Sorry if this seems like an obvious quesiton to some, but I find myself feeling and believing this fact more than I understand it.  I have been employing this strategy and do find that it works – post ante the min raises get respect, often folds whereas pre ante it seems to provide for good playability to raise 3X.  But why? 

I will explain what confuses me:

-It seems that there is very little for the big blind to protect when the blinds are 20/40 with no antes and deep stacks.  Why do we have to raise 3x to play effectively?  Is it because our intention in opening is different in these early stages than it is in later stages (ie. creating situaitons where we play big pots only when we dominate early vs. taking down blinds and antes later) and in order to do this we need to raise to 3x otherwise too many players will call?

-On the above note, it also seems that there is more reason for the BB to defend when there are antes, so I’m surprised that this doesn’t make it necessary to raise more once antes are in place.  Is it because a thinking player knows that people are raising wide once antes are in place, so they are more likely to reraise and make us fold, which means we should risk less and min raise?

-When the antes are in place, it seems we would be willing to wager more times the big blind because we are also winning more when we get folds and we are actually often seeking folds rather than implied odds.

Does it have to do with stack sizes relative to the blinds?  I know Andrew said something in another thread about stack sizes relative to blinds not impacting the math regarding whether or not min raise open is correct, but I don’t know if that applies to this subject, of open sizing at different stages. My guess is, again, that in early stages we are dealing with implied odds, so the open itself doesn’t have to be mathematically sound.

I feel that the answer is simple but I’m just not certain of it.  Thanks for reading.