Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

In another thread at HUSH, I asked about capping with A10 from MP after an aggressive player 3-bets you from bb. See here.

I'd like to get more discussion about the metagame benefits of capping a LAG, when in position. In other words, I raise from MP, and the LAG 3-bets from the BB. (I'm excluding sb, because I think that's an entirely different situation.)

What hands would you cap with in this scenario? Should we be liberal about capping, because there is a decent chance the LAG is on a worse hand range than us in the first place? Or is that fact actually an argument for just calling, so that we can retain flexibility about either letting LAG keep firing away and/or abandon the hand more easily ourselves?

Aside from that particular hand, is capping good because we want to discourage LAG from 3-betting in the future? Will we discourage him more if we just call and raise a subsequent street? Or are we better off encouraging the LAG to continue overbetting future hands?

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

I don't think capping liberally is going to significantly dissuade him from 3betting you. To the contrary, it will often piss him off and make him 3bet you more.

I would cap with hands that I think have a big edge over his range. I'm talking about hands like 88+, AJ+, etc. With hands with a more marginal edge (A6, 44, KQ, etc.) I often just call and give him the initiative. Initiative against LAGs really isn't too valuable (Elindaur had a good post in midhigh a little while ago about whether initiative is inherently valuable).

If I just call his 3bet with A9s, I can let him bluff 3 streets on a 3487J board if I want or raise when I hit. Capping the flop lets him checkraise you whenever he wants and put you to a tough decision in a bigger pot. I actually like giving lags the initiative when I'm in position because it excites them so much! They're gonna take this sexy initiative and always fire 3 barrels into you.

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

I'm with the funky llama.

Every time I cap a lag too often it's like pissing off bruce banner.

suddenly they're looking to cap so that they can get into big pissing contests with ace high.

calling down seems to slow them down considerably. especially when you do it with K9o and win. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

I'm not sure that pissing off a LAG is such a bad idea, when we have position.

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

lags generally dont pay attention to metagame much.

i think there is quite a bit of value in capping tags deceptively hu. also, not capping against tags can gain value later in the hand.

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure that pissing off a LAG is such a bad idea, when we have position.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, and I don't think we really want to slow them down in order to make it easier to play our marginal hands and get outplayed less often. The correct adjustment is to play better hands against them, allow them to continue playing the way they like, and punish the sh!t out of them with our superior holdings.

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

Can I get some more opinions about which hands people might cap with in this situation?

(And also interested in more opinions about the long-term advantages/disadvantages of capping against a LAG, keeping in mind that we have position.)

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

Maybe cap with suited marginals and just call with non suited.

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

If he's just a LAG who 3-bets liberally and bets and raises most streets without giving much consideration to folding Ace or King high, then I'm not capping much more than my normal capping range.

If he's a thinking LAG or just an overaggressive TAG, then my capping range goes up and starts to include hands like T9s. I'm not capping hands like ATo or A6o or whatnot, but hands where I need the FE and might be able to get it would be more likely to be added to my capping range.

Rob

Re: Metagame issue: cap a LAG who is in bb, when we\'re in position?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If he's just a LAG who 3-bets liberally and bets and raises most streets without giving much consideration to folding Ace or King high, then I'm not capping much more than my normal capping range.

If he's a thinking LAG or just an overaggressive TAG, then my capping range goes up and starts to include hands like T9s. I'm not capping hands like ATo or A6o or whatnot, but hands where I need the FE and might be able to get it would be more likely to be added to my capping range.

Rob

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the logic about when you cap a thinking LAG, or an overly aggressive TAG, but not the logic about your approach against the kind of LAG who simply 3-bets liberally. If he's 3-bet us pretty liberally, why not cap with a broader range than your typical range?