[crunchy1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there's a better chance that the button will call 2SBs back to him on the flop before he calls 2BBs cold on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
But the amount we make on his cold-call is negligible.


[/ QUOTE ]
No it's not. First off - it's an extra BB - that in itself is not negligible. Second - he's going to be a lot more inclined to continue the hand to the river, and possibly showdown, after investing 6SBs on the first two streets.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think we can count on SB to lead every turn card after his PF/Flop action.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even after we call-cap?

[/ QUOTE ]
Fine. Possibly not any turn card. I don't think you should discount the amount of donk-betting that occurs on the turn in the 2/4 game. It's gotten really ridiculous lately - and possibly that's influencing my analysis.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Capping disguises Hero's hand if the flush hits.

[/ QUOTE ]
It will diguise our hand the minority of the time that the flush hits on the turn, but it conversely reveals our hand when we go into check-call mode the majority of the time?

[/ QUOTE ]
When are we ever going to be in check/call mode? If SB checks the turn, we check and the BB bets. This situation is negligible. SB probably won't give a free card on a non-club turn - that's fine. Smooth-calling the turn after call-capping the flop probably doesn't narrow Hero's range in SB's view to only a flush draw.

Regardless of all of these points. It's not like we're trying to disguise, protect or gain extra value needed to make up any bet because of some equity disadvantage. IMO, this is a fine example of a cap for value.