I am hoping some generous player with a good grasp of theory can confirm or deny if my basic understanding of balancing ones range is accurate. I am not making this post because I am too lazy to read the literature/do the research, I have studied this in great detail but I am hoping someone will just let me know that my most basic ideas about range construction/balance are accurate. In poker theory it seems as though everything is built on fundamental assumptions and if we have errors in our fundamental understanding of a concept everything is messed up (for example if somebody failed to understand how equity factors into pot odds).

I will lay this out in the most basic possible terms, using a simple scenario:

PRE FLOP: Based on a given position, the other players at the table, the general action etc, hero determines what his RFI, 3Bet, calling ranges etc will be for that given position.

For simplicities sake lets just say hero is on the BTN. So for the BTN hero picks a fairly tight RFI range.

FLOP: Now based on the board texture, the number of players who made it to the flop, and the betting action hero will determine how he will continue with his range.

Lets say hero makes it heads up to the flop, the flop is very dynamic, and he gets check raised by UTG+1. According to min-defense-freq. hero determines that he must continue with the top 50% of his range, so he picks several combos from the value portion of his range, and some drawing type hands. He folds the rest.

TURN: whatever card hits the turn will help hero widdle his range down even further, choosing value/drawing combos from his flop selections. (scenario ends here)

So is this generally the correct way to think about range construction/balance: staring with ones pre flop range for a given position, and trimming/pulling various ratios of value and bluff type combos from that original range based on all variables across future streets?


THANK YOU