Pot Odds Confusion

I have something seriously confused about pot odds / impliod odds

I try to give example then question:

Thing 1.
---------------

I limp (1BB),Idiot dares to raise me to 3BB,blinds fold,i Call

Flop pot is 1+3+1.5+2 = 7.5BB

Now lets say we obth have just 10BB left and i have flush draw and he has pair, to kee it simple i have to hit my flush to win and no redraws bs involved.

Now i bet that moron 3BB
which gives me 22.2% pot odds to hit it on turn, which is bs cos i only hit it like 20% times and lets say 3/27.5 implied = 0.1 ...
in many things i read the peole here will look at pot odds 22% like good cos i hit flush like 35% of time... but why the hell would i look at it like 35% when i'm getting to 22.2 and i dont know what he will bet on turn...if he bets rest = 7 giving me odds 7/27.5 = 25% to hit on river THEN WHY EVERYONE SAY 35% is good then ?

THING 2:
----------------
even more confusing, same situation as in thing 1.
on the flop lets say i bet 9BB (i'm just 1 BB left) and he goes all in 10BB so i have 1 BB to call which he gives me 1/27.5 =3% odds to call to hit my flush. holy cow, 3% to hit my flush great!!! but how come it does not involve the previous 9BB i gvie to pot on that round...so when counting my odds i count all the money i put into pot on the round or how ? and if so why everyone says you only count how much u have to put in now ?

THING 3:
------------------
What is pot equity does it have anything to do with odds ?


SO,
thank you for reading and seriously i dont know if it make sense to you, but hopefuly u know and can read between lines what i mean and can answer. TYVVVVM

From reading your post i think there are a couple of things that you don't understand.

1. If you put money in the pot with a FD when someone is always going to call or raise you, that's a bad play. Calling that raise with good odds is a good play.

2. Fold Equity. Have you ever heard of it? Lets say you have a FD, and the pot is 6BB. You conject that if you bet the flop 3BB, he'll fold 25% of the time. Since your bet is 33% of the pot, and he's only folding 25% of the time, with no hand this would be a bad bet because he's not folding enough. But with a draw there's a sort of combo equity. Your 20% to hit your draw on the turn, and so i 3BB bet is actually a good bet because it adds to your equity.

Maybe someone else could explain this better for me...

Massimo thx for reply:

1. if i put money in pot with flush draw and i give myself good odds why would it be bad play ? i get more prfoit out of him in the end. even if he folds 0% time.

2. dont get what u mean
well i heard of fold equity but i understand it like this: with every bet i make he folds % of a time and this changes our EV of that move...you mention it adds to our equity-u mean maybe pot equity ? i dont know what that is so its hard for me to undetand what u mean there.

wow seriously noone can answer my questions ? i read lots about pot odds its always just explained the same way and it doesnt explain those tihngs i ask about...

1 - Yes it would be a good play but it is very unlikely to happen - ie. you would have to be betting like 1/4 pot or less.

2 - Because you have fold equity, the odds you need are less than what you would need to call a bet.

Massimo explained it well. If you have an unprofitable draw and an unprofitable bluffing opportunity, but you combine the bluff with the fact that sometimes you will hit your draw and stack him, it becomes +EV.

It's a semibluff - read Sklansky's "Theory of Poker".

Just to clarify the draws and bluffs don't have to be unprofitable in the first place, the prescence of the other just makes it MORE +EV.

Hope this answers your questions.

ty, it clarifies some things tho original questions were somewhat different, i knowi ts too long to read i'll have to look at sklanskys book tho i heard its more for limit players...

Oh for your "thing 2", you are working out your second decision, so you look at the 3% chance and you are forced to call. But if you were to look at the whole hand, then you would seem -EV, but that's completely irrelevant when working out whether to call with 27.5:1 pot odds.

FOLDING THERE WOULD BE BORDERLINE INSANITY

Sorry for the caps.

Originally Posted by badgers

Oh for your "thing 2", you are working out your second decision, so you look at the 3% chance and you are forced to call. But if you were to look at the whole hand, then you would seem -EV, but that's completely irrelevant when working out whether to call with 27.5:1 pot odds.

FOLDING THERE WOULD BE BORDERLINE INSANITY

Sorry for the caps.

but why would the whole hand be -EV ?
even when i bet 9 into what would be 27.5 pot i get good odds for the FD + i have probably very good FE too.

ok now i understand what u mean and thats actually what i wanted to know if the whole hand is -EV then i had to make some big -EV mistake before hm...probably that $9 bet can be that (tho not in this case cosi have strong draw,can be for TPTK right)....

WAIt i'm CONFUSED AgAIN or just need to clear it more

now this is strange, similiar situation:

On flop i have FD and he has TP or something, i win with flush
Pot on flop: $10 (both have $20 behind)
Now i'm first and i bet $10 he raises me all in and i call with great 10/50 odds.
on my first bet i had good implied oddds right 10/(30-50) on calling that raise i had great odds to call.

BUT essentialy i am calling 20 on flop into 50 and thats 0.4 which is not good odds for flush. -EV BUT HOW IS IT POSSIBLE IF BOTH THE BET AND CALLING A RAISE WERE +EV ?

only think i can think off is missing out FE for my flop bet + (redraws, he has different hand than TP...but usually its good enough to have flush so that should not change much or ?)

Originally Posted by crazycrazy

WAIt i'm CONFUSED AgAIN or just need to clear it more

now this is strange, similiar situation:

On flop i have FD and he has TP or something, i win with flush
Pot on flop: $10 (both have $20 behind)
Now i'm first and i bet $10 he raises me all in and i call with great 10/50 odds.
on my first bet i had good implied oddds right 10/(30-50) on calling that raise i had great odds to call.

BUT essentialy i am calling 20 on flop into 50 and thats 0.4 which is not good odds for flush. -EV BUT HOW IS IT POSSIBLE IF BOTH THE BET AND CALLING A RAISE WERE +EV ?

only think i can think off is missing out FE for my flop bet + (redraws, he has different hand than TP...but usually its good enough to have flush so that should not change much or ?)

my head hurts.

crazy, I'll sum it up nice and easy for you. first, let me work backwards:

remember the last example you gave? The one with the 10/50 $20 behind example?

This is where you made the mistake: You bet into opponent $10. This is a mistake because he had a better hand and was going to raise you. This is impossible to know wether or not he was going to do this, but he convinced you to, somehow. The part that is correct about the hand, was the all in call, because you were getting 10/50. Problem is, villain looks at the flop situation as one in which he got you to put all of your chips into the pot on a draw = win for him. Get it? You can begin the flop with a mistake, but make a correct decision on the same street before the turn.

Secondly, I think you are confusing pot odds with hand equity. Both require two different sets of math.

For me personally, I only use pot odds when I am calling a bet in which it is the last decision to be made in a hand. For example: Villain is all in on turn with a big hand. You have 9 outs, pot is $20 (after villain pushed), and it is $10 to call. Since you will hit your outs once in five, this is a no call. because, $10 x 5 = >$30 (you add the $10 + $20.... this is also known as getting 2 to 1 on your money). Get it? if not, ask again.

Pot equity works like this: Pot equity requires the same math, except you are changing the final pot amount to stack+pot. To me, pot equity is another way of saying 'potential profit'. It's the amount of $ you could win if you hit your hand. Another difference is that the potential pot amount is based on reads (will your villain pay off enough to make the call a good one). A simple example is one of pocket pairs preflop. (yes ftr, I am still a strict 10x user). So what you do is, when you have 55, villain raises to $5 preflop with a bigger pocket pair, multiply the $5 by 10 = $50. If you are going to call preflop, you need to profit at least $50 every time you hit a set. One important note: you flop a set once in 8, but I multiply the betting amount by 10 just to be a little bit passive. I think passiveness is under rated here by most ftr members, but that's another story. Sorry this paragraph was very long and maybe a lil confusing or rhetorical.

One more thing:

On the flop with 8 outs, you will hit a straight once in three by the river. But only once in six by the turn. Make sure you use each of these two scenerios properly. You can't call a bet on the flop if it is more than one sixth of your potential profit, even though you will win the hand 32% of the time by the river.

bakn thx for time i dont understand completely.probably is different (even with FE exluced) betting and calling with FD...

i am going to make another thread with partiular situation.

heres the situation in other thread:

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...c.php?p=548633

Originally Posted by crazycrazy

Originally Posted by badgers

Oh for your "thing 2", you are working out your second decision, so you look at the 3% chance and you are forced to call. But if you were to look at the whole hand, then you would seem -EV, but that's completely irrelevant when working out whether to call with 27.5:1 pot odds.

FOLDING THERE WOULD BE BORDERLINE INSANITY

Sorry for the caps.

but why would the whole hand be -EV ?
even when i bet 9 into what would be 27.5 pot i get good odds for the FD + i have probably very good FE too.

ok now i understand what u mean and thats actually what i wanted to know if the whole hand is -EV then i had to make some big -EV mistake before hm...probably that $9 bet can be that (tho not in this case cosi have strong draw,can be for TPTK right)....

Sorry, seems like I've confused you more by writing badly. I meant that given that he called the hand is -EV, which doesn't actually make any sense.