I read it in a comment here as well earlier, but got no source. Essentially the idea stated by him was that when facing a bet, if you can't beat any of the value hands that your opponent is representing, then you should fold (except when you have draws of course). Is this even correct? Sounds kind of counter-intuitive to me because why shouldn't you be considering when your opponent is bluffing? But I see it time and time again even by the best high stakes pros these kinds of plays:

6-handed, 100bb effective

Hero raises early position KTs to 3bb
Late position calls

K43 rainbow

Hero cbets 75%
villain calls

Turn is 8

Hero check folds

I've seen even Phil Ivey do stuff like this on a season 6 episode of Poker After Dark (before it got cancelled in 2012) where he consistently folds top pair CORRECTLY to just a single turn bet after making one flop continuation bet (even against Tom Dwan who should be bluffing there more than most) and I think it works because of this concept.

Obviously in the example given above, the only value hand you probably can beat is K9s and that's considering your opponent is playing very loose. Otherwise all value-type hands that are betting have to have you beat, right?

Sorry if this is long. I'm not that good of a player yet. Just trying to learn all I can and more about how to fold correctly and to be more precise. I've really been struggling with it and I don't want to keep being a calling station anymore.

Opponent's non-equity bluffs are usually an extremely small portion of their range. So if we can't beat any of the hands that our opponent could be value betting with and we don't have a reasonable amount of draw equity then we should just find a better spot or we'll get brought to value town over and over again.

As for the Phil Ivey thing... there's a reason why he's considered one of the best players in the world. He utilizes every part of the game to gain advantages.

This concept doesn't really hold up in the modern game tbh - it's not so simple. With that said, the idea is solid. I would modify this concept to say that if we 1) have no draw and 2) don't beat any vbets, we should think carefully about continuing our hand. We can use things like villain reads, blocker properties, and overall range strengths (in addition to betsizings by villain) to decide to call some of these hands and fold other ones.

Basically if you realize you're in a spot where you beat bluffs but lose to all the value hands, it's worth pausing and thinking about what to do, and usually the answer is "call sometimes, fold sometimes" and maybe even bluffraise sometimes too!

When we beat value hands though we pretty much always want to be calling because we're beating bluffs and we're also beating + chopping with some portion of our opponent's value range. This is the case pretty much always unless we really know villain is an extreme nit who rarely if ever bluffs.

I think it's probably most relevant at the micros and more specifically on the river when most players aren't bluffing enough.