So. IP I am 3-betting a more polar range in comparison to my more linear range OOP (this is in order to exploit wider calling ranges IP, and folds OOP). This brings me to 4-betting in and OOP.

My understanding is that vs a polar range, we want to be utilizing a linear strategy (and vice versa)? This is in order to exploit wider 3-betting range which consists of more bluffs in comparison to a linear range. When we 4b polar vs a linear 3b we can allow V to take flops, which is going to be good for our polar range, especially IP (meaning our bluffing section of our polar 4b's can potentially continue post flop on certain textures). I assume a polar range is going to be 5-betting AI/folding more, and taking fewer flops vs a 4b. With our linear range, we can then take our top x% hands and find a call vs a 5b AI, and fold our bottom x% hands (V/position dependent).

That being said, I never employ a completely linear/polar 3/4b range - I find it best to utilize a slight mix of both strategies, but generally leaning towards one; position dependent.

Am I correct in saying we should be 4-betting less vs a linear range? (as we will potentially find fewer folds vs a range w/ fewer bluffs).

I have also read some articles based on 4-betting strategy, and have found some that suggest a polar 4-betting range vs polarized 3bs, and linear vs linear. Is this the correct strat? Or, is it simply too V based; obviously I understand our strat depends somewhat on these factors, but does it depend entirely on elements such as how often V folds to 4b's etc. (upon these V dependent factors is how we develop our 4-betting range).

Is this logic correct or am I incorrect in my thought process? Any advice/opinions/thought's would be greatly appreciated, as this is something I am struggling with slightly atm (basically reasons why we should be employing a linear/polar strat vs 3b's).

Cheers.