Implied odds?

Before anyone says anything, I did read the FAQ. There is a post there titled "I get pot odds, but what about implied odds?". Unless I totally misunderstood that post though, that post ended up being all about pot odds. If I misunderstood, I apologize. I still don't understand implied odds though.

Is there anyone that could explain this concept to me please? Preferably several people explaining in different ways, in case I am just being thick.

Implied odd relate to making a call because of the likelyhood that you may make money later in the hand.

eg. People often call preflop raises with low pocket pairs. You may think 'they aren't getting pot odds to do this' and your right, they aren't. The reason they are calling is Implied odds. If they catch a set they have a strong hand which is hard to detect. If the player who raised preflop has a good hand, which is probable, then the player with the set stands to make a lot of money. Using implied odds takes this money into account.

If the concept of pot odds gives you a reason and a betsize for the optimal math, then implies odds gives a reason to go above pot odds.

Implied odds say that if you can get deep into an opp's stack, it may be worth more than pot odds to call.

Example:
You are in the sb, holding 86o. You pay a little extra to see the flop, BB folds leaving 5BB in the pot.
Flop comes down 7J5 rainbow. You have a sneaky open ended straight draw.
Opp makes a 4/5ths pot sized bet 4bb . You put him on JT, JQ, or JK. You do not have pot odds to call -- You might have called if he bet 2 BB -- pot odds.
You look at the other player's stack and your own. You both have 200bb sitting in front of you.
BUT you have implied odds to call. IF you hit that 9 or 4, he might not see your straight -- I mean, who would pay extra to play 86o, right!? If your 9 or 4 hits, you have a good shot at making far more than the existing pot. You have implied odds that he will put more of his stack in to the pot -- especially if his Q hits on the River -- you are golden.

Preflop small pp have good implied odds if the other players have enough chips in front of them. It's great to call a 4bb bet (he has an ace) with your 55 if the Opp has 10x the bet in front of him, 40bb. And the flop comes down AQ5. You just might get the whole stack for that 4bb call.
Implied odds can become an excuse to make bad plays.

Be careful of hands that look like implied odds, but aren't. Flushes usually are read by the opp, and don't pay off implied odds -- there are exceptions, but they usually don't pay much more than is in the pot. Same with Broadway Straights.

Thats making some more sense. How do you calculate implied odds though? I see people saying "I called cause i was 2:1" or something like that. How do you get from "my implied odds are better than my pot odds" to "My implied odds are better, and they are better by X:1"?

Oh and just to make sure I am getting this right. Say I am at a 9 man table on the button with pocket deuces. Someone early raises 5xbb(probable pockets JJ or better, or AK, AQ?) say he gets one caller before me. My pot odds are crap, but my implied odds say that if I hit a set on the flop I stand a good shot of cleaning out both players ahead of me? So I should call, but if I miss my set get out unless I can stay in for free?

Just for sake of argument in that scenario I just gave, how would you play it post-flop if it hit you but you are prett certain it cleanly missed both opps, say 2s 6c 9d? How would you play it if it hit you but they might have got a piece of it, with say a 2s 6c qd?

Originally Posted by Crotalusatrox

Thats making some more sense. How do you calculate implied odds though? I see people saying "I called cause i was 2:1" or something like that. How do you get from "my implied odds are better than my pot odds" to "My implied odds are better, and they are better by X:1"?

Pot odds are defined(if there's nobody left to act). Implied odds are obviously trickier to figure. Depends on lots of variables.

Originally Posted by Crotalusatrox

Oh and just to make sure I am getting this right. Say I am at a 9 man table on the button with pocket deuces. Someone early raises 5xbb(probable pockets JJ or better, or AK, AQ?) say he gets one caller before me. My pot odds are crap, but my implied odds say that if I hit a set on the flop I stand a good shot of cleaning out both players ahead of me? So I should call, but if I miss my set get out unless I can stay in for free?

You're probably only going to clean out one guy(if you're lucky). I generally like to get in cheap to hit a low/mid set, but you can call a larger bet if you think you can de-stack him AND both of your stacks are deep enough. You're normally folding your ducks to any flop bet and moreso if there is >2 in the pot.

Originally Posted by Crotalusatrox

Just for sake of argument in that scenario I just gave, how would you play it post-flop if it hit you but you are prett certain it cleanly missed both opps, say 2s 6c 9d? How would you play it if it hit you but they might have got a piece of it, with say a 2s 6c qd?

Generally slow-playing a set on an uncoordinated board is the standard move with some bets occasionally to mix it up. The more coordinated or players are in the pot, the more you want to bet your set vs. checking. Second scenario isn't much different. If they have AQ/KQ you're way ahead. If they flopped trip queens you're losing your stack anyway.

Super-Simplistic Definitions:

POT ODDS =
$-In-The-Pot / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

IMPLIED ODDS =
$-In-Your-Opponent's-Stack / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

This is over-simplistic because there are other factors you have to consider before calling with Implied-Odd. But basically if you look at the pot and decide it's right to call the bet, that's pot-odds. If you look at the stack sizes and decide it's right to call the bet, that's Implied-odds.

EasyT.

Originally Posted by EasyT

Super-Simplistic Definitions:

POT ODDS =
$-In-The-Pot / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

IMPLIED ODDS =
$-In-Your-Opponent's-Stack-That-You-Feel-They-Will-Call-Off-In-Future-Rounds-After-You-Have-Made-Your-Hand / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

This is over-simplistic because there are other factors you have to consider before calling with Implied-Odd. But basically if you look at the pot and decide it's right to call the bet, that's pot-odds. If you look at the stack sizes and decide it's right to call the bet, that's Implied-odds.

EasyT.

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

Originally Posted by EasyT

Super-Simplistic Definitions:

POT ODDS =
$-In-The-Pot / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

IMPLIED ODDS =
$-In-Your-Opponent's-Stack-That-You-Feel-They-Will-Call-Off-In-Future-Rounds-After-You-Have-Made-Your-Hand / $-To-Call-The-Bet.

This is over-simplistic because there are other factors you have to consider before calling with Implied-Odd. But basically if you look at the pot and decide it's right to call the bet, that's pot-odds. If you look at the stack sizes and decide it's right to call the bet, that's Implied-odds.

EasyT.

Using that formula lets say 0.01/0.02 blinds. Same scenario I listed before except no body else calls. So to recap, I am on the button with pocket 2s. Villain raised mid table to 10c. If he has $3.00 in his pot, and I have lets say $2.50, $3/$0.10 means I have 30:1 odds of doubling up *if* I hit on the flop? Or am I way off here?

It also sounds to me like it is probably not worth it if played against a tight player that folds to agression post-flop frequently, but worth it against a loose aggressive player? If so I take that to mean that implied odds are not just based on the hand/stacks, but also the opponent(s) play style? This would certainly explain why I have seen no posts claiming to simplify implied odd calculation.

It seems that you are looking for a very concrete QUANTITATIVE example of an implied odds based poker decision. That's totally understandable when you consider how a strict, immediate pot odds based calculations and ensuing decisions are calculated and made. However, you also have to understand that not all applications of the implied odds concept are strictly quantitative. Often, in practise, players make decisions based on a more qualitiatve application of the concepts. That's not to say that you can't do a very precise mathematical analysis of an implied odds situation; I'm just trying to partially relieve your apparent fixation on a strict quantitative example to show you that you don't have to do a strict implied odds calculations at the tables to find the concept useful and to apply them to your benefit.

Most of the implied odds scenarios mentioned so far in this thread relate to NL. Just so we don't think of Implied odds in too a restrictive sense, let's also recognize that Implied odds considerations are also used in LHE too. That is, it isn't just about relative stack sizes. In the most general sense , its about how much additional opponent money you expect to go into the pot in future betting rounds; think of it as an upward correction to your (immediate) pot odds that takes into account how much additional money you can expect to win if you hit your hand. (by the way you can think of reverse implied odds as a downward correction in a similar way, but let's leave that for another discussion).

So, just as an example, in NL you are sitting on a small PP and only a small stack (relative to yours) has enter the pot for a raise in front of you. Do you bother calling the PFR to try and hit a set on the flop? Probably not; why risk your chips against a short stack that can't pay you off even if you hit your set. There, you've just made a useful, qualitative implied odds based decision. Here's another qualitative NL example off the top of my head. Say you on are the flop and you are not sure if you are ahead or behind to your sole opponent. He bets and you feel ok about spending that immediate amount of chips to peel one off. But, you think a little deeper and realize that even if you hit on the turn you might still be behind or that the card that will improve your hand will make your opponent's even better. So now you feel that calling the flop bet will commit you to also calling your opponent's likely turn bet too. After some thought you decide that you don't want to commit yourself to fighting it out for THIS pot and that you should pick a better spot to put your chips in, so you fold. Well, whether realizing it or not, you've just applied the concept of (reverse) implied odds to make a good decision without running any definitive math calcs.

Here's a LHE example. If you've read the book 'Weighing the Odds in Holdem Poker' you'll have read about the author's "DIPO method". I won't get into the details, but just so you see how its applied conceptually, he uses the eventual pot size in his quantitative "DIPO" calculations to decide on whether continuing in a hand is EV +'ve. He does this by using the current pot size plus the bet size to call (that's the pot odds part), your estimated number of clean outs AND by also predicting the "eventual pot size" by upwardly correcting the current pot size by making predications about how many additional big bets he expects to get out of his opponent(s) on future betting rounds. I'll leave the nitty gritty details of his DIPO method to the book. I mention this example because its the best direct at-the-table quantitative application of implied odds I've ever seen in the context of LHE and I think everyone should see a solid implied odds based quantitative method at work. (By the way, if I remember correctly, the author calls his method DIPO for "Do I have the Pot Odds to continue". This actually could be considered a little confusing for some, because he is actually also including implied odds in his method (rightfully so too) by taking into account predictions of future action in his "DIPO" calcs.)

Ok, that was a little long winded (good for the wpp++ ), but I hope it helps.

you could also say implied odds get worse against tighter opponents who are less likely to give you their stack, and get significantly better against loose opponents.