I'd read the "best of" from URZ

Betgo, Don't let the idiots get to you. ... I, for one, appreciate what you post here on 2+2.
The reason I gave a simple straight forward answer to your original post was because I know that there are always newcomers here, and when I first started, I would look for generic posts to get ideas, direction, & general information... I realized later that your post wasn't really about bet sizing, but rather the opionated nature of some of the replies to other posts about bet sizing. ... So to that I say.....
Anyone that says there are hard and fast rules in poker is just showing their ignorance. There are many times when a min raise is the perfect solution, but there are also many situations when 5x might be right, or over betting the pot or whatever it takes to keep your opponents off balance and in the dark about your hand ranges.... There are often good reasons for people to post suggestions tweaking a bet size, but there is no ONE answer to any problem in poker, ESP. Re. Bet sizing (ok, sometimes there is... But those are usually only for very particular short effective stack "push/fold scenarios)
So to the bet sizing Police, I say suggest, don't insist.

yeh, this was what I was getting at.

I think this thread needs more love so here it goes.

Betgo 3x was never standard. The people that were 2.5xing when everyone else was 3xing were printing money. If you raise 3x you allow the blind to fold all but the top of his range and you can't play your draws effectively. 3x is a STD raise with pocket pairs but 2.5x is STD with draws. For example if you Are on the button with 55 a STD raise is 3x. With KTs it's 2.5x.Forget about being predictable for a moment and assume everyone plays face up. 2.5x gives the blind 0ev so that every option is a mistake. 3x gives the blind -ev. Now if he calls with KT his draw will be too expensive to play past the flop or turn. So the goal is to be able to get the blind to play for more money when you have a pair and less when you have a draw. Now lets turn our cards face down and ask how often we need to raise 3x with draws and 2.5x with pairs to create subterfuge. The answer depends on the skill level of the field. In low stakes its almost never.

wut

Look, I'm far from an old timer, I wasn't playing poker 30 years ago, but even in 2003, 2004, there was a time when 3x was VERY std., and if anyone did a min bet, they were considered an idiot (and people usually only did that with AA)
but that was a long time ago.... yes things have changed quite a bit.

but as far as 3x never being std, if you re-read Harrington on hold'em, he pretty much said that 3x was std. (it had since been proven not to be optimal, but that's now)

I used to open always for a minraise ITM in 2006. I found it effective even though it wasn't standard. But back then, you weren't some huge donk if you did something nonstandard like that.

Nowadays, you see people always opening for a minraise or 2.1xBB or whatever in level 1, from the SB or whatever.

HU, you see people minraise every hand, never fold, never complete, never vary sizing. That is one way to play, but not the only way.

Seems like everyone has watched videos and been coached and always uses the correct sizing. Think sometimes not using the correct sizing can create problems for your opponents.

The reaction I got to my OP confirmed my impression that there was one correct approach and anything else was heresy or something.

NO BUT THERE IS ONE THATS MOST CORRECT AND CORRECT ALOT MORE THAN NOT. NO ON E IS ADVOCATING 100% OF ANYTHING. CLEARLY THERE ARE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS.

YOURE RIGHT BETGO. IS THAT ALL THAT NEEDED TO BE SAID?

im not saying that in 2006, you actaully were a donk for min raising, (actually you were prob. among the pioneers of mathamatically proper bet sizing).. but IF someone min raised in a tourney, they were often berated for it.

I used to play a lot of HU online, and I often would m/r every button... it seemed effective and sometimes the BB would fold.

I also agree that non-std. bet sizing can confuse opponents... Andy Frankenberger is a good example of that at work.

I do however think you should be more carefull when posting something like this in the future because the bet sizing police (BSP) were absorbed into the dept. of homeland security and therefore have the power of the patriot act behind them.
You could end up listening to Barney the dinosaur music in a cell in Cuba if you continue to publicly speak about non-std. bet sizing.

See that is what I don't agre with, mathematically proper bet sizing. I used it late in tournaments, particularly with a big stack. People were afraid is general and afraid to play postflop in particular, especially against a big stack and good player. Didn't think it was mathematically correct, just that opponents had trouble with it.

It works well against opponents who are playing scared. It is really bad against oponents looking to see a flop. Like you wouldn't open minraise every hand in a live cash game.

Now I see the proper bet size getting smaller and smaller. Also, the cutting-edge plays like stop-and-gos, loose reshoves, and squeeze plays don't work as well any more. So I am a little sceptical that everyone will be using what is now considered mathematically proper bet sizing 10 years from now.

I still agree with you... I also see that bet sizing goes in cycles... As the majority of people min raise,and expect the same, it wil confuse them when someone starts to do something different, and as those players see that these bets work and adjust to this bet sizing, things will evolve in that direction (then maybe stopNgoes will start to work again...) there is a wide range of "mathematically correct" bet sizing... As bets go up you have win more often for them to be successful over the long term (applies ESP. To cash games) but if, by making a bet bigger, you can get your opponent to fold more often, than the bigger bet has its mathematical advantage... I would never say there is ONE bet size (I think it was Jason Mercier that said he could never see a reason to bet more than 2x)
Anyway... I think we are saying similar things in a different way.

Now, are those bet size police sirens I hear in the distance?

Lindgren says he always opens for a minraise in his 2005 book "Making the Final Table". Think Negreanu often used this approach and perhaps others.

It is good if you want to be agro and hard to read. That top players like it doesn't make it the best approach for everyone.

There was a billionaire on the One Drop who had been coached and was opening for minraises. Not sure it was the best approach for him.

Larger raises get 3-bet light a lot less. Opponents may have trouble handling usual approaches. The minraise encourages flat calls from late position and the blinds, and maybe be can do that more.

There are situations such as deep, early tournament, loose/passive table, and BvB where minraising is not clearly the best play.

This might be true for a couple of hands, but eventually when ppl figure out u open the same ranges as everyone u will get 3b as often or even more often then anyone else (cause ppl win more by 3b u).
the result of this are:
-you will lose more when u get 3b and have to fold
-you need to be deeper to 4b/f (this rly sucks)
-you will win the same amount risking more
-when u get postflop and have an edge postflop STP ratio is smaller which is bad for the superior player

Ok, I guess you're preaching to the choir. I don't disagree with any of this...
your original point that there are people that (Too) strongly advocate their bet size recommendations is valid... in poker, there are many ways to skin a cat (or a fish).

when really deep, at the start of a deepstack MTT, I tend to open higher to achieve my goal of getting as close to HU as I can or taking it down pf.... as we all know, a min bet deep will treated as a limp and can generate a cascade of callers behind, (usually not helpful to our cause) which could then encourage a large 3 bet from someone in position. (also....often, not helpful to our cause... well, sometimes)

anyway... I write this to the betsize cops, cos i know I don't have to reiterate these to the regs, but ......
My bet size plan (which is nothing out of the ordinary) is (usually) bigger opens at the start when deep ( a min will seldom achieve the desired result).. and as the blinds go up, slowly decrease the size of my open bets (and 3 bets) , how i do so often depends on the table dynamics and whatever seems to work (if I see that others min raising does drive players out, or the table is particularly tight, I'll head in that direction ASAP), but in general, i slowly drop my bet size till near the end, when ~2x-ing is all that is needed.

Can we agree that the answer is simply "it depends" and that you just need to be sure that you understand the factors that your sizing depends on. Those may vary from player to player based on BR, skill level, post flop ability etc.