great conversation, appreciate all the responses but I was hoping to get something more like an answer. Maybe it just is not as black and white as I think it is. I am pretty confident that my adjustments to this type of play are right.
If villain is overly aggressive, plays too many hands, bets and raises too large and at too high a frequency then it seems just as simple as can be to me personally that the correct adjustment is simply to call more often and raise less often.
What about when we have a really strong hand on the flop? Call more often raise less often
What if our hand is marginal like some kind of pure bluff catcher? Call more often raise less often
What about a mediocre hand pre-flop? Call more raise less often
Super strong hand on the turn? Call more raise less.
Draw? Call more often raise less often.
Now, I do understand that you could be missing chances to make really profitable light 3 bets but that would depend on how villain continues vs 3 bets. He may play very well against 3 bets, maybe he opens a light 4 bet range, balances it perfectly, and folds about the right number of hands and calls with the rest. Is 3 betting still great? Probably not if we know how he's going to make mistakes post flop.
What about raising him post flop so we can set up a dynamic that lets us get it in against him often when we induce spazz outs?? Well, yeah, I mean that COULD be ok but we don't know that based strictly on the reads i gave in OP.
What about tightening up our range pre-flop? Well, I think that's just silly. Let's say we were playing heads up. If our opponent was a perfect GTO bot and we knew exactly the range of hands we should play at equilibrium then GTO bot started playing more hands there is no way that can cause us to SUBTRACT hands to our ranges. Anything a fish does in a bad way makes it more not less profitable for us to play and there is no way that can do anything but add hands to our ranges. Now, we if we mean that we should play a tighter range than we would against a player with the same LAG style but who used smaller bet sizings then, well, sure.. we can tighten up in the face of bigger bets but relative to someone playing an otherwise good strategy with big bets and raises we should be playing more hands not less and we should be doing that by adding hands to our calling range not our raising range.
So, yeah, if our opponent is making maniacal mistakes it COULD be we can figure out some other stuff he does poorly and make some other adjustments. And you could maybe make an argument for mixing it up still so you don't let him adjust to your exploits but, again, not exactly what the debate was about.
So.. I am FIRMLY in camp one.
If you guys HAD TO chose one camp or the other?? one or two?
And what would you change about this "paradigm 1"?
What do I have wrong?
I think its great to just "avoid the virtual coolers" and keep villains bluffing range in tact, let him value own himself, and slow play big hands until the river and then i would even check to him more than usual and look to check raise my strongest hands.
I think one is correct and two just kinda sounds good.
Yay?
Nay?
Whatcha think between the two?
Of course any further discussion is great too but I thought it was maybe a good time to just say where I come down on the issue.
It did make for a hell of a debate and was intersting to hear players of ~ equal skill levels and with aprox the same win rates playing the same stakes for about the same amount of time disagree so feircely on this topic.
Everyone was SOO confident and argumentitive in my little group and we RARELY disagree and NEVER actually get heated,.. things on this topic got a bit heated.
And, of course, I still believe i'm right and they're wrong
But ready to be corrected..