Quote:
Originally Posted by steveistheman84
should have said, "for the same reasons as flatting or cc'ing the bb". i think that not capping is more for keeping a wider range than seeing if the original raiser caps. a lot of players, especially ip, will cap their whole range knowing that it can't get reraised while letting them show a lot of strength and have the ability to take free cards.
I recognize that choosing not to cap ever does keep your range wider. However, choosing never to cap from the BB (and forgoing the immediate value that capping a strong range would give you) is a choice we make because of the combined benefit of several effects: keeping a wider range; seeing if the original raiser chooses to cap; the relatively small edge we generally have over the other players' ranges (if they have reasonable raising and 3betting ranges); the ability to check-raise favorable flops, etc
Note that here, only the wider range is still working for us...
Firstly, one of the ranges is frequently weak and/or decapitated (again, unless one of the 2 villains cold-called from the BB) which means our preflop equity edge is substantially larger than if we are playing against reasonable raising and 3betting ranges, since now we are playing against a 3betting range and either a limping range or a cold-calling range. Against these weaker ranges we're giving away more immediate value for the sake of information hiding.
Secondly, we miss out on the information of whether or not the original raiser chooses to raise. Sure, maybe some players "always" cap it or whatever, but we still get to see it happen and get to see the 3rd player react to it on the flop. Now, we have no chance of any more information, because our call closes the action.
So, while we still are maintaining a wider range, I don't think that, in and of itself, is enough reason to not cap.