Pot odds...

Printable View

05-20-2007, 04:06 PM
boom3r

Pot odds...

always had trouble with this, but i did run into a pretty good explanation of them for anyone who also had some trouble...http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~jonathan/...pp/node21.html
05-20-2007, 05:59 PM
jyms

There's better ones on this site. Search the 4-2 rule.
05-20-2007, 06:49 PM
boom3r

hmm, i don't see it...probably run into it sometime. Anyway, im just saying it helped me out quite a bit mayb it will for someone else as well who cant find the 4-2 rule like me hah...
05-21-2007, 02:05 AM
boom3r

btw, its not the same thing...i ran into the 4/2 rule..already knew this. The link i posted isn't your percent chance hitting your hand, its what percentage chance you need to win to make the call profitable...2 diff things here, atleast thats how im reading it.
05-21-2007, 06:28 PM
Chopper

Quote:

Originally Posted by boom3r

The link i posted isn't your percent chance hitting your hand, its what percentage chance you need to win to make the call profitable...2 diff things here, atleast thats how im reading it.

i'm confused now. i thought they were "basically" the same.

meaning, you have 10 outs (or 20%ish to win on next card), pot is $5, and villain bets $.75...you call. you "need" 5:1 and are getting better than that.

the % you "need" is expressed as a ratio directly from your % to win the hand, right? at least, thats how i always do it.
05-21-2007, 09:01 PM
jyms

they are exactly the same thing when talking about pot odds, who draws to outs to a losing hand. Now what you may be talking about for percentages to win, in order to call is Implied odds, and that is not what your link is referring too.
05-22-2007, 04:24 AM
boom3r

ok...so where does the 4-2 rule come into play when opp makes an all in raise pf...if its the same thing....HOH2 goes over this, but says nothin about the 4-2 rule
05-22-2007, 05:20 PM
badgers

Quote:

Originally Posted by boom3r

ok...so where does the 4-2 rule come into play when opp makes an all in raise pf...if its the same thing....HOH2 goes over this, but says nothin about the 4-2 rule

Huh? Preflop raise all in is about who has the best hand unless theres a load of dead money in the pot. Then you need something like pokerstove to calculate whether it's a call because you don't know exactly where you're at anyway.

Edit: Just to elaborate, pokerstove calculates your equity against a range of hands. Then you look at that percentage and the pot odds and decide whether to call / fold
05-22-2007, 08:22 PM
boom3r

yea...i have the program, use it all the time. but if you've read hoh2 it does explain calculating pot odds in all-in situations. maybe i got tangled in what i said earlier, i know what the 4-2 rule is and how its used, but what i didn't understand and was kinda err about was the math behind it and the link i posted shows the math behind it. Because i think alota players use the 4-2 rule, but honestly have no idea why they are doing that and are just multiplaying there outs x 4 because 'something' told them to.
05-23-2007, 10:14 AM
Chopper

Quote:

Originally Posted by boom3r

yea...i have the program, use it all the time. but if you've read hoh2 it does explain calculating pot odds in all-in situations. maybe i got tangled in what i said earlier, i know what the 4-2 rule is and how its used, but what i didn't understand and was kinda err about was the math behind it and the link i posted shows the math behind it. Because i think alota players use the 4-2 rule, but honestly have no idea why they are doing that and are just multiplaying there outs x 4 because 'something' told them to.

and thats bad for you, because...?
05-23-2007, 05:52 PM
boom3r

lol, funny guy u r... it doesn't have to be bad for me, was tryin to help some other players out seeing how it helped me a little...wtf's ur problem anyway bro, i'm praying right now that you have stars and we can play hu...forum trash talk is a bit easy, u SHOULD back it up...or just don't talk, i see alota players on here posting on the thread they haven't even read, read the motha fuckin thread first - PM me if ur not a pussy we'll play best outa 5, possibly even 7 or better yet, hu cash seems fine to me as well and maybe after you'll lose your attitude
05-23-2007, 07:43 PM
bjsaust

Heh.
05-23-2007, 07:58 PM
boom3r

and where'd you come from... mate
05-23-2007, 08:19 PM
bjsaust

You have a lot of pent up hostility eh?

I'm here to learn, and see people disagreeing with me as a chance to expand my knowledge rather than as a personal attack.

I find the first half of this thread informative, and the 2nd half amusing.
05-23-2007, 10:06 PM
boom3r

no hostility, just sick of attitude from other players that think they know more than they really do, not saying that i know a lot...but just because my posts are low doesn't mean i haven't been around
05-24-2007, 10:32 PM
Chopper

Quote:

Originally Posted by boom3r

lol, funny guy u r... it doesn't have to be bad for me, was tryin to help some other players out seeing how it helped me a little...wtf's ur problem anyway bro, i'm praying right now that you have stars and we can play hu...forum trash talk is a bit easy, u SHOULD back it up...or just don't talk, i see alota players on here posting on the thread they haven't even read, read the motha fuckin thread first - PM me if ur not a pussy we'll play best outa 5, possibly even 7 or better yet, hu cash seems fine to me as well and maybe after you'll lose your attitude

dude, my comment has nothing to do with me trying to show you up. it was a simple comment, also meant for readers, that if the idiots cant calculate math correctly...that plays into YOUR hands. and YOU should benefit from it.

no need to get so defensive, and try to challenge me to a duel. we're all friends here. i havent seen this kind of "roid rage" in this forum for awhile. usually see it in the chat at a table from some immature drunk.

but thanks anyway for the challenge. i'll pass. i dont like HU. dont think its a test of skill, i think it more of a muscle-flexing, i have a bigger one than you, testosterone fest. not poker, imo. at least, not at our levels.