well, by the time antes kick in the stacks are too light for flatting in pos with marginal hands, things like that, so you are less worried about gettin flatted so you can raise less imo, plus the amount of chips you can actually shave off will matter more b/c early you can shave off maybe like 25 chips but later in the tournament you can do like 200 and that adds up alot faster espically since stacks are light, at least thats what i thought and/or why i do it.


also, i forgot the most obvious, you risk less to win more (re: the antes)

I guess I just assume everyone has thought their strategy through, I certainly have. When I 3x it has a lot to do with effective stack sizes, and how often I'm raising. In a rebuy or cubed or something when the table is averaging 80 BBs I'll still 3x with antes, because that will generally still allow me to play 3 full streets of poker. On average I'm going to have the best of it when the money goes in, so I want to do what I can to make sure that all the money goes in when I want it to. As the effective stacks go down, and the frequency of my raises goes up, I lower my raise sizes to 1) cost myself less to attempt to steal the blinds and 2) make the effective stacks play deeper. I feel like I have a pretty substantial edge on most tables, so the deeper the stacks play, the more decisions each of us will have to make, and the more of an edge I will have.

10/20: 70 + l
15/30: 105 + l
25/50: 175 + l
50/100: 300 + l
75/150: 400 + l
100/200: 500 + l

Without antes i continue with 2.5x + l. With antes I vary my raise sizes based on number of players in the hand, basicly I do like 2-2.5x and add the total antes. I add another 0.5x if I'm raising limpers from the blinds.

When reraising, I raise 3x the original raise (unless it's silly) IP, and 3.5x OOP.

Exceptions are when I'm sizing up for a go-n-go, or a possible c-bet/fold or c/r AI on the flop.

I never vary my bet sizes. I just always make it ALL-IN! LOL.

Sherman

Are you a steal in pos with ATC kind of guy or only with a hand.. Bascially... what's your range fomr the button doing this most often assuming it's against smaller stacks.

when i play 4/180's i usually make it 5-10x throughout the whole tourny

Everytime i raise i get respect so thats always nice

Got to agree... that's why I've asked so many damn questions!

this was actually #35 in my new book, "100 Ways to be Successful in Poker"

what are the other 99

Dammit Geoff, you need to quit holding back. Share your wisdom with us donks. I think you owe us at least 1-34 on the list

I am all in favour of smaller raise sizes as the blinds get larger in respect to effective stack sizes, but I think the relationship between those two variables should be the main focus and should correlate. As mlagoo suggested, there's not really a lot of logic to switching to 2.5x as soon as antes begin. Here's why:

In terms of (for want of a better term) blind-stealing, which I am invoking not as an end in itself but simply as one desirable outcome of raising: when we raise pre-ante, we need to win the pot (just looking at preflop at this stage) 67% of the time to break even, because we are risking 3x to win 1.5x.

Why don't we min raise pre-antes for the same reasons we raise smaller post-antes (i.e. pot control and risking less to win the blinds/antes more often)? Because it gives our opponents too good implied odds to flat call us, the reason being that because there is so much left in the stacks pre-antes that opponents can call with speculative hands like PPs and SCs and get correct odds to out-flop us.

So why should that problem suddenly evaporate once antes begin? It doesn't. However, it does become less pronounced, but only because the blinds have risen marginally in relation to stack sizes, but not enough to justify switching to 2.5x (or 2.2 or 2.7x or whatever) dogmatically. Look at rebuys for example, where the stacks are much deeper than freeze-outs.

I am proposing that raise sizes shouldn't relate to the actual blind/ante level, but rather to the average effective stack size at the table. This might mean raising 2x with no antes, or raising 4x with antes. Respective examples where these raise sizes might be justified (granted these situations will not be common but merely serve to demonstrate the point):

1. Live low buy-in freeze-out with no antes; by the 5th level the average stack is 10BB. Hero is in MP2 with 15BB, two stacks behind him are ~10BB (including the BB), while the button has 20BB. Why not min raise here?

2. Online 6-max $5/$20/$100 rebuy on FTP, blinds have just become 120/240/25. Hero is CO with 70BB, button has 60BB, SB has 30BB and BB has 90BB. 2.5x here would be a mistake imo, and hero would be justified raising to 3x or even 4x because of the large amount both in the pot with blinds and antes, but more importantly because of the amount of chips that will be left in the stacks post flop. 2.5x gives the players still to act (in particular the button because he will have position on multiple streets) a great price to call and play against you post flop with a wide range. They can essentially invest a toothpick to win a lumber-yard, the toothpick being 2.5BB (1.5 for the BB), the lumberyard being your 70BB stack.

Cliff notes: raise sizes shouldn't be dependent on the blind level but rather on the average effective stack size at the table, regardless of whether antes are in place.

Yeah I´m considering to raise only 5xish in these levels, too, but unconvinced yet. As for now mostly 3x opens. How much do u guys make it with AK UTG @ 10/20? Specific question, sorry.

Edit: Np Zedveron, it´s such a valid point, considerations whether to raise / shove according to effective stacks come to mind.

Good post Zed I agree that effective stacks are infinitely more important than blind sizes and was kind of assuming that was understood, but it definitely should have been pointed out explicitely. I think you kinda missed it in the quoted section though. The point is not to win the blinds and antes, but to win chips. At 10/20 there's basically no value in stealing blinds (ldo). So I raise (to 3x) with the intention of building a pot where I have an edge. You're much more likely to have an edge in a pot that's hu and in position, so I raise with that in mind.

Also, I think the term "pot control" is overused/misunderstood in this forum and it would be a good topic for future discussion.

okay here goes a shot of explaining it not just what I do this might be lengthy but it will be very informative so hang in there with me

Here is the reasoning behind varying my bet sizes on position - I want to make opponents decisions as difficult as possible. If you make a big raise then your opponents decisions are very easy, they can simply fold most of their hands and only play their biggest hands. If you bluff with a big bet, you will win very little most of the time but when you get reraised you lose big (very standard and obv I know)


But I mainly want to make things difficult for the big blind, You should never mind if the big blind calls because you have position. Say I'm holding A-J or A-Q UTG, if someone wakes up with a a hand and comes over the top of me I am happy I made that small raise.

Finally smaller uniform raises from early position accomplishes THREE things

1) It makes the big blinds decision as difficult as possible when he has a marginal hand

2) it is cheaper to get away from a hand if somone reraises

3) When you want someone to reraise (for ex. you have AA or KK) you have made it easier for someone to make that mistake.

As for why I make larger raises in late position :

This is going to seem fairly obvious but....

You need to only beat 2-3 remaining hands, if I make that same small raise from early position it is too easy for the big blind to call with a marginal hand. Since I am not representing as strong a hand from late position i need to make a larger raises to give the big blind as difficult decision as possible (I'm also going to be raising nearly 51% of my hands from the cut off or button) Of equal importance, I'm less worried about getting 3betted by a huge hand since there will only be 2-3 players behind me!


It seems so obvious, I hope that was insightful for some of you =)

In a higher buy in and most live events I like uniform betting patterns where I raise 3x bb from all positions. This gives no hint of the strength of your hand and I can be raising with 23 or AA. Of course I add 1bb for limpers in front. I drop down to 2.5 later...for the reasons stated above. I understand altering based on position. Against good players, I don't think you are fooling many people with this.... WHere I differ a little is in low level donakaments. I think raising to 4x bb during the fisrt hour (with corresponding increases for limpers) works to build a bigger pot against villains who will often call with hands we crush.If the goal is to build a big stack early....doesn't this help us accomplish this...

Why is varying your betting pattern based on position "fooling people" like you and your 3x bb from all position, I too am likely to have AA or 23 no matter what spot I am in, this also gives away no hint of strength of ones holdings....

Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with raising 3x from every position on the table, there are just very many other effective ways to bet

the only reason i ever changed my raise size based on blinds/antes was because i came to 2p2 and saw someone post something about how 2.3-2.7x is optimal, and never actually knew why. i'm loving this thread, good stuff.

I don't like this. Obviously stack sizes are a huge variable, but late in mtt's especially making your raise larger to steal the blinds more effectively is only increasing the amount lost when the sb/bb resteal.

If I'm sitting in the big blind with a moderate stack and the co/button opens, I'm usually cramming with 22+/T9+ regardless of raise amount. Again, obviously if I don't have much fold equity I'm not making this play. It just seems weak as hell. Im reading it as "Well, my hand isn't as strong as I'd like so I'll just raise larger to steal more effectively" Its super transparent imo.

Actually, I tend to see this strategy alot. CO/button opens full 3x late in tourney and is forced to fold to a bb/sb shove/3bet. I would say that veryyyyyy rarely doesn the orignal 3xer show up with a callable hand.

The only time I think its profitable to open larger then 2.5x late in mtts is sb v bb, or if you and another person have a very intimate meta-game going on.

Edit- Blind stealing is a very pick-your-spots kind of game. Example, I'm sitting with something very borderline like 22-44, T9s, 98s, and im a mode rately low but still effective stealing stack. The cutoff has just opened a full 3x and its folded to my bb, and I decide to shove. I'm shoving because of the extra equity in the middle from the full 3x raise

Now imagine instead the CO opened to 2.4x. Shoving in to steal now doesn't seem like such an easy/profitable move because there isn't as much equity in the middle/ and its MUCH more likely that a big hand is going to show up here (along with air). I now have a very tough decision and most likely will just give my hand up.

I also do the 3x pre 2.smallx post antes. I do vary raise size a bit in late position depending on stacks left to act.

Ex.

I have semi-strong holding in HJ like idk A9s at 200/400, co, btn and sb have good stacks bb is short with like 1900. Here I will make it as little as possible, like 875 planning to fold to anything except a shove from bb. Whereas I'd prolly make it a little more if I was planning on playing postflop with one of the others.

I am not saying this is good, but it's what I do. Thoughts?

I agree with a lot of what's been said, though there are a few key places that I differ. Some of this I'm really just thinking about for the first time, so if anyone finds a gaping hole in my logic, please let me know. It's probably a leak.

This is something I do and don't agree with. In general, I have no problem raising 2.5x once the antes go in, regardless of how deep effective stacks are. I think the main reason for this is because I pretty much always start opening a wider range as soon as the antes start to go in. In some ways, I'm starting to think any argument about why raising less is good is more an argument about why broadening your opening ranges is +EV.

As I stated in the random thread that launched this thread, there is also the matter of laying odds. Zed covered this to some extent, but this is a range question at heart. The better the odds I'm laying to win the money in the middle, the less I need to rely on the inherent strength of my hand. This, however, is only true so long as I retain a decent amount of FE w/ my raise. The problem w/ min raising, so far as I see it, is that it loses too much FE. As you lose FE against the blinds, and as you make it easier for others to resteal, the mean hand strength you need open the pot goes back up. In theory, there should exist some optimal raise size that produces the most cEV by maximizing FE with respect to the looseness of the opening range is. It's not just that we want to open as wide a range as can possibly be opened and still be +EV, but that we want to open a range where the cEV of each individual raise multiplied by the frequency of opening produces the highest average return. I have no idea what that optimal number is, as it would change from table to table, but I expect it's somewhere around 2.5x.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more that laying 1 to 1 seems important in this calculation, because of what I've already laid out. While I'm having trouble phrasing this right, it seems as though any movement away from this number will produce diminishing returns, either in terms of fold equity or in terms of opening frequency.

I'll need to think about this more, and no doubt some of what I've said is of questionable merit. Hopefully someone someone better at math/poker/getting a full nights sleep, can help me think this out.

One other thing I'll mention is that BrandiFan, though perhaps not explicitly, seems to allude to the "mysterious inflection point" where tournament strategy shifts (if you don't know why I put that in quotes, go read the 2+2 anthology). Thus, it might be said that effective stacks don't necessarily matter when it comes to determining the right time to start raising less unless they are the primary determinant in change the complexion of tournaments (a claim that would be very hard to prove).

Oh yeah, and one other thing, which is the problem of implied odds. Suffice to say that, since I'm raising a wider range when I'm raising less, the problem of implied odds largely takes care of itself.

I agree that this thread need less "I do this", and more "I do this, because".

For me, the pot size, raise amount, opening range and gap concept are closely linked. Early, pre-antes, the pot size is small and the gap low, which means you should raise more with a tighter range, for value. When the blinds increase, the pot size is still small, but the blinds are higher in relation to the pot, which makes for a bigger gap. You should now be slowly widening your opening range, and steadily lowering your raise size, approaching 2.5x. When the antes kick in, the pot size increases significantly in relation to the blinds. Ironically, this makes the gap even bigger, considering that most players now have a lower M in releation to the BB, and are often more likely to 3-bet shove, than flat a raise. You should now be opening even wider, and add steals from good positions, unless the stacks behind you are awkward. As the pot size is now bigger, people are rarely flatting pre, and mostly 3-betting pre, you should now make your raises even smaller in relation to the pot, and lower them increasingly as the effective stacks decrease.

Cliffnotes:
Small pot and small gap (10/20 - 25/50):
* Raise bigger (<3.5x) with a tight range.
Small pot and bigger gap (50/100 - 100/200):
* Raise smaller (>2.5x) and widen your range.
Big pot and big gap (100/200 - 500/1000 with antes):
* Raise even smaller in rel. to pot (2.5x-3x) and widen range further, add steals.
Big pot and biggest gap (500/1000 -> with antes):
* Raise very small (2.3x-2.7x) and widen range to the maximum.

I randomly bet 2.5x, 3x, 4x, and sometimes shove.
I have no structure to my open raising range and no pattern I hope.
I fall behind 3x most but I know I go to 2.5x when the table is weak tight.

Re: Varying or standard betsize

- I pick a standard raise each level and stick to it. I don't vary my betsize based on position or hand strength; I only do it if the stacks behind me dictate it (to make a potsize better suited for a shove, mostly) and the reason for this is almost purely psychological.

Online, the biggest - and almost only reliable - tell is your betting pattern. This is where I get 95% of my reads (yea I might miss a lot, but hey this is microstakes). Simply put, I'm afraid to give anything away should I make a mistake in my betsize be it due to multitabling, tiredness or stupidity. I know it's a question of discipline more than anything, but the subconscious works in mysterious ways, and if I am in the habit of varying my betsizes too much - especially if it's random - it's very likely that I will start betting based on hand strength to some extent.

This might be sub-optimal and I might be doing the right thing for the wrong reasons, but that's what works best for me.

Oh, and the maximum disguise factor, of course.

I should have stated it in my post but that pre-ante obviously and does not apply to end game or later stages of a tournament.

Later stages of a tournament I'm opening 2.25x-2.75x