Cap Games on Full Tilt

[Zybomb]

So I get an email from Full Tilt today talking about their new cap games

For example if a player is playing a 1/2 NL game with a 60 Cap, someone could bet 6 dollars, and the most I could raise is 54 dollars... afterwards I'd be considered all in (although I have more $$ in front of me). The purpose seems to be not to let one bad beat kill your whole stack.... but honestly I think this is pretty retarded, as it'll cost you plenty of money against bad players, and it also allows drawing players to chase, knowing there is no turn or river bets for example.

Other opinions?

[bdawg31]

I thought it seemed odd too. That defeats the whole purpose of wanting to have maximum chips for maximum 'ammunition'.

With that said - does anyone think this will attract weak/scared players?

[Boobie Lover]

This looks incredibly retarded, although I'm sure people that play loose in this game will get destroyed.

[Penguinfan]

Yes I do, simply because I am actually thinking about playing these tables. Since I am just now learning to turn a profit at NL cash games it makes sense for me not to give two hours work back on a single bad beat.

Honestly, in the past two days I have played well for 2+ hours winning small to medium pots only to lose a giant pot on the river twice, once with AA and once with KK. Kinda protects me from myself in that sense.

Now if I was the kind of player who was wanting to play big pots and hope people miss thier draws then I would absolutly hate this.

Just because FT offers this doesn't mean you have to play it though, they still have regular tables.


In the "Big Game" don't they have a limit on what you can lose on a hand as well?

[bdawg31]

I guess to take that one step further - if someone is learning to play NL - or moving up levels - this is a way to protect yourself from losing it all when you make a mistake.

i think someone posted a quote from Barry Greenstein's book that he suggests buying in for the minimum when moving up levels in NL cash games. I guess this would be a variation of that.

[Penguinfan]

Good example:

KK 4x raise, flop a set on a board of 24K, bet the pot, get called, turn is a 9 (two hearts on the board now), I know I'm ahead here and push the rest in, he calls with 3 5 , can't blame him with the flush draw and open ended str8 draw, he hits the str8 on the river costing me most of my stack.

Not sure I really went wrong, but protection there would have been nice.


I say that only becasue I have been on the wrong end of a lot of these recently, if not, I might feel differently.

[thrash1294]

OK played some cap tables today and they are loose as hell so far its like a freeroll in 25nl today

[Talking Poker]

I got the email too. My immediate reaction is that these will attract the scared money players. I'm not sure if that will make up for the obvious pitfalls of having the cap though (not being able to stack anyone, not having NEARLY the same amount of ammo you could have in order to push someone off a hand, etc). What I'm more worried about is these games taking the weak players OUT of the normal games, and making those games tougher to beat.

IMO, if they want these to work, the cap should be around the max buy in - 100 BBs. By having it at just 30 BBs, that really changes the way a hand is going to play out on the turn and river.

Question though: Say, in Zy's example, he raised $53 instead of $54 (total of $59). Then he wouldn't be all in, and could lead out at the turn for $59, right? In order for his opponent to "cap" the action, he'd have to make a full raise (another $53 on the flop or $59 on the turn), right? If that's how it works, it's not so bad, but if he's somehow able to raise to $60 straight in either case, then I hate it.

[melioris]

this sucks. It reduces stack size to 30BB (assuming Zybomb's example is correct). So it really hurts to make a CB in these games. For instance, a hand with one caller, assuming a 3xBB preflop, a CB commits a total of 1/4 of your stack to the hand. I dont' get the appeal.

And penguinfan-you played that hand perfect. The monkey called without odds at each step, something you want. yeah, it totally sucks what happened but on the flop he was getting 2:1 his money when he was a little less than a 3:1 dog, and on the turn got less than 2:1 on his money when he was well over a 2:1 dog. Shit happens. At one of these tables the monkey probably would have had proper odds to call one those bets because your stack size was limited.

[JDMcNugent7]

wow. thats really dumb.
but i guarentee ppl start playing it like Pot Limit holdem, and inexperienced players like to raise to play that game with WAY more variance for some reason...raising the max Alot and making fast crazy calls.

i would def. play in this game if this ur limit and just tighten up and raise the hell out of hands.

[Zybomb]

No... this is the shitty thing. It effectively reduces everyone's stack to whatever the cap is

"For example, in a $60 Cap game, a player with $400 in chips may only wager up to $60 of his stack on a single hand, including pre- and post-flop play."

So your raise to 59 thing and then bet only 59 on the turn thing doesnt work

[Penguinfan]

I'm not really complaining, it may be a leak in my game that I like to get the money in after the turn, reason being is they aren't going to pay you off when they miss their draw so I like to charge them up front.

[Penguinfan]

I guess it depends which side you are on, I just seem to be on the worng side of it too often.

Dealt QQ, raise 4x get a caller flop of AQ8, all the chips go in on the flop, well all that could go in.

He turns over AA for set over set, saved me $35 since it was a .25/.50 game which the standard buy-in is $50, though the max is $1,000,000 for this cap game.

[Talking Poker]

That's retarded. Why in the world would I want to play in a game where the max stack is 30 BBs? I don't care how bad the players are, I can't see how that could be worthwhile.

Count me out.

[Zybomb]

I agree 100%.... the only use I can think out of this is to get a feel for a higher limit which u r considering making a move up to without risking a huge chunk. (it'll be a skwed view of it...but whatever)

[Penguinfan]

I see what you are saying TP, but give it a try, the table I am at is soft as they come. Now think about who just made that statement.


I am down $15 from a $50 buy in at a .25/.50 table and had the following happen:

Then hand above.

Got agressive on the button, raised to $2 (4x) with 45s, got called by the BB, flopped a wheel, turn is a 3, the money goes in and he shows 23 for a boat.

66 in the BB call a raise of $1 flop 4 6 9 SB bets the cap and I obvoiously call, he shows A5 turn 3, river 2 he makes a str8 and I again lose the max without playing badly.

I know everyone on the wrong end of beats think they take it worse than anyone, but I'm telling you this happens to me all the time.

Fortunatly I have learned that this is a good thing, the vast majority of the time I am raking $30+ pots off these idiots, as soon as the deck quits saving them. People are honestly calling with any pair, any draw. Eventually I am gonna crush this game.

I'll post a PT screenshot as soon as I do, PRINT IT.


Being on the wrong side of the beats makes me like this table.

Glad today was rakeback payment day at FT

[Talking Poker]

I took some pretty sick beats at the no cap tables earlier today. Within 3 minutes:

-All in on the turn, he hits his 2 outer on the river (KK no good here!).
-All in on the turn, he hits his 5 outer on the river (that wil lteach me to flop 2 pair to his TURNED SECOND PAIR).
-All in on the turn, I'm drawing to one out in a set over set over straight hand. YUCK!

Of those, only for the last one would I have liked the cap. I USUALLY get my money in on the good side of things, and suckouts are part of the game.

Finished the session up $1000, btw.

[Zybomb]

After those beats, GG sir

[BlibbityBlabbity]

I have heard at least two pros saying it is important for them to have a CAP on the games. I would think it is similar to the reason they "run it twice" often ehen it is a marginal situation. They are looking to build slowly and wait for big spots without taking huge swings, right?

I would think that applies almost exclusively to larger sums of money that a 1/2 stack. Also at higher limits you are going to find fewer players that will pay you off big on the turn and the river with a bad hand or a bad draw. At low limits you lose a lot of expectation by capping the max bet, but at higher limits where the play is evened out (somewhat) I would think it makes more sense in a "safe" kind of way.

[Penguinfan]

AA vs KQ, what the hell was I thinking, calling an all in preflop with AA. I'm just not getting it.

This does turn around, right?

[Talking Poker]

You're posting in the wrong section, bub.

[Govman6767]

ohhhhh this rules Sklanskys new book has a chapter on this (not cap games) but games where you are playing Deep Stack NL and Short Stack NL

Cap games would essentially make you play Short Stack NL

The whole chapter in his book which you could equate to a CAp game is very interesting very indeed.