Might be better in poker theory, I'm not sure.

I've noticed a lot of good players will pot from the BTN regardless but I mostly always use 3x except in situations where one/both of the blinds are calling too much or calling a normal/high amount but not 3b much.

3x to me has always felt the best raise size because of the ability to open and call 3b's wider IP.

I'm worried that I've been wrong all this time though now and that there's a fundamental reason that you should be opening pot every time.

Big raise = big pot

the most important thing in plo is position. on the button you have a good position. lets play big pots in position!

2.5x is the best generic button open sizing, allows you to play with much higher SPR whether they call or reraise, which in turn enables you to take maximize on your positional advantage.

I am with you here. Playing OOP sucks so much more in PLO than in NL. We want to play big pots IP and small pots OOP.

Right but you only play big pots if the blinds are calling. I feel when you make it 3.5x the calling range is significantly tighter and you and end up being 3b more comparatively (to their calling range) - so overall you're playing less big pots in position.

If you took away the pot limit from omaha, would you make it 4/5 or even more x pre-flop IP? No, you wouldn't - because you'd have to steal less else you just get wrecked by their range when they do continue.

^ 2.5 is OK but for some reason I don't feel like a players continuing range differs that much if you make it 2.5 or 3x whereas it does when you go from 3x to pot. This is why I think 3x is still better than 2.5x on the button.

We should adjust to gameflow and player type, but potting is great because as you say most players overfold to pot-sized raises in the BB and this I think is enough of a win to make it good (funnily enough I do not see much adjustment in BB calling ranges depending on position of the opener).

Do you play your BB ranges any differently facing a 3bb or 3.5bb open from the BB?

People over-fold the BB in SSPLO? I’m potting precisely because my opponents call too much. The downside of having worse implied odds vs a 3bet is just far outweighed by being able to play bigger pots in position as a superior player vs calls (and frequently even a superior range).

I think the main concern should be EV, rather than imperfect measures such as ratios of 3-bets to calls or how often we play pots in position.

So, the basics we're all aware of, which I'll restate to appropriately frame later paragraphs: if the SB and BB fold to your open, you gain 1.5 bb. You also gain 1.5 bb (well a bit less due to rake), if the SB folds and the BB defends with a hand that is neutral EV from their own reference point.

It follows that if the difference in two BB strategies, 14% 3-bet and 44% call compared to 12% 3-bet and 55% call*, is mostly a difference in a lot of hands that are fringe calls/folds for the BB, the overall EV could remain quite similar, even if the ratio of 3-betting to calling is quite different. For example, the first range could make up for fewer of those fringe calls that pick up a fraction of a bb here and there by doing better with 3-bets.

What I expect against hypercompetent play -- like recreations of solver sims, in a dystopia where multiway preflop is accurately solved -- is that a 3 bb open would be really close in EV terms to a 3.5 bb open, because all players would adjust strategies for those sizes appropriately, and the "trade-offs" (when converted from raw EVs and frequencies to human language) would more or less cancel each other out. I have no basis for that except intuition, so I wouldn't put too much stock in it, but a similar dynamic can be spotted in solutions for postflop spots -- differences in bet sizes matter a lot less than one might expect, as long as ranges can be calibrated with the backing of so many CPU iterations.

I'd suspect that there isn't a fundamental reason to prefer either 3 bb or 3.5 bb in a rakeless game, and that preference in actual play should be rooted in exploitative play, which can vary across different games and scenarios. With the existence of rake and assumptions of decent play, it does seem 3.5 bb (coupled with a lower opening frequency) would be better, since more hands end without a rake drop.


*The numbers chosen are more or less arbitrary, not meant to be interpreted as defense frequencies against these open sizes.

Awesome reply just what I was looking for thanks!

Thx a lot Rei. Again.

This.

Also until you get out of small (and maybe mid) stakes the lack of rake for getting pre flop folds has to be a dominate factor to your sizing. Imagine you have a hand that is +2bb vs. the blinds, if you min. raise you play it out and realize that +2bb but if you pot open they'll fold giving you 1.5bb which will be more.