It allows you to widen your range --call some suited connectors and borderline PPs for less. If UTG has a 4bet range, you gain that extra info.

1. If you have an UTG raise and UTG+1 re-raise with strong ranges (i.e., players who don't get out of line), I'm not sure you should have any suited connectors and borderline PP's in your range. Your calling 3 bets range should look basically identical to what your capping range looks like.

2. If you don't cap anything, you miss the opportunity to charge 2 players an extra bet to play pre-flop, which you may not get the opportunity to put in later.

3. If your opponents are not stupid, they should figure out that your call is super-strong.

I totally understand the argument for not having a capping range in situations where the opponents' ranges are wider, but UTG raise and UTG+1 re-raise? Just cap, IMO.

I've just stoved this with the ranges OP provided. UTG has 34.5% equity, UTG+1 has 27.7%, and CO has 37.9%. I don't think we should fold, and I don't think we should get aggressive. Good spot to call down.

How much value does CO give up from their best hands if they never cap? How many hands can they profitably add to their range if they just flat-call the 3-bet? Does the added value from the additional flatting hands make up for the value lost by flatting what would otherwise be their 4-betting range?

three bet flop, call down rest of way...you can't give credit for AA or KK in these situations regardless of image. Sets theoretically even out over time.

The general principle is, when the pot gets big, you should worry about saving the pot, not bets.

Here the mental math would seem to be close (I can post mine). But what makes aggressive play correct here is that we can sometimes get AK to fold when it "should" call because we're slightly overrepresenting our hand. We should XR CO on the flop because AK UTG+1 probably will fold here and should against our range and not closing the betting, but actually has odds against our actual hand.

We're probably a little behind his capping range but not far behind that being behind is a marginal, not a suicidal "waste" of bets. Getting hands to fold substantial equity is worth a large portion of this 6 big bet pot, at least 1.5 bets if AK is 25%. Getting caught with a worse hand is worth at most 1.35 big bets (90% of 1.5 because we sometimes spike a Q). We won't always get AK to fold (they may not even have AK), but we won't always be behind the bettor either.

Exception is if CO is likely to decline the cbet here. If we're best then getting checked through is a disaster so leading is worth considering.

If you're against observant players and think betting out with JJ-QQ is correct in a vacuum, then you should probably lead with a few other hands too. AKs of ,, or sometimes the suited AQ ,, seems like enough range with enough equity to provide some deception.