alan is correct.

in your example he can, eg, make thinner calls on the turn since he will get so see a showdown for cheaper. if you are veering off GTO, you are by definition playing exploitably.

note in MoP (p97), they introduce the term "balance" by saying it is not a technical term from game theory, and then say that "balance is a measure of how exploitable a strategy is." thus a perfectly balanced strategy is GTO.

EDIT: I think you are thrown off by their claim that "we can often create strategies that are balanced and difficult to exploit." They mean this in an approximate sense, and with the assumption that we are playing other imperfect humans. And again, they are simply using "balanced" to mean "an approximation to GTO."

no idea what you are responding to here, i'm not comparing polaris and sonia. i am using both, separately, to illustrate that the best humans and the best current GTO bot are both still highly exploitable (in theory)

Balance is just the first "step" to GTO. All GTO strategies are perfectly balanced, but not all (perfectly) balanced strategies are GTO.

If the ratios of bluffs:valuebets is not changing, you cannot make thinner calls, the perceived distribution has not changed such that we can exploit anything - you aren't bluffcatching more. Now, the person cbetting at irregular frequencies may own himself by betting at too high of a frequency, but he can lose value without being exploitable.

Again, I truly realize that giving an example on the flop, where hand distributions aren't absolute/static and can change from street to street because of the presence of draws make the situation more complex. This is why I introduced the other river example. How would you, as the opponent calling exploit that the opponent is not value betting enough, but still bluffs at the appropriate ratios?

No, it is not. Since I can create one-street strategies that are perfectly balanced, unexploitable and proven to be not GTO, (they don't maximize value), that statement is not correct.

Ah ok, I concede you are right about this. The other player has no incentive to deviate from his current strategy but you do. I guess I find this to be a definitional quibble, as your opponent is still "exploiting" you (not in the technical GTO sense, ofc) just by continuing to play. That is, if you and I were playing a 1 street game of poker, taking turns as the button, and you played balanced but not GTO (not maximizing your value) and I played GTO, I would win money from you. So the sense in which you are "unexploitable" is only one of mathematical definition.

From a practical perspective, too, it seems like an inconsequential distinction, because it's not as if the problem of balance has been solved for the full game of LHE, and people simply don't know how to maximize value. As closer approximations to a GTO solution are found, both problems have to solved simultaneously.

Also, while you are right the general statement "perfectly balanced implies GTO" is not true, it could be the case that in a more complex real game like LHE that the statement is true. At least I don't see an obvious reason why not. Which leads to my answer to your other question:

Changing your play on earlier streets. It could be the case that certain portion of your turn range have to be folded only because your opponent gets X amount of value on the river. If he is not claiming that value, it allows you to continue with more showdownable hands. Just as a possible example.

Couple things. Nice topic joker and great reply from dd. I would say that the more you attempt balance the better at seeing areas to exploit in your opponents you will be.
Also, Playing different hands in the same way or in similar boards IS balance.
Need to balance play and balance ranges.goes hand in hand
Live, im always looking at how players play common boards such as pairs and 3 suits etc. so many players have UN balanced play(and ranges) that you can define alot of their style from just a few boards. I think balance is extremely important , ..especially live. Okay gameover, have fun

bump