villian end up putting money into the pot on differenty streets it certainly wont be with your whole range, its kinda like considering making an all in play, you dont care about the equity youll have against any other hand besides on that calls you. LIke you say we have 60% against their whole range right? well then why not shove?. We should rather focus on what ranges of hands villian will put money in with on different streets and how, if they tend to put alot of money in with different ranges we play them one way and if they tend not to then we play them another.

that was just me being nit picky at your post and i know you are familiar with this concept.... just thought i help add something to a good pooh bah post =)