In the CO, fees adds a few more hands:
- 22+
- A5s+
- A9o+
- 65s+
- JTo+
- QTo+
- KTo
- K9s
- T8s+
- Q9s+
which he states is 23% of total hands, pointing out that a successful blind steal is an equivalent winrate of 75PTBB and so it is an important part of our profits in the game.
Fees includes some discussion about how our action is influenced by the action in front of us, with two specific examples. In one example, we have K9s in CO, and a 38/10 (50% fold to cbet) UTG limps with a 18/15 TAG behind us on the BTN and two 30-35% VPIP short stacks in the blind. He recommends folding vs raising because it is likely that UTG will not fold to our cbet because he is at the top of his range UTG and there his fold to cbet range is considerably less than 50%. At least one of the shorties will likely come along with us and so we may have to cbet through two players, and the shorties don't give us any IO either.
Limping is not considered- is this because BTN would come along and make things tough for us? Perhaps the shorties in the blinds would give us our IO if we just limp?
Another scenario:
we have 65s in CO, 25/12 (fold to cbet 66%) MP limps with a 20/10 weak tight BTN. Blinds are deep and bad. This seems like the opposite the previous example and he advocates a raise.
In both examples, we are either raising or folding. If we are against a player who likes to call, we raise the K9s type of hands if he is short. But if he is deep, we raise 65s. Just an IO thing.
Finally, we have K9s/KTo/A9o in CO and a LP full-ish stacked player in MP limps with tight button and blinds. then we raise to isolate as the probability increases that the non-limpers get out of the way and the tendency of the limper to fold to cbet.
There is no discussion of 3 betting, but I assume that we will want to 3 bet a little more liberally here, seeing as we are slightly closer to the button and also seeing as if we are 3 betting a MP open, MP's range can be a little wider than an UTG open.