Hi this is sort of a newbie question. I'm a winning 25NL player, starting to take shots at 50NL. I want to improve my game so please help me with this question about raising size pf in different positions. (and yes lets ignore SB since that is usually 3X vs BB)

I watched a few youtube vids and some coaches always open raise the same amount PF in each position except the sb of course (for example always 2.2, or always 2.5x)

Some coaches will raise less from ep, then the will size up in later positions (their justification is in ep you will play more pots oop, and in lp you will steal more in blinds)

Other coaches will raise bigger from ep, then size down in later positions. (their justification is you will open raise more with premium hands in ep, and in lp you will have weaker holdings so you want to steal for cheap and not invest much when you get 3-bet)


As you can see these are 3 conflicting information, if anyone credible can give me what the most accepted way to open raise in 2021 (I don't want to pick up bad habits).

Thanks

GTO: Open smaller in early positions and bigger in late positions. Reason being you get 3bet more often by the table as a whole from early positions so you cover your ass by opening small plus your strong hands get value when you get 3bet.

Simplicity: Opening 2.2 or 2.5 everywhere cause who cares

Exploits: When your table is not 3betting you nearly enough, you may want to up your sizing. If you pair that with the fact that most weak players under defend their BB versus small sizings, you could open smaller in later positions.

My advice: Do it bigger from later positions on strong tables, do it the other way around on very weak tables. Your ranges should also change a lot between these 2 situations.

I hugely prefer using the same sizing from each position for simplicity.

Like you mentioned, both opening larger and smaller from each position had it's advantages and disadvantages.
In the end it really doesn't matter.

The size you're opening to only affects the range you can play.
If you open smaller, you can play a wider range.
If you open larger, you have to play a tighter range.

Just pick a size and stick with it, anywhere from 2bb - 3bb.
It won't have much of an impact on your game.

As long as you don't correlate your betsize with your hand strength: go with what works. Which always boils down to 'it depends'

Betting should be done to fulfill some goal. If your betsize is not achieving that goal (or is over-achieving that goal) then change your betsize.

Don't just bet size X because it's what you always do. Passive tables, active tables, position and even dynamics with one other player can change what betsize fulfills your goals best.

I agree with all of the above info. Each persons response is valid, it really just depends on which way you want to go.

From my own experience, I usually raise 2.5 in any position. A. For simplicity sake B. Always putting in the same bet size helps to conceal your hands strength. I'm with Yeodan on this personally. By betting the same amount in every position, it's one less thing to think about (based on the amount of tables you play at any one time). If you know you always bet 2.2 or 2.5 (whatever your number is), you can set that up as a tab on your bet slider and just go with that every time. Any amount of brainpower saved can be used on later streets when the decisions are a lot more important. This way when you start adding more tables, it will be easier to keep track of where you are as your bet sizing will be the same. Also, by betting 2.5, you can still get away from the hand only losing fairly minimal compared to other options. I mean, it still sucks if you have to lay it down on a re-raise from your opponent, but I believe you'll end up making more in the long run, because of the concealment factor ( 9 10 Suited or AAs, you always raise the same). Your opponents won't be able to use your bet sizing as a tell against you.

This is obviously only good on the basis of the hand strengths that you play.

(Examples based on $25NL)

Example: A) 9 10 Suited against 1 opponent. Action folds to you, you raise 2.5, your opponent re-raises to 12. Based on your overall feeling, maybe 9 10 Suited doesn't feel good anymore, you can lay it down without hesitation and wait for a better opportunity.
(You only lose $1.25)

Example B) Same as above, except this time you have Pocket Aces. Action folds to you, you raise 2.5, your opponent re-raises to 12. Now you have a bigger decision to make, Call and go to a flop? Re-raise? Jam?

More often than not, you end up making more money in these spots.

Just my 2 cents man. Hope this helps

This. As long as you know the reasoning behind the different bet sizes, do what feels more comfortable to you. I'd stick to simplicity and use the same bet size from every position

Large sizes work better when people call too wide and/or don't raise enough.

Small sizes work better when people raise you too wide and/or don't call enough.

That's the basic principle of sizing as far as I'm concerned. Zenith has some exploitative preflop sims (publically available) that demonstrate this concept.

Who or what is Zenith?

Theoretically speaking what aner0 said is correct and anyone advocating for bigger ep and smaller LP is misguided at best barring some exploitative reasoning that may or may not check out.

In practice the EVs run very close together and preflop doesn't really matter as long as your strategy is reasonable.


A poker training site that focuses heavily on gto and betsizings.

Ok thx.

What if we are playing at stakes up to 10NL lets say. I think its still better to go with bigger EP and smaller LP as majority of the player pool there will be just calling too much and 3beting too litte. What do you think? From what stakes is GTOlike aproach better?