[Arenas]

[ QUOTE ]

Arenas, you will learn that this is a somewhat typical post from Miles - he makes a (results-orientedly) good river lay down in a huge pot, and a lot of people (myself most certainly included) say "huge pot, good 7% or more, call WTF" In this hand, I have a hard time imagining my hand being good after the turn action vs. too non-tilting TAGs, yet at the same time, pot so big, closing action, etc...

One thing to remember is that, in my estimation, Miles is a superior hand reader to most of the posters here, so he can safely make a lot more of these thin lay downs - I can't fold this against most opponents because my read will very rarely be that good (plus the river donk confuses me so much...)

PF, capping this is spewy OOP vs. two competent TAGs (if either is weakish post flop you may get some value in terms of fold equity, but don't count on it now that you've bloated the pot) - you have an EQ edge vs. opener's range, but probably not against 3-better's range. Against different villains (laggy opener, thinking TAG 3-better, e.g.) a cap is certainly in order as the LAG's open means...very little, and the 3-bet is probably commensurate with the tag's top 85% or so of his usual openers in that spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with most of it. I think capping PF is indeed spewy most of the times.

And I'd play diferently when against two good TAGs(probably fold on the flop already as I don't wanna mess with really good TAGs when there's a lot of fishes at my tables) but in this case "one played spewy before" and for the other Miles just thought he was a good TAG but lately realized he didn't have many hands on him.

I also think that even with great handreading skills it's very hard to tell that you will lose here more than 93% of the time w/ a TP w/ good kicker.