[Wynton]

What occurs to me whenever anyone described an opponent who is "instabetting" is that he's not really playing his cards, which makes it more important that we play our own (rather than try and adopt by hand-reading).

In other words, this type of opponent is evidently not paying very much attention to the board, as much as he is adopting a set routine. If his reaction is predetermined, then I think that's more of an argument for us to play our cards, rather than try and force the villain to adopt or try to make inferences about his hand.

This is just another way of saying what has already been said. I think we continue to bet for value when our cards are great and hope for cheap showdowns when they're marginal. I just wouldn't spend too much time trying to put our opponent on particular cards, since the villain's "instabet" suggests they're making actions regardles of what their cards happen to be.