  It is sometimes the case that one solution concept in game theory is
equivalent to applying another solution concept to a modified version of the
game. In such cases, does it make sense to study the former separately (as it
applies to the original representation of the game), or should we entirely
subordinate it to the latter? The answer probably depends on the particular
circumstances, and indeed the literature takes different approaches in
different cases. In this article, I consider the specific example of
Stackelberg mixed strategies. I argue that, even though a Stackelberg mixed
strategy can also be seen as a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of a
corresponding extensive-form game, there remains significant value in studying
it separately. The analysis of this special case may have implications for
other solution concepts.
