Implied Pot Odds

Just wanted to ask you guys about implied pot odds. OK, so I was in LP in a $25NL full Ring game and limped QTos with 3 callers. Flop was 9 2 8 with 2 diamonds. SB bets .50, BB folds, I call and button folds. So now it's just me and the SB. Turn is a 6. Pot is now $2.25 and SB fires out $1.50. I now have a double barrel str8 draw, so either a 7 or J completes me but I don't have the pot odds to call this. However, my read on this guy ($20 stack) was that he had a hand-maybe 2 pr or top pr w/str8 draw. Given the fact that he bet more agressively on the turn, I thought the probability of taking his stack if I hit my str8 was good so I called. And I hit my J on the river, SB bet $7 on the river and I took him all-in and cleared his stack. He had 2 pr on the flop BTW. Was this a donk play or a good use of implied odds?

I like to use implied odds only on players I know will give me their stacks if I hit my hand. Straights are much better for implied odds because flushes are much more obvious.

What if a 3rd diamond fell and gave you a straight? Would you still play of stacks with him?

agree with above -- implied odds much better for straight.

I think you need to raise this weak-ass minbet on the flop. A Gutshot and two overs is approximately as good as a flush draw, in terms of outs (you have to discount a bit). You might've got the river for free.

I don't think you played this poorly. It probably was only marginally profitable in the long run though.

I think your play was profitable against most opponents. This is a strange spot, because either he has 2-pair or better with implied odds in full effect, or he has TP on the flop, and later streets decrease your implied odds while giving you more fold equity. It has everything to do with the player and what you put them on. Just remember that some poorer players who take their hands too far are giving you a basket of implied odds anyway, so chase away with good outs.

For me, this is an easy call. It is probably at least a break even play and if you can break even, the always make the call! It gives you a looser image, makes you look fishy, and pisses people off. These are all great things at this level of play.

Originally Posted by dpe8598

For me, this is an easy call. It is probably at least a break even play and if you can break even, the always make the call! It gives you a looser image, makes you look fishy, and pisses people off. These are all great things at this level of play.

dont agree
ABC is much more effective than chasing without pot odds despite posibility of break even play.

There are so many bad players at 25nl or 50nl and 100nl for that matter that betting good hands at abd opps is so much more profitable than chasing small/break even edges against made hands imo

Yeah, I think you need either only marginally bad pot odds AND another reason to call, which will usually be a poor/tilting/overly aggressive player. I managed to destack one last night when I hit my nut flush on the river in an almost identical situation - luckily, I knew he was hyper-aggro (and not in a good way) and decided to push after he bet small on the river. He called with two pair.

Miff, I didnt say "chasing" a break even play. I said if your read is that it "is" a break even play. If a play is 0ev, go for it. Now, if it is a -ev play or you think it might be, sure, fold. But a break even play? Stay active, make your opponents guess. I understand that at the lower levels (I play 100 and 200) this isn't as important. But if you are at least breaking even, who cares?

I like to keep implied odds calculations simple, and the most important thing is guestimating how much value you can get from a made hand if you hit.

For our intents and purposes, assume the following:

There's significant money behind.
Villain is competant and has a huge hand (ie nut flush)
We are behind.
We are drawing to the nuts.
Villain isn't going crazy on the river with a second best hand.
We are drawing to 10 outs, and we are on the turn betting round.
If we make our hand, it will be checked to us, as our villain can see the board just as well as we can, and he knows his hand is now very vulnerable.

Numbers are just off the top of my head, but seem reasonable.

10 cards make our hand, 36 do not.

$100 in the pot. Villain leads $50.

Further assumptions: if we call on the turn, and hit on the river, villain will check to us and call a pot-sized bet exactly one half the time on the river. This is much more relevant then the long list of assumptions above. This is exactly $100 in value on the river, if we hit, according to our assumption.

So... he leads 50 into a 100 pot, that's 150, add the 100 in value on the river, 250, and it's 50 to us. We are getting 5:1 in implied odds here and are only 3.6:1 against hitting. Clear call.

Nifty eh? I try to keep the assumptions as simple as possible, and these kind of things have run through my head so many times it's just automatic to me now.

edit: just note that we are only getting 3:1 in expressed odds which isn't enough, but implied odds are very important in NLHE, particularly (in general) against players who take second best hands too far.

djzcko,

just say implied odds. Never even heard the term implied pot odds before.

Originally Posted by Lukie

10 cards make our hand, 36 do not.

$100 in the pot. Villain leads $50.

So... he leads 50 into a 100 pot, that's 150, add the 100 in value on the river, 250, and it's 50 to us. We are getting 5:1 in implied odds here and are only 3.6:1 against hitting.

Can you elaborate on the 3.6:1 calculation please?

Originally Posted by djzcko

Just wanted to ask you guys about implied pot odds. OK, so I was in LP in a $25NL full Ring game and limped QTos with 3 callers. Flop was 9 2 8 with 2 diamonds. SB bets .50, BB folds, I call and button folds. So now it's just me and the SB. Turn is a 6. Pot is now $2.25 and SB fires out $1.50. I now have a double barrel str8 draw, so either a 7 or J completes me but I don't have the pot odds to call this. However, my read on this guy ($20 stack) was that he had a hand-maybe 2 pr or top pr w/str8 draw. Given the fact that he bet more agressively on the turn, I thought the probability of taking his stack if I hit my str8 was good so I called. And I hit my J on the river, SB bet $7 on the river and I took him all-in and cleared his stack. He had 2 pr on the flop BTW. Was this a donk play or a good use of implied odds?

Isn't the problem here that if it DOESN'T fall on the turn, you'll get raised the $7 all the same so you have to calculate that into your bet too.

So to me it seems like: instead of the usual 8 outs times 4 is 32% chance to hit your straight, you get:
16% to hit your straight on the turn.. then another 16% to hit your straight on the river at the cost of $7. So yeah, the implied odds are great.. but your investment is a lot greater than you'd expect too.

Ofcourse I totally lack experience, but seems like more of a coin-flip.. ie in the long run you won't win much with these odds.

I mean, if you don't get your outs.. are you gonna wager another $7 for the 16% chance that they'll fall on the river?

also if it hasn't been said already, limping in with QTo in 25nl is a very loose call.

Haven't read the replies thoroughly, but here's a good example of implied odds. 200NL, 9-handed, effective stacks $250ish. I get dealt 67o in the BB. 4 limpers and I check. Flop is 582, 2 spades and I don't have a spade. It checks around to Button, and he bets $4. I call, since I am drawing to the nuts, but may not have 8 clean outs. MP limper check-raises to $12, button calls, and now it's on me. I'm pretty sure button has a flush draw, and that MP has a pretty big hand like a set or top two, so I smell big implied odds if I hit my six outer. I call the $8. Turn is a spade, completing the flush. I check/fold, and sure enough MP and button get it all in (not sure if MP made his boat), and MP shows middle set, and button shows a flush. But the important thing to realize is that imagine if I had hit a clean 9 or 4. I take MP's stack like taking candy from a baby.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

Originally Posted by Lukie

10 cards make our hand, 36 do not.

$100 in the pot. Villain leads $50.

So... he leads 50 into a 100 pot, that's 150, add the 100 in value on the river, 250, and it's 50 to us. We are getting 5:1 in implied odds here and are only 3.6:1 against hitting.

Can you elaborate on the 3.6:1 calculation please?

Say you have a set on the turn with 4 flush cards out. Let's also assume we don't have the best hand. Say the board is Td 4d 7d Ad, and you hold black 10's. There are 46 unknown cards left in the deck. 10 make your hand (one T, three 4's, three 7's, three A's). 36 do not. So you are 36:10 against hitting = 3.6 : 1 against hitting. Just another way of saying you hit 10 out of 46 times.