This is one of the better articles I've read recently:
Whenever someone explains why a common practice is for the intermediate players (vs. those continually striving to get better), I listen. I have often thought about why I instinctively don't want to c-bet on some boards and I realize that I've been looking to quantify it as this article has.
A digression: So much poker information today is related and correlated to "wide ranges" and keeping bad hands in the pot. So much is on maximizing return and the notion of "survival" is far less emphasized. I continue to struggle with the notion that these are somewhat opposing views and that there is instead a time to look at any given situation as in one camp vs. the other instead of preaching/teaching one or the other. I have yet to nail down some of the dynamics, but I am contemplating this a ton.
Intuition tells me that there are times that its better to maximize value and there are times where its better to avoid a marginal edge, despite convention 2014 thinking that I have to take many many edges and just amortize it over a larger number of entries. If there was a way to draw that distinction, it stands to reason (although unproved) that you could get similar results with a smaller sample size.