Hi guys. Normally play 3/6 and 2/4 nlh on Bovada. Starting to play a little 5/10 nlh now and against better competition.

I'm trying to understand Game Theory better. To be able to conceptualize it more.

Question #1:
If we show up on the river with a perfectly polarized range, and we make a bet, how does are EV change from your opponent calling and folding the appropriate amount, to your opponent calling with every hand that can beat a bluff? First of all, does this just mean that your value hands make more money now, but since your bluffs lose more money now, your EV still stays the same? Or does it mean since your opponent is now playing a strategy furthur away from game theory, he is now losing more money to you in the long run?

Question #2:
I looked in my database at hands villains 3bet vs my utg open. Saw a hand where the HJ 3bet 64o preflop. With playing game theory, if you play a perfectly balanced range preflop/flop/turn/river vs their bet sizings, will my EV stay the same because I am appropriately folding the right amount of hands and calling with the right amount? Or from his perspective, maybe his optimal 3bet frequency is say 4% of all hands preflop, but say since he's 3betting 64o, maybe he's 3betting 30% of hands (technical I know he's basically 3betting everything because he's 3betting 64o, but let's just say 30%), do all the extra hands he's playing now have a negative expectation attached to them?

I've read a ton and watched videos incorporating a lot of game theory concepts to my game, thinking "this hand belongs in this range, so I'm going to call in this spot", ect...but I want to understand it even better. What I'm really wondering is if your playing an optimal strategy and your opponents are really far from optimal, is your strategy inherently just going to net you money. Basically if you visualize every single hand in your opponents range and maybe all the ones that are supposed to be part of their optimal range maybe have a 0 EV expectation or +EV expectation, but do the ones that would fall out of an optimal strategy, to they lose your opponent money, therefore making you money?

Something I'm trying to get at, is I'm a reg that grinds for a living and I basically have my set strategy I do in spots and don't deviate much from it. I'm thinking on how to improve my own game and want to find spots where maybe I'm defending more/less than optimal or bluffing more/less than optimal, and when I'm facing opponents in similar situations, executing an optimal stragegy vs them in those spots and possibly improving my overall expectation (if it works like that). Maybe there is a spot where I'm bluffing too much.

It seems like poker is a game where its all about winning the most equity with every hand in your range. Say maybe preflop, other players are folding hands from the bb, where your actually 3betting those hands and losing less money per hand than 1bb and calling profitably with other hands those players are 3betting, and your strategy is realizing more equity than other players' strategies you play against. If other player's strategies are not realizing as much equity as you are, I assume that means your making more money than they are?

Trying to understand game theory better. Feel like I've asked a lot of different questions that can maybe illuminate my thought process and thinking. A lot of my questions I feel like are similar in nature. Thanks!