I am watching a runitonce video about blockers, by James Hudson (it's the earliest video in full ring, theory categories).

I understand that blockers aren't very effective vs people who don't 3/4/5 bet bluff and have a value range of AK/AA/KK/QQ because blockers don't eliminate the possibiltiy of certain hands, they reduce it, but when these guys are 3/4/5 betting you they actually have it, so your blockers mean shit (other than e.g. if you hold AQ telling you that it's more likely that of the pairs they more likely have KK).

I understand that AKQJ blockers are not as effective against someone who is 4betting smaller pocket pairs because your blockers aren't going to block that many of their hands preflop (as they have such a wide range) and are thus less useful vs a loose/wide 4better+.

I understand that blockers are effective vs 3/4/5 bet bluffers who try to rep a value range of AK/AA/KK/QQ because say you have KQ, they can now only have 24 combos of that range (6 AA, 3 KK, 3QQ, 12 AK)

James says that blockers are even more valuable against 4bet bluffers because against someone who has a balanced range (who also uses blockers to 4bet bluff such as AJ, AQ, KQ etc) BECAUSE we're blocking their use of blockers. I don't understand why it's valuable to block someone's use of blockers and their use of Ax type hands.