Alternate Method Of Calculating Pot Odds

[SCYUKON 0]

So anyways, I thought I understood basic pot odds. If the pot contains $20, and it costs you $10 to call, then you are getting 2 to 1 on your money. Simple as could be. Or so I thought.So tonight I am reading a book by a University of Toronto probability expert, called "Struck by Lighting" (a great read so far by the way, as this guy makes probability very understandable for the layman).Anyways, in one of his sections, he is talking about pot odds, but the way he describes it, in the above scenario, once you threw in your $10 into the pot, the pot would now contain $30, so in effect you would be getting 3 to 1 on your money, not 2 to 1.So I went and rechecked my Harrington on Holdem books again (waiting for your book DN as these make me play way too tight!), and of course his definition of pot odds would be that I was getting 2 to 1, not the 3 to 1 mentioned above.So anyways, everyone always says that once you have money in the pot, it is gone and you forget about it. So would that concept not apply as well to the money you are about to put into the pot? (as opposed to the money already in there). In other words, if I make the call the pot now contains $30, and that is the amount I will win for my $10 bet, not the $20 that was in the pot prior to my call.Or have I been missing something all along and 3 to 1 would be the odds I am getting if I call $10 into a $20 pot.The example he gave was when you had a 4 flush after the flop. The odds of making your flush by the river are 35%, so the EV is 35% * $30, of approximately $10.50. Since you are only calling $10, it is a no brainer (ignore implied odds and future bets for now). But if you do the calc with $20, your EV of course is only $7.50, so it is a sucker bet. So who is right?Thanks for your adviceSCYukon

[SCYUKON 0]

Hmmn - not getting flamed yet, so either this post has merit, or is so retarded that no one is bothering with it. Still not sure which is the case....hopefully the former.....

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Hmmn - not getting flamed yet, so either this post has merit, or is so retarded that no one is bothering with it. Still not sure which is the case....hopefully the former.....

Sorry, it's the latter.A concept of Pot odds is only as relevant as how we use it to interpret what odds we need to call a bet. If we go with the 10 to call a 20 pot as being 2-1, then we must recognize that we must win the pot 1/3 times to break even.In other words, getting n to 1 on our money, we must win 1/(n+1) times.If we call it 3 to 1, then we simply alter our formula:Getting n to 1 on our money, we must win 1/n times to break even.In other words, it all washes out when you reinterpret to what percentage you need to call. This is the only concrete thing that must be correct.

[NarSARSsist 0]

Since he is a probability expert, he would probably view things in a slightly different light than a poker player.It's not really an issue of who's right, it comes down more to what it stands for; he probably uses that convention just to simplify some of his explanations.His end result is probably still the same (or close to, maybe with some added complexities) as the poker player's version.It's like saying "The number of coinflips I lose before I win one" vs. "The number of coinflips I run until I finally won my first one.If you lost 3 times and then won one, the first number would be 3 and the second would be 4; they still describe the same event though.

[offset 0]

It is the same concept, the expert is just using 3:1 to represent 1/3 of the pot rather than the more commonly used 2:1. Either way your call is still 1/3 of the total money going into the pot so the +ev is calculated the same way.

[SCYUKON 0]

Ok that is very helpful. So which do I compare against the odds of making the hand in that scenario, the 2 to 1, or the 3 to 1?Thanks folks!SC

[edge52 0]

Think of it this way, if you call 10 you'll have a chance to win the pot that already contains 20. If you fold you don't risk the 10. Yes the pot will contain 30 if you call, but that extra 10 was yours anyways if you folded.Or another way, if you call the pot grows by 10 chips but your stack shrinks by 10 chips so the effect on pot odds is cancelledOr, say the pot is 10 and someone goes allin for 1000. If you also have 1000 in your stack and call, you're not getting a good price to call. You're risking 1000 to win only 10.And I just thought of something...when an opponent bets at you, the number of chips he bets is the price he is paying you to call. The number of chips in the pot is the price the pot is paying you. Basically the pot gives you a discount to call his bet.

[SCYUKON 0]

Think of it this way, if you call 10 you'll have a chance to win the pot that already contains 20. If you fold you don't risk the 10. Yes the pot will contain 30 if you call, but that extra 10 was yours anyways if you folded.Or another way, if you call the pot grows by 10 chips but your stack shrinks by 10 chips so the effect on pot odds is cancelledOr, say the pot is 10 and someone goes allin for 1000. If you also have 1000 in your stack and call, you're not getting a good price to call. You're risking 1000 to win only 10.And I just thought of something...when an opponent bets at you, the number of chips he bets is the price he is paying you to call. The number of chips in the pot is the price the pot is paying you. Basically the pot gives you a discount to call his bet.

Thank you very much. This totally clears it up for me I guess those Harrington and Sklansky fellows are alright after all LOL.Thanks again.SCmoderator - please feel free to toast this post at will

[_Great_Dane_ 0]

Ok that is very helpful. So which do I compare against the odds of making the hand in that scenario, the 2 to 1, or the 3 to 1?Thanks folks!SC

To simplify the answer, if you're 35% to make a flush after the flop, you'll make the flush about one time in three, and you'll miss about two times in three . That makes you a 2:1 underdog. If you're a chipleader with $20k in chips, you've got four cards to the nut flush on an unpaired board after the flop, two people go all in making the pot $20k, and you need to call $10k to stay in the hand, you would be getting the right pot odds to make the call.The $20k pot is 2x the amount needed to see if you have the winning hand (2:1). You'll make the flush 1/3 of the time and your $10k call will make up 1/3 of the pot after your call is made. But, to ensure that you're "on the same page" as everyone else, you should use the 2:1 terminology because you're comparing the size of the pot before your call is made to the amount of your call (2:1) and the times you'll miss your hand to the times that you'll make your hand (2:1).

[SCYUKON 0]

To simplify the answer, if you're 35% to make a flush after the flop, you'll make the flush about one time in three, and you'll miss about two times in three . That makes you a 2:1 underdog. If you're a chipleader with $20k in chips, you've got four cards to the nut flush on an unpaired board after the flop, two people go all in making the pot $20k, and you need to call $10k to stay in the hand, you would be getting the right pot odds to make the call.The $20k pot is 2x the amount needed to see if you have the winning hand (2:1). You'll make the flush 1/3 of the time and your $10k call will make up 1/3 of the pot after your call is made. But, to ensure that you're "on the same page" as everyone else, you should use the 2:1 terminology because you're comparing the size of the pot before your call is made to the amount of your call (2:1) and the times you'll miss your hand to the times that you'll make your hand (2:1).

Excellent example - very helpful indeed

[DaBruins 0]

now that you're getting better at thinking about pot odds, try some more advanced stuff. Such as implied odds, or reverse implied odds.

[JMoney2681 0]

now that you're getting better at thinking about pot odds, try some more advanced stuff. Such as implied odds, or reverse implied odds.

WTF is reverse implied odds???

[qyayqi 11]

WTF is reverse implied odds???

google is my friend:For reverse implied odds, consider that you have a strong hand but little chance of improving and your opponent has a chance of improving to a hand stronger than yours, or possibly already has a hand stronger than yours (they have been betting and you are not sure if they are bluffing) - essentially a situation where you are not certain that you have the best hand. Say it is the turn and there is $12 in the pot and it is $4 to call (pot odds 3-to-1). If your opponent has a weak hand or misses their card they may stop betting in which case you would only win $12 (it costs $4 to find out you are winning). Otherwise, you have committed to playing to the end of the hand in which case it would cost you $8 to find out you are losing (pot odds 3-to-2). There are many variations to this scenario. The essential idea is that reverse implied odds should be considered when you are not certain you have the best hand; it will cost more in future betting rounds to discover this.