A hand

[Paluka]

I was going to respond to this, but Clarkmeister has me on ignore.

[Westley878]

HI Clarkmeister,

It looks like you posted this hand becuz you were wondering if there is a better line to take in this spot with TT against this type of opponent.

Heres a quote from TOP, page 272, that may apply here.

11. "Against an opponent who plays too loose on early rounds and too aggressively later on you should play solid cards, but play them meekly. Make this player think he can run over you."

Since the villain seems to fit this decription, If I were to apply this concept, I would just call his 3 bet preflop, and on this board, I would just call down. What do you think of the merits of this strategy against this particular opponent. I personally like this line against this villain.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
HI Clarkmeister,

It looks like you posted this hand becuz you were wondering if there is a better line to take in this spot with TT against this type of opponent.

Heres a quote from TOP, page 272, that may apply here.

11. "Against an opponent who plays too loose on early rounds and too aggressively later on you should play solid cards, but play them meekly. Make this player think he can run over you."

Since the villain seems to fit this decription, If I were to apply this concept, I would just call his 3 bet preflop, and on this board, I would just call down. What do you think of the merits of this strategy against this particular opponent. I personally like this line against this villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Capping preflop is totally mandatory if his 3 betting range includes hands you dominate, and he will continue to play in a bizarre way(see this hand) postflop.
-James

[mike l.]

"Capping preflop"

no cap headsup live

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
"Capping preflop"

no cap headsup live

[/ QUOTE ]
in vegas there is, but its five bets.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Capping preflop"

no cap headsup live

[/ QUOTE ]
in vegas there is, but its five bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike is right. In most rooms, including this one, once it's headsup there's no cap. So we could've gone 12 bets preflop had we both chosen to do so.

[Westley878]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
HI Clarkmeister,

It looks like you posted this hand becuz you were wondering if there is a better line to take in this spot with TT against this type of opponent.

Heres a quote from TOP, page 272, that may apply here.

11. "Against an opponent who plays too loose on early rounds and too aggressively later on you should play solid cards, but play them meekly. Make this player think he can run over you."

Since the villain seems to fit this decription, If I were to apply this concept, I would just call his 3 bet preflop, and on this board, I would just call down. What do you think of the merits of this strategy against this particular opponent. I personally like this line against this villain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Capping preflop is totally mandatory if his 3 betting range includes hands you dominate, and he will continue to play in a bizarre way(see this hand) postflop.
-James

[/ QUOTE ]
I have to say I strongly disagree with this statement. I'm not saying capping is a bad play, but I definitely do not think its mandatory. Just becuz the hero's hand is likely to be ahead of the villain's 3betting range does not necessarily mean that capping is the best play. Against certain opponents it may be best to pass up our edge preflop, depending on how our opponent will react postflop to the hero's cap versus the how the villain will react postflop if the hero just calls the 3bet.

Holdem is too complicated of a game to ever say that capping is absolutely madatory. It can very easily be the case that the hero stands to make more money in the long run by just calling the 3 bet and letting the villain stay in control of this hand than if the hero capped and retook control of the hand. As you know, limit holdem is a muti-steet game, how the hero plays one street will have a direct impact on how the later streets play out. Becuz of this reality, the hero actually has a lot of flexibilty preflop after the villain 3 bets. Whether the hero should cap or not, I am not certain, but I am certain of this much. There are no absolutes here, and against many opponents with the same range as this villains 3bet, capping would not be the right play here.

Edit: Just realized from Mike1's post that this is HU live so there is no cap, just replace the word cap with fourbet.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
Just becuz the hero's hand is likely to be ahead of the villain's 3betting range does not necessarily mean that capping is the best play...As you know, limit hold 'em is a multi-street game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you be any more condescending? Are you seriously telling me that hold 'em is a multi-street game? I realize my response was brief, but your response is long-winded and insanely basic. I did not say to fourbet every time if we believe we are ahead of his range. I said to fourbet every time if his hand range includes hands we dominate and he will continue to play bizarrely postflop. This is the crux of the position here. I know that there are many times where, in position, we can afford to disguise our hand and expect to gain more bets later on. Believe it or not, I have played a few hands of limit hold 'em.


[ QUOTE ]
Holdem is too complicated of a game to ever say that capping is absolutely madatory.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it isn't. There are certain times where it is absolutely mandatory. When you have the absolute nuts on the river while heads-up, putting as many bets in as possible is mandatory. When you have aces in a ten-way pot and you can either call the third bet and close the action, or make it fourbets, it's mandatory. There are certain times where, mathematically, it is insanely stupid not to cap. This is NOT one of those times. This time, it's a combination of the math(you have a very good chance of being a 2:1 favorite, at least according to Clark's original post) and the fact that our opponent will still give us plenty of action regardless of our cap. This is true in many high-stakes games, especially against opponents who aren't as good as we are.

[ QUOTE ]
Against certain opponents it may be best to pass up our edge preflop, depending on how our opponent will react postflop to the hero's cap versus the how the villain will react postflop if the hero just calls the 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe this hand is evidence that our opponent falls into the category of "we should take our edges every time we can get them, because he will continue to give us plenty of opportunities for more money on later streets regardless of the strength we show," as there are very few hands he could have here that he has played well against Clark's range and table image.

So please, save your essay on why 4-betting preflop with the best hand is "sometimes not the right play." I have considered this before. Instead of jumping on what you believed to be a mistake, you should have read my close more carefully. While it was short, you managed to miss half of the reason I gave why fourbetting was best.
-James

EDIT: I just noticed that you saw Clarkmeister say basically what I did(except that he elaborated more) and now you agree. Oh well, maybe you learned something from this post anyway and will read posts more carefully, so you won't have to take ten times as long to come to the correct decision.

[Westley878]

James, I am sorry that my post came off as condescending. I didnt intend it to sound that way. When I said that holdem was too complicated of a game to ever say that capping is mandatory, I meant in this specific preflop situation. I shouldve been more clear.

I was not convinced that capping was the best play preflop against this opponent until I read Clark's response.

Im sorry if I offended you in any way.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
as there are very few hands he could have here that he has played well against Clark's range and table image.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hey James,

Suppose villain had some weak or medium ace, what would have been a good line for him take against clark's range here?