[brianmarc]

OK, I hear you. And your point about Antonius' article is well taken. However, this kind of makes my point: that this is more of a hand-reading example than a generalizable strategic analysis since when you have high certainty AND accuracy in reads, poker becomes much simpler. I, for one, have rarely been able to get as comfortable with a read as you did in this case.

So, I'm more interested in discussing and reading about situations where the uncertainty is greater and the author explains the thought process that lead to a decision. See some of the hands I have posted in LL and ML NL forums on 2+2 for examples.

But I see your point, and appreciate your response.