Without regulatory capture actors in markets strive for control of the market though various means such as monopoly, duopolies etc, and using their market position to force competition out of the market.

Trying and accomplishing are two different things. All companies strive to maximize their market share. That doesn't mean they are able to accomplish it or that there are even examples of it occurring.

Crony capitalism is just the flip side. The effects are exactly the same. Reduces competition and freezing out newcomers and disruptive technologies or innovations through market dominance rather than regulator capture.

There is a difference between establishing market dominance and having the government enforce that dominance. Large companies fall all the time. There is no guarantee of their dominance. Look at IBM's dominance which gave way to Microsoft which gave way to Google and Apple. Look at Kodak. Look at Pan Am. Large companies with big marketshare fail in competitive markets. There are very few examples of large companies maintaining dominance for a long period of time without government support. Coca-Cola maybe being one of the examples that springs to mind.

Regulation is required for a competitive market but the dangers of regulatory capture must also be dealt with and the only way to do that is, also, through regulation of the markets.

That makes no sense. You can't stop regulatory capture with further regulation. You only create even more incentive to capture the more powerful the regulations are. Understand? The more you regulate, the greater the incentive there is for the industry to generate influence. The only way to limit influence is to limit instances where decisions are made through politics and increase instances where decisions are made through the market.

We have experience full on free capitalism in the 1800s.

The Industrial Revolution led to the greatest increase in real wages in human history. But capitalism was still young then. It is far more advanced now. There is no sense discussing 17th century economics in a 21st century context.