Varying the size of your opening raises - useful or waste of time?

[FoldALot.]

It has probably been discussed before, but anyway:

I'm asking because I watched Greg Raymer at one of the WCOOP tournaments and he pretty much said that he always makes it 2.7xBB to go because "it's just the right amount" or so.
Now Dan Harrington advises you to make different opening raises:
Raise less with big pairs (because you don't mind action), raise more with middle pairs or high cards (to discourage action). Also consider position.
And vary the bets so that your opponents can't read you.

Of course, if you always raise 2.7xBB like Raymer does, your opponents can't read you anyway.

I assume it's simply because Raymer is a much more aggressive player and therefore doesn't mind action even with his weaker hands.

Would you agree?

Thanks in advance.

[Matt Williams]

It has a lot to do with position and how many are already in the pot. If 5 people have already limped in and you want to raise on the button you are silly to raise 2.7 BB. The point is, you want to mix it up so no one has a read on you. I think what Raymer means is if he is first to open the betting, he will raise that amount, whereas Daniel will mix it up a lot more. Maybe you will be lucky enough to get an answer from Raymer himself.

[FoldALot.]

Yeah I meant first to enter the pot only. Sorry for not making that clear.

[mornelth]

I usually raise MORE than 3x in early stages to cut down on implied pot odds of my opponents.

I'll raise around 3x in the mid-stages of the tourney

I'll usually do 2.5x later on if that has been sufficient to get enough folds.

In reality, you can raise any amount you want at any time, just be aware of why you do it and what you are hoping to accomplish with your raise.

[whynot?]

i definitely vary based on the variables (position, stack sizes, table image, my image, cards, etc)

and i think by so doing you can really confuse villains on hands you may have. for instance - i very often raise aa or kk from mp to 4 to 5 times bb. why? cus many read this as ak or a mid pair. on the contrary i will usually, but not always, make mid pair bets to 2.5 times as it somewhat disguises them against a thinking opponent. so, the net is yes i believe varying your bet can be very beneficial

[CybrPunk]

There's two schools of thought on this....

Dan Harrington states that you should vary your raises so that villains can't catch on.

Barry Greenstein says you should always raise the same amount so that villains can't catch on.

Two very successful players with differing ideas and strategies. Can you say which one is right and which is wrong?

I can't.

Personally, I prescribe to the Barry school of thought that playing your hands in a consistent manner regardless of the holding makes it most difficult. Even using randomness to mixup your play can often be influenced by the subconscious mind, so is it really that random?

I think the real answer is going to be different for a lot of people. There really isn't a correct answer here, if you ask me.

[FortunaMaximus]

Playing the same raise amount for a standard raise saves you a decision PF if you raise it every time. Artificially or not, varying your raise sizes can be a tell.

The amount literally doesn't matter. I think Raymer advocates 2.7 because he's risking 2.7 to win 1.5, and that allows him to open from any position with at least 20% of hands. Maybe my math's a bit off, but it looks plausible.

I've gone deep in tournaments, playing TAGgish, opening top 15% or so for 3BB, dropping to 2.5BB with antes.

I've also gone deep in tournaments opening top 30-35% of hands playing LAGgy and not deviating from minraising. And exploiting irriated TAGs with 3-bets for stacks with JJ+, AKs. Because they didn't give your minraise credit at first, they won't give the 3-bet the credit that they should.

And some advocate a sliding scale, open 2.5BB early, 3BB in MP, 3.5-4BB in LP.

FWIW, what I find to be one truism, for sure, is when raising limpers, you should always have your xBB + 1BB for each limper.

[Spee]

Ok, so in a hypothetical, you're now seated at a table with Greenstein, Harrington and Raymer.

Do you honestly think you have a chance raising 2x or 3x every time you are first in a pot? Probably not a chance in heck. You have to deviate simply to make it harder for these better players to read you. But that is not to say that you vary simply by varying the size of the raise. You also vary by not raising, or changing the hands that you enter the pots with.

But in another scenario where you're seated with 3 Dickey Donks there is hardly a need to use so much deception with an opening raise, or with slowplays or the range of hands that you play. Why bother using tricks when they aren't needed to get it done?

Also, just watching Raymer or any other player for a short period of time in a single tournament is a very small sample and is probably not indicative of his overall play.

[SuperUberBob]

I'm a bit too predictable when it comes to things like varying my raises.

I've found that raising 3x BB is generally the sweet spot. Enough to make a player with a weak hand fold. Yet, it's enough to get hands that you beat to call as well.

I like Barry Greenstein's method better. Harrington says that sometimes you have to make a slightly incorrect decision with your raising preflop. But I tend to feel uncomfortable like that. Barry's method fits me a bit better. Varying raises can give off a tell even if you don't think it is.

[0evg0]

i raise 3xbb for the first 2 hrs usually, then about 2.3xbb from then on

one reason i raise so small is because i am raising a [censored]-ton of pots and with a smaller raise i don't need to take down as high a % of hands pf to make my steal +EV. also, cbets are smaller with the smaller pot size