RFI - What is the best size?

4bb is too big. Just use larger size when you have strong hand and there are fishes on blinds. In this situation, you don´t wanna any regular cold calling.

The standar size is 2,5BB on every position, except on SB, where you should use 3bb.

On tight tables, you may use 2,2bb from UTG and MP and open more hands on these positions.

This is STD for all limits.

i think, its the other way round. you should pick a RFI % and then the size.

When i was playing 6max CG - open from EP 3x ,CO 2.5x / BTN 2.3x and SB 2.2/ 2.1

And this is why PLO is such a good game. Only one sizing preflop.

Wouldn't waste your time thinking about it when the difference is negligible. Put your time into something that has an impact.

Only tip is make it bigger vs fish.
I 3x from UTG, 2.5 from Mp, 2.2 from CO, min pop from BTN and 2.5bb from SB.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
And this is why PLO is such a good game. Only one sizing preflop.
not in MTTs

The best raise size depends on a couple of factors:
- how much are villains willing to call with a weaker hand?
- how much are villains willing to fold a better hand?
- how unexploitable is your sizing game?
- how deep are stacksizes?
- What will be the Stack Pot Ratio on Flop if getting called?

now generally I guess good players changed to GTO openraise sizes some time ago, other regulars adapted blindly. If you raise 4bb good players will recognize this and treat you as weaker, non GTO player. If you make your homework you can take advantage of that.

I think there is not much of a difference when you stay within the 2-3bb range. Personally I dont like raise smaller from later positions especially BU, because I would like to play bigger pots in position.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
And this is why PLO is such a good game. Only one sizing preflop.
Lot of players don't seem to know this though

To be honest, I expected a bit more deep answers. I read an aswer on the flop flush draw thread here, which made me actually open this post. I will quote the answer from there:

Originally posted by mbml
the concept of "laying odds" is a very backward and primitive one, because it works with the assumption that you always have a made hand and your opponent always have a draw. But this is 100% untrue.

Smaller bet sizes allow you to bluff a lot more cheaply but causes you to extract less value with your best hands. Then the next question is to think about how often you/your opponent has different combinations of each type of hands.

For example, if you were the Preflop raise and the board came AK2, you would have an overwhelming advantage given that your opponent would have likely 3bet AA KK AK. This means that you can just bet a really small sizing with your entire range and he will not be able to do much against you. You could even mix in huge pot bets or overbets with certain types of hands and he cannot exploit your smaller bet sizing simply because he rarely has strong hands here and cannot start getting wild.

Second factor to think about is Stack:Pot Ratio. When stacks are shallower, it is not necessary to bet so large since you can easily get in stacks by the river. Also, you have less reverse implied odds (assuming your opponent has a draw and you have a made hand) so it's ok to "give him good odds". Multiway pots have lower SPRs and they also force players to have stronger continuation ranges. Both of these factors encourage a smaller % bet size in theory, although there are plenty of bad players who look at "pot odds" only even if it's 5way and call with bottom pair in an attempt to draw to 2-pair or trips. Vs such guys, feel free to make an exploitative increase in your bet size with your stronger hands to extract more value.

Just think for a second, how strong you would look, if you were potting the Flop 5way on a J97 board. I might even fold AJ here in this situation given how the pot better seems to clearly have 2-pair+ here very often. And if you were doing it with a hand like KJ or QJ it would be a massive mistake. So a 1/3 pot bet here even if it doesn't protect as well, could make some sense vs a tighter lineup.

Another consideration is to think about elasticity of ranges. There are elastic and inelastic boards. Those that are low and coordinated then to cause defenders to have more elastic ranges (people will call with all sorts of weak gutshots or overcards in an attempt to draw). Then there are boards with 2 high cards where defenders tend to have more static ranges. Would you call T9o on AK3 vs a 20% pot bet? I don't think most people would. But many people might call JTo on a 223 vs a 20% pot bet, or a A8 on a J97 board vs a 20% pot bet but fold vs a 80% pot bet.

So, if someone as in-depth like mbml could explain why we should raise 2.5 BB and not 3 or 2.1, I would be really delighted. Of course don't get me wrong, I still learned a few things. I think the dynamic approach to postflop play could be however applied to the preflop play also. I did order the book: Modern Poker Theory: Building an Unbeatable Strategy Based on GTO Principles however, and I am looking forward to study it. With 2 other books along.

I personally use 2.2BB in HJ,LJ,CO, 2.5BB in BU and 3BB in SB.

I am also not sure.

a) I heard that 2x all pos except BT (2.5x) and SB (3x or so). Reason for 2x'ing is that we don't want to build a big pot when potentially OOP. Reason for 2.5x BT is that we want to play bigger pots IP. Reason for 3x-ish SB is to not give villain great pot odds.

b) 3.5x all postions at micro stakes, in order to deter people from calling you, because you don't want to pay rake.

Honestly, I don't know.

Honestly, today it is difficult to see a regular opening 3bb as standard.

At high rake tables, most regulars uses a 3-bet or fold strategy. Then you will have to fold a lot for 3-bets. It is better to leave 2.2bb in the pot than 3bb, when you have to fold to a 3-bet.

In the Pre-flop Bible, they recommend the sizes I mentioned above.

They say this about the pros and cons:

Originally posted by Lucianomb
They say this about the pros and cons:

I find this to be a very convenient way to put it, just to prove a point. I could say:

Imagine that this was Originally posted by a 6-max genius

I recommend a large raise size.

Benefits:
-Win more money when 4bettting against a 3bet
-Grow pot size vs SB/BB
-Increases our chances to win a huge pot when called
-Decreases cold calls IP
-Decreases % flop seen, thus decreasing rake paid %
-Grow a larger pot when called - which is good because our range is stronger and uncapped than cold callers

My point being that, while the Preflop Bible guys say true stuff, that's only looking at one side of the coin, and I can come up with other arguments to "prove" that a larger size is better.

However, I think (but can't prove it) that 2.2x'ing or 3.5x'ing preflop is not what is preventing someone from winning money at the micros/getting out of the micros. I am 2.5x'ing with antes and recently started to consider a larger size, I still have no idea what I want to do, because either way, I am not convinced.

exploitatively speaking:

- with weak hands, as small as you can make it and still steal the blinds
- with strong hands, as big as you can make it and still get called

for micros, i'd say that regs are too nitty.
thus, stab wide preflop and on the flop (be very wide with a small sizing), but stack off tight.

Originally posted by Swish29

Originally posted by Lucianomb
My point being that, while the Preflop Bible guys say true stuff, that's only looking at one side of the coin, and I can come up with other arguments to "prove" that a larger size is better.

However, I think (but can't prove it) that 2.2x'ing or 3.5x'ing preflop is not what is preventing someone from winning money at the micros/getting out of the micros. I am 2.5x'ing with antes and recently started to consider a larger size, I still have no idea what I want to do, because either way, I am not convinced.

But the point is that in the Preflop Bible, they recommend these sizes and also recommend the ranges you should use.

I think it's like they said above. First choose the range and then define a size. For a tight range, it makes more sense to open 3bb.

Originally posted by ghaleon

Originally posted by Kyyberi
And this is why PLO is such a good game. Only one sizing preflop.
Lot of players don't seem to know this though

Is this just a fact or also some literature behind this?

Fact, in cash games. Based in Solver sims. And backed up with pretty much every pro there is.

Well it makes sense -- if you are entering a pot, there is little point in undercutting your potential winnings.
Just out of curiosity, Kyyberi -- is there a similar "rule of thumb" in PLO for raising over multiple limpers?

I get pretty tight in those situations, since if you pot over two or three limpers on the button, you (or I anyway) regularly see pot-sized 3Bets from one of the blinds

Umm, you shouldn't bet 3bet more than normally, when raising over the limpers. If you are, the 3bettor isn't that good of a player and you should win in the long run.

Versus one limper, raise a bit tighter range you normally would from that position, versus 2+ limpers raise only the premiums.

Preflop in PLO is not rocket science. If you just understand how to use position postflop and the difference in multiway and hu pots, you should have solid preflop. It's your postflop skills that dictate the profits (or lack of it).

it's about risk vs reward. You generally wanna risk less to steal a pot if you are using a wider range of hands. Conversely, you wouldn't mind building up the pot if you have a strong hand.

Also in general you wanna raise larger in EP so that you can thin the field and prevent multiway pots as much as possible. With a weak range, you wanna raise smaller so that you lose less when you are attacked by 3bets.