completing in the sb: hypothetical question

[Makavelli 0]

ANYTHING suited, Anything 7-8 higher connected, any pocket pair, even 2's... That's about it.... Getting lovely odds here.

i disagree. i would basically play any hand that isnt one of the worst 5 hands. 19-1 pot odds. i mean haysuse.

you play 10, 3flop is 10, 8, 4.. 1 bet 1 call. now its on you.. do u waste more money to someone with 10, Q? etc... those hands are just garbage and should not be played unless BB or New Poster.

Play 10-3, just learn to get off it when you *miss*, and I would count top pair as "missing" in this case. Yes, you'd call a bet here, but you wouldn't call a raise. Top pair is a drawing hand here, and you do what the odds dictate or you're making a mistake. This is a great test of post flop skills. I think you have to call here no matter what. If you don't know when you get off a hand post flop, that's about your poker skills, and not relevant to the odds of winning this huge pot.

[TheMathProf 0]

Jayson,I believe u are correct, Sir!Odds of flopping exactly 2 pair :In Excel: =COMBIN(3,1)*COMBIN(3,1)*COMBIN(44,1)/COMBIN(50,3)= 2.02% ~ 48.5 to 1 againstAKA: Ways to take 1 of 3, and 1 of 3, and 1 of 47, of the total ways to take 3 of 50.My rookie thoughts on the whole completing.. I would do it with anything because I don't always think mathematically and would look at it as "Small bet for huge pot possible". That explains my lack of success!The relevance of the 5.9% is that even if you see all cards against all 10 opponents and no more betting, you will only win enough to barely justify the completion; nonetheless, will enough of the eventual losing hands stay in to justify continuing to call bets with a possible losing hand? I know you need to re-evaluate the pot odds / implied odds with each bet, but I always have trouble with that unless I'm drawing to the nut hand. What kind of board will be strong enough to keep calling with 7-2 and a) not be beaten and B) have enough opponents to make the pot worth it. Flop: 2, 7, JYou hit two pair. Ok, who's still going to play with you? Jx, 22, 77, JJ, J2, J7; maybe: 89, 810, 910. So about 1 out of 50 times you hit two pair and then get future action from hands that often are way ahead. The 1/20 of the times you will eventually win with this hand, I'm guessing you will not recoup all the $$ you spent losing with it. been reading oftenlove the infolater,Clint

I think what's being ignored here is the very texture of the table itself.If you've got a total of 8 limpers up to you in the SB in the first place, a lot of them are going to be hanging around, even if they no longer have a hand worth continuing with and that they shouldn't have probably entered with in the first place.On the 2-7-J hand, my guess is that at least four other people stay in the hand to a single bet. It wouldn't surprise me if it was as many as six or seven. A double bet and maybe not (although you never know). If that board also included a potential flush draw, that would add to the number of people who would stay in the pot.It just seems like a ridiculous premise to assume that all of these people who don't know how to play pre-flop will all of a sudden learn how to play post-flop. I know the two aren't always directly correlated, but I think in this example, it's safe to assume that many of these people don't know how to play post-flop.And if there were this bizarre situation where everyone is playing fine pre-flop, then your 7-2 might very well be the best hand anyway if you flop two pair (because a lot of the "outs" that most of these folks would hold are being held by other players!).I trust my post-flop play enough to play 7-2 from the SB here, and my guess is that this move is slightly +EV. That being said, it's slight enough that I don't think that folding is a bad option.Just my two quid.

[Canada 0]

Do you just have no idea what you're saying? Or do you have no idea what you're thinking either?Implied odds are large because you're paying 1/2 of a bet to see the flop in a huge pot. I still have no idea what you're saying. If you're actually accussing me of saying that AKs vs 72o is a coinflip, I can't recall ever saying that. If you're saying that "math guys" think that, you're wrong. Either way, you're not making any sense. Are you trying to make sense?BTW, you'd like to play at my table, why? Because I use logic to support my opinions? Clearly that's the mark of a poor poker player. Ummm thats not implied odds genius!..Your implied odds is the money to be tossed into the pot later on in the hand, post flop.

Actually you're wrong here. Implied odds (positive and reverse) are the ratio of future bets to your current bet. The reason that are Implied odds are large are because the bet you are required to call now is half a small bet. This effectively means that compared to every other player at the table (except the BB) your Implied odds are doubled.Look at the example of calling a nut flush draw heads up on the turn getting 4-1. Despite getting less than the required pot odds if you are sure you can get 1 more bet on the river if you hit you call geting 5-1 total odds (pot + implied).Now I'm sure I'm not telling you anything new here, but lets just apply it to the situation at hand...facing 19-1 pot odds to call you are also reasonable in assuming that you could get 4 callers on the flop and 2 on the turn and 1 on the river, all for 1 bet. Of course you can get a lot more but this is a reasonable and conservative estimate.4 callers on the flop = 4SB = 2BB2 on the turn = 2BBand 1 on the river = 1BBfor a total of 5BB.Going back to the original bet we are expected to call. It is .25 of a BB, so getting 19-1 pot odds and another 20 for implied odds for a total of 39-1 why would anyone fold anything here?This brings us onto the negative side here: Reverse Implied Odds

Reverse implied odds is the largest factor of this hand right now.

Give it up... Anybody who thinks for a second that reverse implied odds outweigh the positive should stop playing poker now.Once you complete the SB u get to see the flop (we have assumed from the OP that the BB is not raising)You are gaining 60% of the board and unless you are a fish are not going to play on without being hit hard.Assume you just play on when you get 2-pair or better or a strong straight draw - 95% of the time you fold. There are no reverse implied odds there.For the 5% you continue, if you can't make a profit when you are guaranteed to have 2-pair or better at the flop or a striaght draw with massive pot odds then there is a real issue with your post flop play.Anyone, even JFarrell (rest his inter-soul), should be able to turn a profit under those circumstances, indicating your reverse implied odds are outweighed by positive implied odds - to what degree depends upon your post flop skill.To finish off I found this little gem reviewing the thread...

The pot odds are higher than your implied odds in this case. And with that said, your pot odds arent great either.

I've just shown a conservative calculation of implied odds being roughly equal to the current pot odds - if this hand gets any action at all the implied odds could be 2-3 times bigger than your current pot odds.As for 'your pot odds arent great either'. Wow. I want to play the same games you do. If I could find a game where 19-1 was common let alone considered 'not great' I would be in seventh heaven!

[Royal_Tour 0]

Actually you're wrong here. Implied odds (positive and reverse) are the ratio of future bets to your current bet. God man.. like. i thought people like u were too busy waiting for star wars to open.Your telling me i'm wrong? Its the amount of projected money or chips, to be tossed in post flop. Taken into account by the pre-flop play and betting. Ready, 2 players heads up no raise?.. low implied odds.8 players 1 raise, 1 re-raise, 7 more calls. High implied odds.. there you go

[Royal_Tour 0]

Give it up... Anybody who thinks for a second that reverse implied odds outweigh the positive should stop playing poker now.Type in reverse implied odds in google, and get yourself educated.. PLEASE!!with a 7, 2 o. your reverse implied odds are huge, because this hand is considered a winner about 4 - 5% of the time. (depending on how technical you want to be). which is extremely low, and - EVsee for yourself.http://www.evgr.com/TechCorner/h2wins.outHypathetically:Lets say for a minute that there will not be any betting post flop., and if your cards hit., and u bet , you will take down the pot.Now blinds are 1, 2 SB - BB.. you complete the BB everytime with 7, 2 10 handed with every player in. You win 18 + your original 2, 4.3% of the time.That is 4 times out of 100.. (since your a math guy and all) that means you win 72$ + your original 8$. but it cost you 100 to play those 100 hands.which means that you lose money with such low EV hands like 7,2 in low implied odd pots.. which is what this is!.

[Canada 0]

Actually you're wrong here. Implied odds (positive and reverse) are the ratio of future bets to your current bet. God man.. like. i thought people like u were too busy waiting for star wars to open.Your telling me i'm wrong? Its the amount of projected money or chips, to be tossed in post flop. Taken into account by the pre-flop play and betting. Ready, 2 players heads up no raise?.. low implied odds.8 players 1 raise, 1 re-raise, 7 more calls. High implied odds.. there you go

Nope your still wrongIt is future betting but the bit you are missing is where it is applied as a ratio to the current bet.The word ratio is the important bitra·tio ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rsh, rsh-)n. pl. ra·tios 1 Relation in degree or number between two similar things. 2 The relative value of silver and gold in a currency system that is bimetallic. 3 Mathematics. The relation between two quantities expressed as the quotient of one divided by the other: The ratio of 7 to 4 is written 7:4 or 7/4. Here's an extract from a University paper a simple google produced. Maybe you can understand it if somebody else says it."Put another way, implied odds is the ratio between the amount you expect to win when you make your hand (more than what is in the pot) versus the amount it will cost to continue playing"Now here is the hard bit.I'm typing this slowly so you can keep up...because the bet you are faced with is halved the ratio (there's that word again!) is doubledwhen you double something it gets biggerany of this making sense yet?

[Canada 0]

Give it up... Anybody who thinks for a second that reverse implied odds outweigh the positive should stop playing poker now.Type in reverse implied odds in google, and get yourself educated.. PLEASE!!with a 7, 2 o. your reverse implied odds are huge, because this hand is considered a winner about 4 - 5% of the time. (depending on how technical you want to be). which is extremely low, and - EV

Which bit don't u understand?If the flop for your hand is rubbish you give up.This will be 95% of the time.It costs you no more.zero divided by anything = 0Reverse implied odds only kick in if you continue on the flop which, under these circumstances, will be in situations where you have a high probability of winning...

[Royal_Tour 0]

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~jonathan/Grad/papp/node22.htmlYa thanks bud.. I know the link.. you should read it again.It is the ratio of the hand after the flop...Implied odds does not take into account if u were the BB or SB., or if it was half price for u or not.It has to do with the money in the pot, and the expected amount to be pushed in later, Sumed up., its how much its going to cost you, vs. how much you can win.

[Canada 0]

Oh dear compare these 2 statements

Implied odds does not take into account ... if it was half price for u or not.

Sumed up., its how much its going to cost you, vs. how much you can win.

Surely if it is half price this actually changes 'how much it is going to cost you'Let us compare th button vs the small blind in this situation using your correct statement of Sumed up., its how much its going to cost you, vs. how much you can win.Lets say the total pot will be 15BB at the end of the hand this equals 30SBFor the button to call pre flop it will cost him 1 SB to win 30SBa ratio of 1:30For us in the small blind it will cost 1/2 a SB to completea ratio of .5:30 which is equivalent to 1:60Does that help....

[Royal_Tour 0]

CanadaI think you are confusing pot odds with implied odds.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Its how much its going to cost you in the FUTURE!!! good god man!!.. wether you complete the small blind or not., has a very small effect on the implied odds.This is POT odds.. you are half price there for your pot odds are large with 10 players.

[Canada 0]

CanadaI think you are confusing pot odds with implied odds.

No, go back and read my last post.See the bit where it says at the end of the hand? Implied oddsLets break it down further:Preflop the SB is asked to call 1/2 a small blind vs 9 1/2 small blinds in the potThis is 1:19 and are your pot oddsThe implied odds are 1/2 SB now vs winning 30SB at the end of the handThis is 1:60 and are your implied odds (actually its 1:59 but hey...)--------------------------Some schools of thought actually break it down like this 1:19 pot odds1:59 implied pot odds (notice implied + pot)1:40 implied odds (the future component of the hand and the 'technically correct' definition of implied odds)however as the 1:40 is irrelevant to most situations and as players we need only be concerned with implied pot odds which conveniently gets shortened to implied odds.

[Canada 0]

Its how much its going to cost you in the FUTURE!!!

No actually it isn'tFor implied odds you are looking at how much you will win, so the assumption is made that you will win the hand.Based on that the hand cannot cost you anything more.Future costs are dealing with reverse implied odds

[Canada 0]

good god man!!.. wether you complete the small blind or not., has a very small effect on the implied odds.

but this is the whole point...we are looking at one bet at this stage. The completing of the small blind.We are therefore looking at the pot odds and the implied odds of doing so.Therefore the cost of doing so must weigh in to the equation

[Royal_Tour 0]

Dude.. i'll give you credit.. You almost understand it all.. Implied odds looks at how much you are going to win. if your hand is made. this is all in the FUTURE.Its already been proven that 7,2 is a losing hand. (loses more than wins)And with this said, your hand is up against 9 other players in this senerio.The winning rate is even lower.I cant argue anymore., You just keep playing your 7,2 o and i'll stick to folding them

[Canada 0]

Dude.. i'll give you credit.. You almost understand it all.. Implied odds looks at how much you are going to win. if your hand is made. this is all in the FUTURE.

lol! this just has me shaking my head.i need to stop tapping on the glass.One day you will get it...

[PocketTwosUTG 0]

Ummm thats not implied odds genius!..Your implied odds is the money to be tossed into the pot later on in the hand, post flop.When there is a raise, and several calls. these are huge implied odds. why??well because odds are that the original raiser or a caller will raise again..I think you have no idea what your talking about. And to call yourself a "mathguy". is just ridiculous., Your way off bud.

The only argument you even made against me was semantics. I say the implied odds are better than usual since you're paying 1/2 of one bet, and all bets on future streets are larger. Getting X:1 is not the whole story if you're considering the money that will change hands on later streets. It's why in general, you can often be much more likely to peel off the river on a draw for one bet, where if it was 3 cold to you with the same odds, it might not be profitable. Granted, we have the idea that earlier aggression tends to mean that we'll see aggression later as well. Perhaps semantically, paying less than one bet doesn't "improve" your implied odds depending on how you look at it, but it's surely a benefit that the investment in the pot on this street is 1/2 the size of the small bet, and 1/4 the big bet.This is why he is saying that the RATIO is important. Because it is, regardless of whether or not it fits neatly into your definition of "implied odds."

Pocket Two's... You're Running Circles... You were wrong in this case, The numbers add up too it, and nearly every member posting agrees... And Reverse Implied Odds CERTAINLY are important too look at here. I am not brushing off ANY win percentage, You are looking at it wrong. Done.

Vox Populi Vox Dei huh? I guess I gave you too much credit: you seemed to be one of the few people that was interested in actually finding out an answer, instead of just telling me that they're right. At least you actually reasoned out an argument the first time though, that's more than can be said for most everybody else. FWIW: appealling to the "authority" of a group of people that agree with you is weak normally, but especially so when it's just a group of monkeys on a message board. If you're going to tell me "reverse implied odds are important," give me reasons. Give me reasons why they outweigh the positives of implied odds in this case. I don't think they do.

It has to do with the money in the pot, and the expected amount to be pushed in later, Sumed up., its how much its going to cost you, vs. how much you can win.

Maybe hearing it from somebody else will help. If we assume that the SAME number of bets can be won post flop, it amounts to a lot more, compared to our cost, if we're only paying 1/2 a bet.

 Post Posted: Thu, May 19th, 2005 6:50    Post subject:Dude.. i'll give you credit..You almost understand it all.. Implied odds looks at how much you are going to win. if your hand is made. this is all in the FUTURE.Its already been proven that 7,2 is a losing hand. (loses more than wins)And with this said, your hand is up against 9 other players in this senerio.The winning rate is even lower.I cant argue anymore., You just keep playing your 7,2 o and i'll stick to folding them

This is even more ludicrous since it's already been explained how utterly stupid this reasoning is. 72 loses more than it wins? NO WAY! So does every other hand against 9 random hands. That has absolutely no relevance here. You don't need to be an odds favorite to make something profitable. Canada:"lol! this just has me shaking my head." -You're not the only one."i need to stop tapping on the glass." - But it's fun"One day you will get it..." - Doubtful

[Royal_Tour 0]

Ummm thats not implied odds genius!..Your implied odds is the money to be tossed into the pot later on in the hand, post flop.When there is a raise, and several calls. these are huge implied odds. why??well because odds are that the original raiser or a caller will raise again..I think you have no idea what your talking about. And to call yourself a "mathguy". is just ridiculous., Your way off bud.

The only argument you even made against me was semantics. I say the implied odds are better than usual since you're paying 1/2 of one bet, and all bets on future streets are larger. Getting X:1 is not the whole story if you're considering the money that will change hands on later streets. It's why in general, you can often be much more likely to peel off the river on a draw for one bet, where if it was 3 cold to you with the same odds, it might not be profitable. Granted, we have the idea that earlier aggression tends to mean that we'll see aggression later as well. Perhaps semantically, paying less than one bet doesn't "improve" your implied odds depending on how you look at it, but it's surely a benefit that the investment in the pot on this street is 1/2 the size of the small bet, and 1/4 the big bet.This is why he is saying that the RATIO is important. Because it is, regardless of whether or not it fits neatly into your definition of "implied odds."

Pocket Two's... You're Running Circles... You were wrong in this case, The numbers add up too it, and nearly every member posting agrees... And Reverse Implied Odds CERTAINLY are important too look at here. I am not brushing off ANY win percentage, You are looking at it wrong. Done.

Vox Populi Vox Dei huh? I guess I gave you too much credit: you seemed to be one of the few people that was interested in actually finding out an answer, instead of just telling me that they're right. At least you actually reasoned out an argument the first time though, that's more than can be said for most everybody else. FWIW: appealling to the "authority" of a group of people that agree with you is weak normally, but especially so when it's just a group of monkeys on a message board. If you're going to tell me "reverse implied odds are important," give me reasons. Give me reasons why they outweigh the positives of implied odds in this case. I don't think they do.

It has to do with the money in the pot, and the expected amount to be pushed in later, Sumed up., its how much its going to cost you, vs. how much you can win.

Maybe hearing it from somebody else will help. If we assume that the SAME number of bets can be won post flop, it amounts to a lot more, compared to our cost, if we're only paying 1/2 a bet.

 Post Posted: Thu, May 19th, 2005 6:50    Post subject:Dude.. i'll give you credit..You almost understand it all.. Implied odds looks at how much you are going to win. if your hand is made. this is all in the FUTURE.Its already been proven that 7,2 is a losing hand. (loses more than wins)And with this said, your hand is up against 9 other players in this senerio.The winning rate is even lower.I cant argue anymore., You just keep playing your 7,2 o and i'll stick to folding them

This is even more ludicrous since it's already been explained how utterly stupid this reasoning is. 72 loses more than it wins? NO WAY! So does every other hand against 9 random hands. That has absolutely no relevance here. You don't need to be an odds favorite to make something profitable. Canada:"lol! this just has me shaking my head." -You're not the only one."i need to stop tapping on the glass." - But it's fun"One day you will get it..." - Doubtful

LOL.. your a horrible player.please tell me which site you play at, i'd love to play you

[Royal_Tour 0]

Pockettwo'sYou can argue your pot odds, and implied odds, and eliminate your reverse implied odds all you want to try and make your decision that much more sound.But if you can call half a sb with the worst rated hand., Then with your logic it should be profitable to call a full blind with the 5th, or 6th worst rated hand. are u drawing a line at this idea somewhere?.. where do you stop the math, and import the luck?. at the SB?

[loogie 115]

Let's forget about the numbers and percentages of whether completing with 7/2 off is +EV or not. I'm sure it's not...BUTWhat about this non-math perspective? The entire table limps but the small blind folds, it looks weak. If I'm one of the other players at the table, I'm immediately noting this move from the small blind. This is a player that can be bluffed off the best hand later. He's too focused on odds and math and will see monsters when a well timed bluff is aimed at him.I use math, odds, all that stuff, too. But I also do my best to take advantage of other players when I see recognize their playing styles and patterns. I will definitely be making a move on this player in future hands.This is only a no-limit argument, though. I don't have enough experience in limit to discuss it.

[PocketTwosUTG 0]

Pockettwo'sYou can argue your pot odds, and implied odds, and eliminate your reverse implied odds all you want to try and make your decision that much more sound.But if you can call half a sb with the worst rated hand., Then with your logic it should be profitable to call a full blind with the 5th, or 6th worst rated hand. are u drawing a line at this idea somewhere?.. where do you stop the math, and import the luck?. at the SB?

Could you also tell me how exactly my logic would say be saying this?

[mikedshelton 0]

FOLD or RAISE

[Monkeyman 0]

FOLD or RAISE

Well, this comment has certainly taken the discussion in a new direction.

[Guest]

Dude.. i'll give you credit.. You almost understand it all.. Implied odds looks at how much you are going to win. if your hand is made. this is all in the FUTURE.Canada, you should be flattered! This is coming from someone who's quick to call people out playing 3/6 holdem! On top of that, his post count is almost 600!!!!!!! Therefore he > us. I would expect such a deity to be too busy basking in his own greatness to offer up such a compliment.I think everything I would have added in terms of theory and whatnot has already been covered...I would like to address the point made that I was flawed in my reasoning to use the 5.9% figure to calculate initial pot odds since that only holds true if I take it to showdown. This is a correct point, but serves no purpose to detract from my argument. I am aware that 27o is going to fold some winners on the flop...however, 99.9999% of the time, this will not be a 10 handed showdown, and the possibility of others folding winners more often than I do is dramatically higher. Therefore, while the 5.9% is not technically correct, it is as close of an estimate as we can create simply because when we progress past the flop, with people dropping out, our equity will more than likely increase. This may have been covered inbetween the random "I know I'm right, people with higher post counts than you say so" and the "Where do you play I want your bankroll" posts, but to be honest, I resorted to skimming. I know that I did a bad job of explaining my thoughts on this, and I wanted to clarify for the 5 people or so who actually want to reason this through. That's my rationale for reevaluating the hand on the flop. Implied odds and reverse implied odds have already been covered. I truly wish some of the "OMG U play 27o so u suck! Where do u play u fish!" would redirect their efforts into proving their points with more than a simple redirect to their previous points which have been pointed out to be flawed.On an aside, while I'm not aware of the subtleties of this board just yet, typically, challenging someone to a balls-to-the-wall 6 handed 3/6 match doesn't inspire the utmost confidence in a person's logic. I would say that it makes it seem like you would just be beginning to deal with the concepts you're preaching, not that you've spent years familiarizing yourself with them. Just sayin'.