I've been thinking about how postflop frequencies by villains effect my preflop strategy, and I have a fairly broad question.

Against an opponent who Cbets and barrels too frequently, a lot of speculative preflop hands are going to have trouble realizing their equity. On the other hand, against a player who is more passive on the flop, we'll oftentimes get to see turns/rivers, which should allow us to call a preflop open somewhat wider.

But...

If the passive player is well-balanced, in that he checks a lot more OTF (a surging trend in the poker landscape), does the additional equity we realize in seeing more streets more often makeup for the fact that we'll be up against stronger ranges anyway.

In the situation of the player who cbets too much on the flop, if he does have a checking range and folds too much when he checks, i figure their is some way to determine how often he has to fold to a turn bet after a missed cbet to help justify how wide our preflop calling range is right?

huh?

You can play a lot more hands vs. passive players. You can probably play a bit wider vs. the aggrotards as well, but the threshold will be lower.

Passive isn't really the right word. I'll try and make this more concrete. Two competent regs, two different styles.

Player 1 (28/10 - cbets 65%), Player 2 (28/10 - cbets 45%) - Facing a RFI (~55% of hands) from the BTN in the BB. Should my preflop strategy be significantly different between these two?

The second question relates to whether I can use more abstract postflop frequencies to alter my preflop strategy in a more nuanced way. If I know P1 folds to turn/river aggression after he checks the flop too much, does that make it exploitably correct to play a wider range preflop than a standard BB defense vs BTN open?

What sparked all of this was after hearing Tyler Forrester on the 2p2 pokercast discussing how players should be altering their preflop strategies based on what their opponents do postflop, and determining what exactly to do can be a fairly precise science especially from the BB. He has a few RIO videos on this from what i understand, but I'm only an Essential member.

Super late, dont know why I put 28/10 lol, 28/20-22 in that range. Basically a Laggish reg

Typically if someone is more aggressive and c-betting more you'd want to defend slightly less preflop I'd imagine. But, they may be making too many mistakes on turns/rivers with continued aggression that the EV lost facing flop bets is more than made up for on turn/river mistakes by your opponent.

That'd be my take on it.

So, a few things here:
1) The more mistakes (of any kind) our opponents make post flop, the wider we can call and the more hands we can play in general (be that by flat call or 3 bet/4 bet, whatever)
2) The less often your opponent c-bets the more equity you will realize when you are behind (with all of your hands) but I do believe that suited connected hands will benefit more from this than other hands if only slightly.
3) The less often your opponent c-bets the less you will tend to make when you out flop your opponent in a big way (and I would say that this prob hurts suited connecting hands worse than it hurts other hands with the prob exception of small pocket pairs). So this maybe tempers the otherwise benifit that SC's have vs infrequent c-bettors but I still do think that suited connectors will play better against players w a lower c-bet %.
4) There are other factors that can make these factors less or more important of course. Stack depth comes to mind.

So, yeah, I do think you're right, OP, that we can add some more synergistic hands to our flat calling ranges vs players who c-bet less often than they ought to. But there is, of course, more to consider than that.

Consider one player who c-bets a % that is on the low side of average but plays pretty good overall and then consider a player who c-bets far too high a % and folds vs check raise way too often. It could well be the case that suited connectors are more valuable against the latter player because we can check raise stuff like 9s8s on 7s3h2d very profitably and NEEDLESS TO SAY we can check raise that 9s8s on Qs7s2c very profitably.

Before I started answering this thread I actually was pretty certain I was in agreement with you, OP, and had come to this same conclusion on my own. But as I think thru all the multitude of variables that could make it less or more true and start grappling with just how complex this is it makes me a bit less confident than I was before. I think I'm going to rest on this statement and feel pretty good about it, "The more mistakes your opponent makes the more hands you can play profitably against him. Not c-betting often enough is a mistake. The right type of hands to add to your calling ranges vs players who make a lot of mistakes post flop would be hands that are just barely not strong enough to call with ordinarily. Suited connected hands fit the bill quite well for hands that you may just barely fold or work into a light 3 bet range and so.. yeah, I think you are safe to add the hands you're thinking of adding based on the rationale you seem to be using but it's prob not quite as simple as you (and honestly I) may have thought.

Good "LUCK!"