|
Ok well this is talking about implied odds. Lets say you hold Ax of spades, and you have 4 to a flush on the turn against one opponent. The pot is 100, and he bets 60 into you. Looking at the expressed odds you don't have the odds to call, because he is giving you 3:8 odds, when you need 1:4 (ish) to make this a correct call.
But if you think you are going to get more money if you hit your flush then you can take those implied odds into account. Lets say you two are both deepstacked (30+BB) in the example above. If you hit your flush, and bet 200 and he calls, that extra money is the implied odds you got from calling the turn.
But what Harrington says is you will never know for sure you will get called when you make your hand, so you have to estimate how likely he will call your river bet assuming you made your flush. THis is what Harrington is saying- to multiply how often opp will call and the amount you will bet. In the example above, he would have to call about 40% of the time (.4x200=80, 80 added to the money in the pot (160) is 240. Putting in 60 on the turn to get 240 on the river is 1:4.)
This is read dependant, if you saw him previously call big river bets after betting the turn like this, or not being able to let go of some piece of the flop, then I'd say the percentage that he will call is high, but if opp can fold, then it will be lower.
Hoped that helped, that is how I think of it at least, but honestly, at the table I don't really think about math that much (which is probably a bad thing), I just decide, based on the action of the table, if implied odds are there (I usually think they are if opp is loose and the expressed odds are not too far off.)
|