[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
misguided because they are based on the assumption that our opponent will both correctly assess AND correctly exploit the vulnerability of our actions.

[/ QUOTE ]
Villain doesn't have to assess anything or be any kind of genius. For many of these LAGs attacking tight players (or all players) comes naturally. They just do it and you either counter it properly or you don't.

The problem comes in when Hero is being exploitably weak and doesn't realize it. Suddenly the LAG has the best of it and Hero doesn't understand what is happening to him. Folding "too many" hands is fine if Villain doesn't bluff enough. It's a deliberate strategy to make extra profit by exploiting his failure to bluff.

[ QUOTE ]
Until our opponent gives us reason to do otherwise, I think it is usually the best policy to take whatever action we think has the highest EV for a given situation with minimal regard to the implications that action may have on future hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course taking the highest EV action is the best policy but that is beside the point. None of what I wrote is about future hands, only the current hand. If Villain is bluffing correctly--not excessively, but correctly--then a policy of folding too many hands will cause an immediate EV loss on the current hand.

Of course if Villain recognizes your leak he may exploit it by further increasing his bluffing. This will cause him losses if you adjust and begin calling at least the correct amount. Otherwise he devastates you.

The underlying concept is that in heads up play there is a correct amount to bluff and a correct amount to call. This is an equilibrium where neither player can exploit the other. The first player to disturb the equilibrium is going to suffer losses. But if one player insists on playing incorrectly and never adjusts then the other player can either continue playing normally and make a profit or he can can begin playing incorrectly in the opposite direction and make extra profit. For example, if Villain decides to bluff too much you can exploit him by calling too much. But if you insist on calling too much then he can exploit you by not bluffing at all.

Holdem is so complicated that figuring out exactly what is correct play is extremely difficult. But it is still important to try and think about it to create some guidelines for your play. Then you can take that guideline and adjust it for the way your opponent actually plays. This way if you are assuming that your opponent is too passive then you at least realize what you are doing and can make adjustments if it isn't working out.

The "what would happen if Villain always bluffed" question is a tool for recognizing incorrect play. If you are calling the proper amount then you should expect that he can't hurt you this way. If you are calling too much he also can't hurt you. But if the answer is that you are losing large amounts of money that obviously belongs to you then the inescapable conclusion is that you fold too much. Now you need to ask yourself why folding too much is the default play in this situation. If you have a good answer to that question then go ahead. But at least you've thought about it.

An example of a standard play for many of us that is "folding too much" is checkcall, checkcall, betfold with a moderate made hand. There is no way this is mathematically correct in many situations where it is applied. But it is definitely true that a wide range of players don't bluff raise enough in this situation. This in turn is an exploitation on their part of the fact that a wide range of players call river raises much too much. But it is still worth remembering that the betfold play is incorrect and remain wary lest you become the exploited instead of the exploiter.