Commented code generates Fig. 2, while active code generates the wanted output in Fig. 1
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}
% http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/4816/13173
%\begin{table}
%\begin{tabular}{| +p{3cm} | ^p{3cm} | }
%\rowstyle{\bfseries}
%Count \texorpdfstring{$P_{st}(G)$} & Hello \\ \hline
% Output: wrong
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{| p{3cm} | p{3cm} | }
% Output: ok but not generic
\hline
\textbf{Count \texorpdfstring{$P_{st}(G)$}} & \textbf{Hello} \\ \hline
1 & 2 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{document}
Fig. 1 Wanted output (done with \textbf), Fig. 2 Output of the \bfseries approach with Math symbols
System: Linux Ubuntu 16.04
TexLive: 2015




\mathversion{bold}instead of\boldmath? It sounds me more stable but not sure. – Léo Léopold Hertz 준영 Aug 11 '16 at 08:18latex.ltx-- defines\boldmath(essentially) as\mathversion{bold}. – Mico Aug 11 '16 at 11:35