Pot odds 102

I am currently teaching a friend to play low limit holdem, and the following concept came up that he didn't quite get, so I thought I'd pose the question as a little bit of a thought exercise.

Suppose you are in position on a single opponent, and the flop gives you a gutshot straight draw, but the high card on the flop is above both of your hole cards (e.g., you hold T9 on a K76 flop). Your typically passive opponent leads in to you on the flop, which lets you put him 100% on TPTK or better.

For pedagogical reasons, let's assume you must hit your gutshot to win the pot and that hitting your gutshot will not give your opponent a redraw against your straight. Finally, assume that your opponent will never give you a free card on the turn as a result of a flop raise.

How many SB's must be in the pot for you to profitably call? What do you consider in determining this?

Easy answer but I’m assuming you don't want me to skew the poll results so I won’t say anything about it just yet...

If you can be assured that your passive opponent will bet-call on the turn and check-call the river after you hit, then you're looking to win 6 more small bets if you hit, and lose one when you miss.

If x = 6 (current pot size)

8% to win 12 bets = +0.96 (EV)
92% to lose 1 bet = -0.92

If x = 8
8% to win 14 bets = 1.12
92% to lose 1 bet = -0.92

If x = 10
8% to win 16 bets = 1.28
92% to lose 1 bet = -0.92

So theoretically you could call with 8-1 odds if you're guaranteed that many bets after you hit.

If you figure you can only get 4 more small bets out of him (he check-calls turn & river or bet-calls turn, check-folds river), then you'd need 10-1 odds. This is probably a more likely scenario.

It depends somewhat on how your opponent plays the turn and river. I assumed he'll bet/fold the turn and check/call the river. (Folds only if the 8 hits, of course)

Suppose the pot has n SB's. If you hit your draw on the turn, you win n+4 -- if you miss, you lose 1. The odds of hitting your draw are 4/45 ~ 9%. So it's profitable to call if
(.09)*(n+4) + (.91)*(-1) > 0
<=> n >~ 6

Also, you really shouldn't have included an "other" option -- regardless of your assumptions, it's very unlikely that the break-even point is going to be exactly an even number of small bets.

- Nate

Actually, you should assume he will bet/call either one or both the streets if you hit.

I can debate both 8 and 10... The simple odds would be if you were AI lets say or her was AI with no other betting rounds easy answer of 10.5:1 4 outs...

However, given you might get an extra 1bb out of the opponent when you hit this curves it a bit say 2sb to your odds and you can probably justify 8sb...

I don’t see calling for less then 8:1… however rule of thumb usually 10:1 if looking at straight up odds…

I don't really need to do the math behind this do I?

Originally Posted by pokerfanatic

I don’t see calling for less then 8:1… however rule of thumb usually 10:1 if looking at straight up odds…

No.

Originally Posted by elipsesjeff

Originally Posted by pokerfanatic

I don’t see calling for less then 8:1… however rule of thumb usually 10:1 if looking at straight up odds…

No.

The answer is about 6.5SBs on the flop and 9.5BBs on the turn.
That being said, I voted for 8. I also wouldn't call on the turn for less than 10 to 1.
I don't think it is a mistake to give up 0.03sbs worth of equity for decreased variance. At 0.1SBs it becomes a call for me. This also help to protect you from miscounting outs and making -EV plays.

ah another post that shows I'm not destined for this game (stupid right brain). Could some explain in layman's terms why 10 is wrong on the flop? Is it because can assume he'll bet/call any raise if you hit?

Originally Posted by Demiparadigm

The answer is about 6.5SBs on the flop and 9.5BBs on the turn.

Still off. But closer.

Originally Posted by rubixstreub

ah another post that shows I'm not destined for this game (stupid right brain). Could some explain in layman's terms why 10 is wrong on the flop? Is it because can assume he'll bet/call any raise if you hit?

Implied odds.

Oh, if he's bet-calling both streets, that's an extra 4 SB's you make if you win. This means you can call when there are at least 2.25 SB's in the pot (which is always, since there have to be at least 3 SB's). The assumptions are starting to get a little unreasonable, however ...

It seems like I'm way off from what other people are saying though ... can someone tell me where they disagree with my math?

- Nate

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

Oh, if he's bet-calling both streets, that's an extra 4 SB's you make if you win. This means you can call when there are at least 2.25 SB's in the pot (which is always, since there have to be at least 3 SB's). The assumptions are starting to get a little unreasonable, however ...

It seems like I'm way off from what other people are saying though ... can someone tell me where they disagree with my math?



- Nate

I think your math is perfect. The only difference is the assumptions. I guess we could use n+6 assuming a bet/call on the turn and a check/call on the river. so we get:
(4/45)*(n+6) + (41/45)*(-1) > 0
(4/45)n + 24/45 - 41/45 > 0
(4/45)n > 41/45 - 24/45
(4/45)n > 17/45
n> 17/45 * 45/4
n> 17/4
n> 4.25

I am still gonna be stubborn and stick with my answer of 8 though

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

Oh, if he's bet-calling both streets, that's an extra 4 SB's you make if you win. This means you can call when there are at least 2.25 SB's in the pot (which is always, since there have to be at least 3 SB's). The assumptions are starting to get a little unreasonable, however ...

It seems like I'm way off from what other people are saying though ... can someone tell me where they disagree with my math?

- Nate

Yea, pretty far off. Read SSH lately?

Originally Posted by Demiparadigm

blah blah blah... a whole lotta math ... blah blah blah

so...translated for a beginner is...?

i'd say just keep it at 8 too. as beginners you want them to win profitably. you don't want to teach tactics on maximizing profit, because they will screw up and end up losing more, since adding EV means almost exponentially increasing variation (or so it seems). just let experience teach them to handle more marginal situations.

Jeff if we are all way wrong and you seem to know it lets see the math and your answer...

EDIT: (11:15PM)
Implied odds w/e even if you hit on the turn are you counting that as 2bb extra? Then the answer changes a lot... If you hit on the river assuming you still have odds to be calling the turn card in the first place you will probably only get 1bb, spending an extra 1bb on the turn to river it those it could have reverse implied odds on the flop of being 12:1... or it could have good odds of 2 bets on top of the one that the passive would probably bet into you on the turn... so that's 4sb IF you can make it on the turn... thus being 6:1 odds...

There for your avg is going to be 9:1 about...

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

Originally Posted by Demiparadigm

blah blah blah... a whole lotta math ... blah blah blah

so...translated for a beginner is...?

Translated you need 10.5 to 1 odds to call. When you take implied odds into account your call of 1 small bet must net you 10.5 small bets total.

We need to assume how many bets will go in on later streets if you hit your card on the turn.
Since we have position, we assume our villain will bet the turn and call a raise, then check/call the river.
since these are big bet streets, these 3 big bets you win from him = 6 more small bets in the pot that you win for your call.
since we need to make 10.5 small bets on the call, we subtract the 6 small bets implied from 10.5 and get 4.5.
The 4.25 above uses 45 unknown cards instead of 47, since we know that our villain doesn't hold any of our outs. This increases the odds of making our hand in the next card enough to drop the odds required from 4.5 to 4.25.
This is a very hypothetical excercise though, in that we are assuming our opponent has at least TPTK, and will pay us off on the big streets. While implied odds are an important concept to understand, we can rarely assume in a game what exactly will happen on later streets. Since you will sometimes not be up against such a player, or such a hand, and your hand may not hold up every time, it is usually best to be laid better odds for a draw than the absolute minimum.

Originally Posted by pokerfanatic

Jeff if we are all way wrong and you seem to know it lets see the math and your answer...

EDIT: (11:15PM)
Implied odds w/e even if you hit on the turn are you counting that as 2bb extra? Then the answer changes a lot... If you hit on the river assuming you still have odds to be calling the turn card in the first place you will probably only get 1bb, spending an extra 1bb on the turn to river it those it could have reverse implied odds on the flop of being 12:1... or it could have good odds of 2 bets on top of the one that the passive would probably bet into you on the turn... so that's 4sb IF you can make it on the turn... thus being 6:1 odds...

There for your avg is going to be 9:1 about...

Don't average it. we are only considering the odds we need to make our hand on the turn. if we miss our hand, and no longer have odds to draw, we fold. Therefore we are only risking 1 small bet total.

Originally Posted by pokerfanatic

Jeff if we are all way wrong and you seem to know it lets see the math and your answer...

Because really, I know the correct answer. The point is for people who DONT know the right answer to give their thoughts.

The EASIEST way to find this answer is to go in to SSH and quote it. Have none of you read it?

Also:

Translated you need 10.5 to 1 odds to call.

is not correct either.

elipsesjeff, stop being so cryptic and tell us your answer (and the math behind it), so we can tell you why you're wrong

- Nate

Just want to add that I didn't address a couple of points, so there is no hard and fast answer to the question I have posed. Mostly I was hoping for some discussion along these lines. Seems like this discusion will be useful to some (at least the 10 who voted for 10 or more SB)...

Basically, expressed odds would have to be about 11:1 (10.75:1) using only your cards and the board. As Demi mentioned, you can safely cut it to 10.5 or 10.25:1 since we have assumed that Villain has at least a piece of the flop or an overpair.

Because of implied odds, folding simply because the pot is smaller than 10 SB is clearly too tight.

What factors should you consider in estimating your implied odds?

Well if you want to JUST look at the Turn assuming you will not play any farther w/o improving given you fold to one bet when you miss and gain beats only when you improve you can make an argument that by calling the flop you are free rolling the turn... figuring you’re loosing nothing but a 1sb (the flop) when you miss and win at least 1bb possibly more depending on the player and there hand when you hit...

Is that right Jeff?

King Yao's Weighing the Odds in Hold'em Poker has a pretty easy method for a beginner to use.

it's a bit mathy, but easy enough for anyone with basic math skills to use. it just takes practice to use all the time.

it's called the DIPO method (do i have pot odds).

good number = (expected pot size excluding my bets) * outs
bad number = (amount needed to call) * non-outs

whenever good number > bad number, you should call.

in this case, we have a 4 out draw.

the pot on the flop is N. we expect to win 2 big bets on the turn and river if we hit on the turn, and nothing more if we miss the turn and fold. (btw, the book recommends to estimate the pot size only until the turn, and then recalculate it there)

so, the EPS is N+2 in big bets

good number = (N+2) * 4
bad number = (52 deck - 5 seen cards - 4 outs) * (0.5 bet to call)

4N + 8 = 43 * 0.5
4N + 8 = 21.5
4N = 13.5
N = 3.375

so....in small bets 6.75 to call break even for this example.

it's pretty easy...until you get faced with raises instead, and the bad number gets uber high and you end up comparing if 102 > 100

demi...you're gonna have to explain why you used n+6 in your example... (edit: nm, i just read you assumption of a turn checkraise)

recalculating using DIPO with 3 extra big bets won...
4N + 12 = 43 * 0.5
4N + 12 = 21.5
4N = 9.5
N = 2.375
which is 4.75 small bets, which is close to what demi calculated earlier (probably cuz he used 45 instead of 43)

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

elipsesjeff, stop being so cryptic and tell us your answer (and the math behind it), so we can tell you why you're wrong

- Nate

HAHA. I'm waiting for the SSH quote. I'd post it but the book is at school.

BTW, SSH is the bible.

SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, Thought i'd have some fun

"Sometimes your opponent will have a relatively weak hand and just pay off a single bet. But occasionally he will have a strong hand and raise once or twice, losing a total of 2 to 5 bets. So you guess that you will win, on average, about 1.5 bets. Since you will have the nuts if you make your hand (and, therefore, there is no chance that you will actually LOSE those 2 to 5 bets to a surprise holding), you should add 1.5 bets to the size of the pot to determine your implied odds.
<midas06> So add $6 (1.5 bets) to the $40 pot, and you have 11.5-1 implied odds. While your pot odds are only 10-1, your implied odds give you a solid overlay. You should call with your gutshot"

- Page 32, Small Stakes Holdem

unfortunately, that quote only states that you should call for that particular example. it does not say what the minimum pot size has to be.

That was the only quote I could find in SSH regarding implied odds. Unless I missed something in my 5 minute reread...

Well, in this case we know the opponent has a relatively strong hand (at least TPTK) and we've got position, so let's bump it up to 2 bets, or 4 SB (this might still be conservative). In this case you should call if there are more than about 6 SB in the pot, as I showed earlier.

elipsesjeff, we're still waiting on your answer ...

- Nate

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

Well, in this case we know the opponent has a relatively strong hand (at least TPTK) and we've got position, so let's bump it up to 2 bets, or 4 SB (this might still be conservative). In this case you should call if there are more than about 6 SB in the pot, as I showed earlier.

elipsesjeff, we're still waiting on your answer ...

- Nate

The quote from SSH is about a gutshot on the turn, not on the flop. I think we can add at least 4sb here, possibly 8.
That is why I went with 6 (which is probably the most likely also).

It is a silly point to argue though. The point of the thread is that you don't need 10 to 1 odds to call with a gutshot taking into account implied odds, or any other hand which would be the nuts, but would still get paid off.
Straight draws are better than flush draws for this, as they aren't as recognizable, as opposed to when the third sooted card hits the board. (which is often an action killer.)



(I like parenthesis)



-demi

Direct odds you need ~12:1. If you assume you'll win additional bets then your odds don't have to be as high.

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

Well, in this case we know the opponent has a relatively strong hand (at least TPTK) and we've got position, so let's bump it up to 2 bets, or 4 SB (this might still be conservative). In this case you should call if there are more than about 6 SB in the pot, as I showed earlier.

elipsesjeff, we're still waiting on your answer ...

- Nate

I know.

Originally Posted by elipsesjeff

Originally Posted by bigg_nate

elipsesjeff, stop being so cryptic and tell us your answer (and the math behind it), so we can tell you why you're wrong

- Nate

HAHA. I'm waiting for the SSH quote. I'd post it but the book is at school.

BTW, SSH is the bible.

SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, SSH, Thought i'd have some fun

I did quote SSH on my post there bud, under the implied odds section... or real close to it...

Originally Posted by PokerFanatic

Well if you want to JUST look at the Turn assuming you will not play any farther w/o improving given you fold to one bet when you miss and gain beats only when you improve you can make an argument that by calling the flop you are free rolling the turn... figuring you’re loosing nothing but a 1sb (the flop) when you miss and win at least 1bb possibly more depending on the player and there hand when you hit...

Note: Changed to replicate this example they use the example as if you were on the turn going into the river... with a gut shot...

Originally Posted by SSH

... Using pot odds alone, we concluded that the pot must lay 10.5:1 to call profitably. But we ignored the turn beating round. If you miss your draw, you will fold to one bet, so you still loose only 1/2 bet from the flop. But if you make your draw, there will probably be more beating on 4th and 5th street. If your opponent has only TPTK you might get 1bb out of each street, however if your opponent has a set, he may raise if you beat, thus you would get 2 to 4 bets in on 4th and 5th street both. So with a draw like this, the turn is a freeroll to you: You lose nothing if you miss, but you could make one or more bets if you complete your stright...

Lots of good discussion. Two things I consider when deciding if the pot is big enough:

- How obvious is your draw? If you hold J8 and the board is KQ9 for example, you shoudn't expect a lot of action when a ten hits.
- How often does your opponent go to showdown after being raised on the turn? If your opponent frequently folds good hands on the turn or river when you play back at him, you have to discount your implied odds a bit. (Obviously this opens up a whole world of bluffs against him.)

Anyway, nothing dramatic here. It's just a concept that is often ignored or misunderstood by otherwise solid players.

Incidentally, I would typically make this call with 6 SB in the pot in small stakes games since I have position and there is almost always a showdown. I'd require 8 SB if the draw were really obvious.

was reviewing SSH on my plane ride back from holidays.

pg 147
"The flop is XXX giving you a gutshot and backdoor flush draw. The small blind checks, and the big blind bets. You are getting 6-1 on a call, but you should probably fold. If you knew that it would not be raised behind you, then you could call. You hand has just enough strength to take a card off when you are getting 6-to-1 plus implied odds, especially if a couple of opponents might call behind you."

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

was reviewing SSH on my plane ride back from holidays.

pg 147
"The flop is XXX giving you a gutshot and backdoor flush draw. The small blind checks, and the big blind bets. You are getting 6-1 on a call, but you should probably fold. If you knew that it would not be raised behind you, then you could call. You hand has just enough strength to take a card off when you are getting 6-to-1 plus implied odds, especially if a couple of opponents might call behind you."

yea i froget what page i read my quote on i thin it was in the implied odds section about havng a GSD on the turn...

gutshot is 4 outs
around 8% to hit it on the turn
if you hit it on the turn you get in a raise and a bet on the river (he will call because he has a good hand)

that's 3BB = 6SB

to call 1SB for chance of getting (x + 6)SB
where the probability is 8%
you should be getting 11.5 to 1 or better on your money
1 sb is your money then the pot including his bet should be 5.5 sb so I vote 6 sb

We are on the flop betting round, so there are 47 cards unseen and 4 cards make the straight.

47/4 : every 11.75 times, 1 of these cards will come. So the pot must lay you 10.75:1 ?

Including implied odds: when you don't make your straight you will fold and if you do hit your straight you will get at least 2 more bets (4 small bets) from your opponent because he will call you down (i thought this was the assumption?).

So the pot must lay you 6.75:1 to call.. you still lose 10.75 small bets in total when you don't hit your straight and when you do hit you get those extra 4 small bets on top of the pot.

Am i stupid?

please tell me i am right elipsejeff!

I don't wanna throw a wrench in the works here.... but there is a very obvious point made in the sentence that kind of turns this call at 6 SB into a donk call.

JdTd on Qh,8s,4d
The analisys suggests that you indeed only have 4 outs, and hititng your obvious straight draw will win you some bank. the problem that you all run into is that Malmuth and Skalansky suggest vociferously that you have additional outs here.

from this point you have 4 guaranteed outs. but what happens if you pick up another diamond on the turn? They calculate, and re-inforce throughout the entire book that a backdoor flush draw is worth an out to you here. so now you're on 5 outs. They also suggest that from here if you were to get to 2 pair, or trips (runner runner) you'd probably be winner too. suggesting that this type of an out is worth 1.5 outs too. Now you're at a whoppoing 6.5 outs!!!

Which is about 6.0 ish bets to one to call.

NONE of that particular info was given in the original analsis. I need to know suits, and whether a freak runner-runner wins it for me. All of which is allowed for in the book, but NOT allowed for in the original analysis.

you and 1 opponent heads up a the flop, you need 10 bets in the pot to call here.

Originally Posted by Ragnar4

I don't wanna throw a wrench in the works here.... but there is a very obvious point made in the sentence that kind of turns this call at 6 SB into a donk call.

JdTd on Qh,8s,4d
The analisys suggests that you indeed only have 4 outs, and hititng your obvious straight draw will win you some bank. the problem that you all run into is that Malmuth and Skalansky suggest vociferously that you have additional outs here.

Of course you may have additional runner runner outs, but this was a lesson on implied odds, not counting outs, so I made a simplifying assumption. I also didn't consider the possibility that my opponent might have a set and have a redraw against a straight. There are many more things to consider, but when you are trying to teach a concept, it is often helpful to strip away the complicating factors.

Originally Posted by Ragnar4

NONE of that particular info was given in the original analsis. I need to know suits, and whether a freak runner-runner wins it for me. All of which is allowed for in the book, but NOT allowed for in the original analysis.

Of course it may be possible, but the fact is that you don't even need to consider runner runner to call at 6 SB. Many beginning players who understand expressed pot odds don't understand implied pot odds, and they don't consider the effect of a double bet on the turn and river.

Originally Posted by Ragnar4

you and 1 opponent heads up a the flop, you need 10 bets in the pot to call here.

I think you missed the point entirely.

i'm starting to wonder if anyone even read anything of this thread....

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

pg 147
"The flop is XXX giving you a gutshot and backdoor flush draw. The small blind checks, and the big blind bets. You are getting 6-1 on a call, but you should probably fold. If you knew that it would not be raised behind you, then you could call. YOUR HAND HAS JUST ENOUGH STRENGTH TO TAKE A CARD OFF WHEN YOU ARE GETTING 6-TO-1 PLUS IMPLIED ODDS, especially if a couple of opponents might call behind you."

It's entirely possible, I may have missed the point completely.

I just can't imagine that investing 4BB to get your opponent to invest 4BB gives you pot or implied odds to your 10.5 to 1 draw.

I went to the book, heck I just barely bought the book, and I consider myself intermediate and I just graduated to it. I just need an explanation concerning when, if ever, you get 10.5 to one on you draw justifying this draw.

You have a draw to the nuts and position. When you hit your draw on the turn, you stand to make 3 BB (=6SB) in addition to the what is already in the pot. When you miss your draw, you simply fold the turn when your opponent bets. You only have to invest 1 SB to win what's in the pot plus an additional 6 SB.

Damn this post got great discussion well done...

See, I kept wanting to take it past the turn to the river. I wasn't thinking in "turn only" thought processes. lol. i've got a real big "commit to a hand and refuse to fold till the cards are out" kind of a mentality lately.

6sb in the pot, I call his bet making 8 sb, I hit my straight, check he bets I raise, 12 sb right there. then bet out he crying calls. makes sense.

thank you. =)

... and then died without a clear conclusion.

What the hell?

elipsesjeff, please? I don't play limit but I read this. Now end it?

Here is my explanation, which is essentially the same as koolmoes except he seems to believ that the pot will only be +6 BB on the turn (villain bets, we raise, he threebets, we call?? CAP WITH THE NUTS! ) and hence, I get about a 4:1 needed to call...

The original post says "you must hit your gutshot to win the pot". Thereby discrediting any backdoor outs in this hand. That means villain has to have top set (so that our runner runner trips is no good). We have exactly four outs. We gotta hit the 8.


Well "lucky" us, the turn is an 8, giving us a fairly well hidden nut straight. Villain bets (+1 bet in pot). We raise (+2 bets, 3 bets total). It now gets slightly fuzzy in the "what if?" category, but we can safely assume villain almost always threebets here -- he'd be pretty stupid not to. That puts 6 bets total in the pot on the turn, and we cap we're at 8 bets total in the pot, four of which are his, four of which our ours.

Villain doesnt improve on the river but almost always check/calls and bet/calls slightly less often, so there will be +10 bets in the pot when we hit the turn and can cap.

Now on the river we have to assume he's slightly less likely to cap us. People tend to be more passive on the river. He bets, we raise, he might just call. This puts 4 bets total on the river, plus the 1 on the turn, for 5 total in the pot. If we average this number in with our +10 on the turn (since we'll hit our 8 on the turn just as often as hitting our 8 on the river -- ignoring that there is one less card in the deck on the river, its essentially the same.) we can assume that when we're going after this gutshot there will be ATLEAST 7.5 bets in the pot at showdown.

Therefore, when drawing on the flop, we can assume the pot when we hit will be +7.5 bets bigger (we dont factor in how much in the pot was ours because once hit hits the felt it ain't -- he's still got 10 outs to re-improve.)!

So with a pot expected to be on average +7.5 bets when we hit, and it only costs us 1 bet to see, we're gettin 7.5:1 implied odds, right? The pot would have to be about 3sb on the flop for us to call.


That is all assuming he has a "threebettable" hand -- two pair or a set. If he only holds top pair instead of a set or two pair, he's not as likely to threebet the turn when we hit.

Therefore he will bet the turn, we will raise, he will just call. That puts +4 bets in on the turn, and 2 more on the river, +6 total. The same is likely for the river, he's not going to threebet the river with top pair, and maybe not even two pair. So +6 is good there too.

Alright, so in almost every case, the pot will be somewhere between 6 to 7.5 bets larger when we hit than when we miss, so we'll need 3.5 or 4.5:1 to make this call, depending on what our opponent has. Since we can't know what our opponent has (and he's more likely to hold top pair than top set) we have to slightly downweight it and say ...

We can call with about 4:1.


Stab complete. My head asplode.

I can't believe this was 6 months ago.

Anyway, 6.5/1 is my standard, although if I think I can get more out of him, say a turn cap, then obv you don't need as good as outs, but i don't think 4-1 is anything spectacular and I wouldn't consider it standard.

ok i'm not as good at math as some of you but i have a simple way that works for me. I just add the bets i expect to make when i hit my hand to the bets already in the pot. The only problem is this far from an exact science as you can never be 100 percent sure that they will call both the turn and river.

Originally Posted by littleogre

I just add the bets i expect to make when i hit my hand to the bets already in the pot.

Thats.. exactly what we're doing..

Although I want o make sure you understand its not just "bets I expect to make when I hit", because then you'll get "Well, Ill make 2 more bets, and it costs me 1 to call" -- when in actuality its, "Well, there will be 4 more bets total in the pot, and it costs me one more to call." The same situation -- a turn raise, but one gives you 2:1 (the wrong one) and one gives you 4:1 (the right one).

Remember that rule about once its in the pot it ain't yours?


/Just clearing up some symantical problems

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Originally Posted by littleogre

I just add the bets i expect to make when i hit my hand to the bets already in the pot.

Thats.. exactly what we're doing..

Although I want o make sure you understand its not just "bets I expect to make when I hit", because then you'll get "Well, Ill make 2 more bets, and it costs me 1 to call" -- when in actuality its, "Well, there will be 4 more bets total in the pot, and it costs me one more to call." The same situation -- a turn raise, but one gives you 2:1 (the wrong one) and one gives you 4:1 (the right one).

Remember that rule about once its in the pot it ain't yours?


/Just clearing up some symantical problems

Ok let me make sure i'm going about things in the right way. Lets say i flop a gut shot nut str8 draw in a heads up pot with 6 small bets and my opponent leads out making it 7 small bets in the pot We can assume that at the very least my opponent check call the turn and river. Lets also assume that i'm smart enough to fold if the turn is a blank. So in essence i woud be spending i small bet to possible win 11.

typically passive opponent

but we can safely assume villain almost always threebets here -- he'd be pretty stupid not to

Typical passive players don't 3-bet unless they have a monster (such a set). Most fishy players will just call down with 1-2 pair after they are raised.

Since top pair (with a wide range of kickers) is a far more common holding than a set that he'll 3bet us with, you cannot assume that we'll get 4-5 big bets (3-4 on the turn, 1 on the river) against this player.

Plus, if we're assuming he has a set, there is the possibilioty of redraws on the river even afer we hit. So that's 20% of the time we will hit on the turn and still lose the pot (and an extra bet) on the river.

Had you made the player a maniac, then a call with questionable odds is defendable. But as the problem was stated, I don't think we can justify a call with less than 8-1 odds.

Hmm. I think youre close.

pot is 6sb, or 3bb on the flop, HU.
opponent leads, 7sb in pot, or 3.5BB

So if we call, we'll put another sb in (4bb), and on the turn our opponent will bet again. The pot is now 5bb. If we hit, we raise, pot goes to 7bb and he calls, making 8bb in the pot. If he check calls the river, the total pot is 10bb.

In your post you wrote: Let's also assume I'm smart enough to fold if the turn is a blank. No, no, that would be a bad thing to do. Nothing has changed!

Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)

Our implied odds are 10:1 -- which is exactly .5bb below where our 4 outter should be. Its still a slightly -EV situation to be in -- which is why most people have put the proper answer at "The pot should be 6.5sb's to call for the gutshot" -- which will be exactly break even on your gutshot. If you figure you might have a runner runner draw as well at least some of the time, you're profiting.

However, it makes some fundamental assumptions:
A) Our opponent will pay us when the gutshot hits. If our opponent leads into us hoping to steal the pot and we call chasing our 4 outter thinking we have good implied odds, and our opponent has absolutely nothing -- even when we hit we won't get paid and that makes it a LOSING proposition.

We have to get a raise off on either the turn or the river AND see showdown to BREAK EVEN on that call.

Originally Posted by KoRnholio

typically passive opponent

but we can safely assume villain almost always threebets here -- he'd be pretty stupid not to

Typical passive players don't 3-bet unless they have a monster (such a set). Most fishy players will just call down with 1-2 pair after they are raised.

Since top pair (with a wide range of kickers) is a far more common holding than a set that he'll 3bet us with, you cannot assume that we'll get 4-5 big bets (3-4 on the turn, 1 on the river) against this player.

Plus, if we're assuming he has a set, there is the possibilioty of redraws on the river even afer we hit. So that's 20% of the time we will hit on the turn and still lose the pot (and an extra bet) on the river.

Had you made the player a maniac, then a call with questionable odds is defendable. But as the problem was stated, I don't think we can justify a call with less than 8-1 odds.

No, as the problem stated, we need 6.5:1 to break even, assuming we can get a raise off on either the turn or the river and see showdown as well. See my above post.

Originally Posted by euphoricism

That is all assuming he has a "threebettable" hand -- two pair or a set. If he only holds top pair instead of a set or two pair, he's not as likely to threebet the turn when we hit.

Therefore he will bet the turn, we will raise, he will just call. That puts +4 bets in on the turn, and 2 more on the river, +6 total. The same is likely for the river, he's not going to threebet the river with top pair, and maybe not even two pair. So +6 is good there too.

There also might be a difference between how we're defining our odds. The post asked in terms of SB, I'm writing in terms of BB.

Yeah I was talking in terms of SB's for the flop call. 8-1 (small bets) on the flop is good enough if you are quite sure your passive opponent will pay you off all the way).

But I am confused...

Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)

We shouldn't be calling on the turn if that is the case. Since needing to gain 2 bets just to be "almost" breakeven in EV isn't good poker.

My calculations assume we fold the turn if we miss and the odds to call aren't there.

Originally Posted by KoRnholio

Same situation, 3.5bb on the flop, if we call there will be 4bb on the flop going into the turn. We miss on the turn. Damnit! He bets, 5bb in the pot. If we call, there will be 6bb in the pot. But we hit the river! He leads into us again (7bb) we raise (9bb) and he calls! (10bb)

We shouldn't be calling on the turn if that is the case. Since needing to gain 2 bets just to be "almost" breakeven in EV isn't good poker.

My calculations assume we fold the turn if we miss and the odds to call aren't there.

Yes. Ideally we would like to call on the flop if the pot is 4 bb instead of 3.5.
This is a minor grievence at best... or worst... whichever.