Book by Michael Acevedo:

"In general, you want to construct your betting range in such a way that your opponent cannot possibly make the right decision consistently against all the different holdings in your range. You want to create a big discrepancy between your opponent’s EV when they call and you hold hand type A in your range compared to when they call and you hold hand type B or C in your range. The same applies to raising. You want there to be a sizeable EV difference when they raise when you have hand A in your range and when they raise and you have hand B or C in your range. That is what makes a really strong betting range. The EV of folding is always 0, so in that case it doesn’t matter."

I don't feel like I agree with the last sentence.

If you examine the simple AKQ toy game. It's not the same folding with the K against the A, than against the Q.

For you, EV is always 0 for sure. But when you fold against the A, you are better with the EV 0 of folding than the EV- of calling.

And when you fold against the Q, you are worse with the EV 0 of folding than the EV+ of calling.

So by having a strong betting range you are also making the villain do mistakes even when they fold. They can't consistently play well against all your hands.

This is too basic and Acevedo himself explain it some pages before writing this, feel like he could have added this here too. Maybe just a semantic issue here?

What are your thoughts?

He's basically paraphrasing Slanky's Fundamental theorem of poker