Pot Odds Vs Implied Odds questions responses, look at all the wrong answers?
KKsuited
Okay, rule for the board. If you don't know what you're talking about, please
don't answer questions. I hate to call all of these people out, but the amount
of bad info on the board is hilarious.
Let's look at all these answers from the pot odds vs implied odds question.
Sounds like we have a bunch of pro's, until someone points out almost every
reply is wrong. I'm not claiming to be a pro, but if I don't know about a
certain topic, I don't act like I do. So, here we go......
1) "Calculating implied odds in the heat of battle takes a lot of practice, but
thereare charts you can memorize as opposed to calculating them on the fly."
Now this one isn't too bad, but how exactly would there be a chart to help with
implied odds? I guess there could be something to help in limit poker, but
implied odds are an estimate based on estimated future betting rounds. There is
no exact number that a chart can calculate.
2) "> pot odds is the amount in the pot vs the bet you're currently facing.
> 100 in the pot, someone bet 50, pot is offering you 2 to 1
It's actually 3 to 1. You count the 50 that was bet too. "
Uh, no. You don't count the bet you're putting in. A $50 bet into a $100 pot
is laying you 2-1 pot odds. Thanks for the info tho.
3) "POT ODDS:
The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
with one card to come. This is calculated by dividing the current pot
size by the unit of investment. If the pot is $80, and the bet is $20
(putting $100 in the pot) then the pot odds are $100 to $20 or 5 to 1."
Uh, no. First off, you don't have to be on a draw to worry about pot odds. If
you're facing a $100 bet into an $600 pot on the river, then you're second pair
is facing 6-1 odds. What that tells you is your hand has to be good one time
out of 7 times to break even. If you call and are right 2 in 7 times, you'll
make money. Sometimes it's right to call when there might be a good chance you
are beat, but because of the amount in the pot, you have to call.
And, once again, you don't count your bet in the odds. So, a $20 bet into a $80
pot is 4-1, not 5-1.
Hopefully I won't piss anyone off too bad, but I want to clear up some of the
bad info from this thread.
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
jason219912
Who are you like the master of poker or something? I mean come on man, its a
game of luck, theres alittle skill but get real dude....
_______________________________________________________________
Block Lists, Favorites, and more - http://www.recpoker.com
KKsuited
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
Omaholic
someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, your $50 call gets you 3 to 1.
The $100 in the pot and the $50 that will be in it if you call.
Plastic Sklansky
> 3) "POT ODDS:
> The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> with one card to come. This is calculated by dividing the current pot
> size by the unit of investment. If the pot is $80, and the bet is $20
> (putting $100 in the pot) then the pot odds are $100 to $20 or 5 to 1."
"Uh, no. First off, you don't have to be on a draw to worry about pot
odds. If you're facing a $100 bet into an $600 pot on the river, then
you're second pair is facing 6-1 odds. What that tells you is your hand
has to be good one time out of 7 times to break even. If you call and are
right 2 in 7 times, you'll make money. Sometimes it's right to call when
there might be a good chance you are beat, but because of the amount in
the pot, you have to call."
This is also correct, however the question asked by the poster was "can
someone explain the difference between pot odds and implied odds." While
it is true that pot odds does apply to calling on the river (i.e., you
think your opponent may have a worse hand or bluff x% of the time, but you
know that they will have a better hand about y% of the time, so you
determine if the pot is laying adequate odds to call with a potential
second-best hand), the answers I supplied to each is sufficient to explain
the difference between the two without being bogged down by numerous
examples. I felt a single example was sufficient to answer the question.
"And, once again, you don't count your bet in the odds. So, a $20 bet
into a $80 pot is 4-1, not 5-1."
No, it's not. I most certainly will count any bets made by my opponent
when calculating odds. It is you that is not reading this thoroughly
enough to comprehend the answer. So, to dumb it down a bit.
-- Assume there is $80 in chips in the center of the table. Assume I am
P1, you are P2. If P1 (you) bets $20, the pot in the middle that I am
contending for is now $100 ($80 in the middle already, $20 that you just
bet). If P2 (I) call that bet, I am getting 5 to 1 on my call, because I
am committing $20 for a chance to win $100.
Where did I ever say that I was counting my own bet in the calculations?
I thought I was pretty clear.
"Hopefully I won't piss anyone off too bad, but I want to clear up some of
the bad info from this thread."
Doesn't bother me a bit, but you might consider reading more carefully
before you create new threads to demonstrate your lack of reading
comprehension.
________________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
GrouchySmurf1002
> And, once again, you don't count your bet in the odds. So, a $20 bet into a
$80
> pot is 4-1, not 5-1.
> Hopefully I won't piss anyone off too bad, but I want to clear up some of the
> bad info from this thread.
And once again, you're being naive or unclear, or both. If there is an
$80 pot and someone bets $20 into it, there is now $100 in the pot. If
you have to call that bet, your pot odds are:
$100 (pot size before opponents bet + opponents bet) : $20 (the size of
the bet you have to call)
This is 5:1. We're not counting out bet in the pot. We're counting the
opponents'
This isn't debatable...so stop arguing it.
--------
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
ezc3m
WOW!! i never seen someone start new thread critcizing something he himself
doesn't even understand!! wait... actually i have... carson and special
olympics comes to mind...
anyways, if the pot on this round is 600, someone bets 100, if you call that 100
and win, you WIN 700 PROFIT (600 pot+ 100 his bet) hence pot is OFFERING YOU 7
TO 1, please please understand something simple for once...
btw, if you want some good thoughts on implied odds, i'd recommend googling some
of treesong's old threads..
On Jun 16 2005 3:32 PM, KKsuited wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
Your Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
Tad Perry
are golden?
Then, SOME get it and SOME lose their pants!!
It's a WAY COOL way to do it!!!
tvp
"KKsuited" <kksu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1118950366$537...@recpoker.com...
KKsuited
Your $100 bet will win you $600. I (and most people that know what they are
talking about) usually don't chips already in front of me as profit in a pot,
but thanks for you effort.
So if there's 800 in the pot and I be 2k, I win 2800? No, risk 2,000 to win
800. Or I risked another $100 to win $600. Not rocket science here.
_______________________________________________________________
KKsuited
It sounds to me like when you say there is 80 in the pot and the bet is 20, all
the bets that are going into the pot have already been made. Who cares what the
pot was before another player bet. Useless information that creates all the
confusion.
You only need to tell someone what the pot is and what's the bet they are
facing.
The pot was 40, the player A, B and F bet 16. Now you're face with a $22 dollar
bet. What the fuck is this, the SAT again?
_______________________________________________________________
New Feature: Mark All As Read! - http://www.recpoker.com
KKsuited
Can anyone comment on the chart that calculates implied odds?
On Jun 16 2005 4:06 PM, Tad Perry wrote:
> KK, dammit, why can't you just let them be stupid and doubt that my answers
> are golden?
>
> Then, SOME get it and SOME lose their pants!!
>
> It's a WAY COOL way to do it!!!
>
> tvp
>
> "KKsuited" wrote in message
> > Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - /
_______________________________________________________________
Watch Lists, Block Lists, Favorites - http://www.recpoker.com
il Lupo
the betting round and someone makes a $100 bet into that pot (Making it a $700
pot), you are now being offered 7-1 to call when the action gets to you....
Chi pecora si fa, il lupo se la mangia.
Blackize
pot to build it to 700. You are right however that the pot is offering 7-1
On Jun 16 2005 4:02 PM, ezc3m wrote:
Blackize
opponents and how willing they are to pay you off when you make your hand. Maybe
there is a chart somewhere with PT stats that can give you an idea of your
implied odds given the stats of the players in the hand.
il Lupo
On Jun 16 2005 4:22 PM, KKsuited wrote:
>
> It sounds to me like when you say there is 80 in the pot and the bet is 20,
> all
> the bets that are going into the pot have already been made. Who cares what
> the
> pot was before another player bet. Useless information that creates all the
> confusion.
>
> You only need to tell someone what the pot is and what's the bet they are
> facing.
>
Different size bets can mean different things. I actually find it important to
know the size of the opening bet in relation to the pot size when
making my decision about how to play a hand in each betting round...call me
crazy...
Chi pecora si fa, il lupo se la mangia.
mo_charles
yeah - ignore it.
mo_charles
_____________________________________________________________________
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
GrouchySmurf1002
> Your $100 bet will win you $600. I (and most people that know what they are
> talking about) usually don't chips already in front of me as profit in a pot,
> but thanks for you effort.
>
> So if there's 800 in the pot and I be 2k, I win 2800? No, risk 2,000 to win
> 800. Or I risked another $100 to win $600. Not rocket science here.
And yet you still don't fucking get it.
Your BET ODDS would be 6:1 in your example, as you're BETTING 100 to win
the 600 in there already, or 2000 to win the 800 in there.
If your OPPONENT bets 2000 into an 800 pot, your POT ODDS are 2800:2000,
or 1.4:1
If your OPPONENT bets 100 into a 600 pot, your POT ODDS are 700 (the 600
pot + his 100): 100 (the amount you have to call), or 7:1
____________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
Michael Sullivan
> Okay, rule for the board. If you don't know what you're talking about,
> please don't answer questions. I hate to call all of these people out,
> but the amount of bad info on the board is hilarious.
> Let's look at all these answers from the pot odds vs implied odds question.
> Sounds like we have a bunch of pro's, until someone points out almost every
> reply is wrong. I'm not claiming to be a pro, but if I don't know about a
> certain topic, I don't act like I do.
Oops. Except when you don't feel like it, I guess. Where's that
website that sells new irony meters?
> 2) "> pot odds is the amount in the pot vs the bet you're currently facing.
> > 100 in the pot, someone bet 50, pot is offering you 2 to 1
>
> It's actually 3 to 1. You count the 50 that was bet too. "
> Uh, no. You don't count the bet you're putting in. A $50 bet into a $100 pot
> is laying you 2-1 pot odds. Thanks for the info tho.
Let's be clear. If you say you are facing a $50 bet into a $100 pot, I
take that to mean that before your opponent acted, there was $100 in the
pot, and your opponent has just bet $50.
In that case, your pot odds *are* 3-1. The $150 that is in the pot
after your opponent bet, vs. the $50 you need to put up to stay in.
> And, once again, you don't count your bet in the odds. So, a $20 bet into
> a $80 pot is 4-1, not 5-1.
You don't count *your* call, but you do count your opponent's bet. When
someone says there was "an X bet into a Y pot" that means that Y was in
the pot *before* the bet. X + Y is in the pot *after* the bet, before
you call or fold.
For an X bet into a Y pot, the pot odds faced by the potential caller
are (X + Y) to X. The win rate one needs to correctly call with no
action to come is X / (2X + Y).
> Hopefully I won't piss anyone off too bad.
No, I'm mostly just amused, pontification boy.
Michael
il Lupo
Brick wall dude, brick wall...
Chi pecora si fa, il lupo se la mangia.
_______________________________________________________________
Plastic Sklansky
"It sounds to me like when you say there is 80 in the pot and the bet is
20, all the bets that are going into the pot have already been made."
What I said (and I quote myself) was: "If the pot is $80, and the bet is
$20
(putting $100 in the pot) then the pot odds are $100 to $20 or 5 to 1". I
don't see how I could have been any more clear, since I did the math for
you.
"Who cares what the pot was before another player bet. Useless
information that creates all the confusion."
The size of the pot is relevant because we are calculating "pot odds".
"You only need to tell someone what the pot is and what's the bet they are
facing."
That was exactly what I did.
On a related note, since you are so nit-picky, you do need to know the
size of the pot in relation to the bet for a number of reasons. One
situation I can think of off of the top of my head is if you are in a
3-way pot, between two players in the betting order. Then it becomes
quite relevant, since you must consider the action that may transpire
behind you before you call a bet, since a raise from behind would affect
your pot odds.
"What the fuck is this, the SAT again?"
It is not my fault if you failed the reading comprehension portion of the
SAT. Plus, if I remember correctly, the SAT poses a number of
multiple-choice questions for you to answer to determine your
comprehension of the subject. Not only did I spell out exactly what I
meant, but I also did not ask any follow up questions, like you may find
on a SAT.
----
KKsuited
lol, uh, does the size of the bet you are facing not inherently tell you what
the previous bet was?
Like I said, all I need to know is what the bet is to me and what the total pot
is. I can't figure everything else out myself. I guess that makes me special.
_______________________________________________________________
KKsuited
It was my freak'n example and I didn't say shit about a $600 pot with a $100 bet
going into it. Please reread.
The pot is ALREADY $600, and I'm faced with a $100 bet. That is 6-1. My $100
bet will win me $600.
KKsuited
This is the most retarded thread I've ever been apart of.
I obviously know you count what the other player into the pot.
"facing a $50 bet" means the beat is on YOU.
If the pot is already $100 and the action is on you at $50, that's 2-1.
lol on the brickwall comment. I don't think I'm the one with the lack of
understanding of poker here..lol
On Jun 16 2005 4:31 PM, Michael Sullivan wrote:
_______________________________________________________________
Plastic Sklansky
"lol, uh, does the size of the bet you are facing not inherently tell you
what the previous bet was?"
I have no idea what you are asking this for. Perhaps you have 'read' more
into my reply than what was there, or you skimmed over it to find some key
words. Or maybe you are now confusing threads with eachother.
"Like I said, all I need to know is what the bet is to me and what the
total pot is. I can't figure everything else out myself. I guess that
makes me special."
You're the one who started a new thread to point out the flaws in my
answer, which was 100% correct.
Can you demonstrate with any authenticity how what I originally stated was
incorrect, without making a total ass out of yourself?
________________________________________________________________________
Super Steamer
No you don't, it's 2 to 1 only. You're counting money that you are about to put
in for pot odds? Think about it, that makes no sense.
Steamer
_______________________________________________________________
The Largest Online Poker Community - http://www.recpoker.com
Plastic Sklansky
"This is the most retarded thread I've ever been apart of."
Funny how you originated it. Hmmmm...
_______________________________________________________________________
Plastic Sklansky
"It was my freak'n example and I didn't say shit about a $600 pot with a
$100 bet going into it. Please reread."
Here is a quote (from your post): "If you're facing a $100 bet into an
$600 pot on the river, then you're second pair is facing 6-1 odds. "
A $100 bet going "into a $600 pot on the river" would make a $700 pot. I
don't see how this could be misconstrued.
"The pot is ALREADY $600, and I'm faced with a $100 bet. That is 6-1. My
$100 bet will win me $600."
Nope. If the pot "is now $600, including a $100 bet", you are getting 6
to 1. If the pot is "ALREADY $600, and (you're) faced with a $100 bet",
then you are getting 7 to 1.
It can't be "already" and "is now" at the same time.
---
KKsuited
okay, how about this sentence.
The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> with one card to come.
That is what you had under the title POT ODDS. Your definition of pot odds.
The intent of my thread was to say basically, don't title something POT ODDS,
then give a definition like that. Draw only? One card to come? I know you
said you didn't want to go through every example. Thank god. Nice cover up.
On Jun 16 2005 4:59 PM, Plastic Sklansky wrote:
> On Jun 16 2005 2:50 PM, KKsuited wrote:
>
> "lol, uh, does the size of the bet you are facing not inherently tell you
> what the previous bet was?"
>
> I have no idea what you are asking this for. Perhaps you have 'read' more
> into my reply than what was there, or you skimmed over it to find some key
> words. Or maybe you are now confusing threads with eachother.
>
> "Like I said, all I need to know is what the bet is to me and what the
> total pot is. I can't figure everything else out myself. I guess that
> makes me special."
>
> You're the one who started a new thread to point out the flaws in my
> answer, which was 100% correct.
>
> Can you demonstrate with any authenticity how what I originally stated was
> incorrect, without making a total ass out of yourself?
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
Omaholic
Super Steamer wrote:
> On Jun 16 2005 12:47 PM, Omaholic wrote:
>
> > You do count the bet that you're facing in addition to the pot. If
> > someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, your $50 call gets you 3 to 1.
> > The $100 in the pot and the $50 that will be in it if you call.
>
> No you don't, it's 2 to 1 only. You're counting money that you are about to put
> in for pot odds? Think about it, that makes no sense.
You're right. That doesn't make sense. But that's not what I wrote.
There seems to be confusion over what "facing a bet" means. Most
people would understand "facing a bet" to mean that someone has made a
bet that you must react to. KKSuited seems to think "facing a bet"
means that no one has bet and you are deciding whether to bet or not.
KKsuited
dude, come on. "facing $100 bet" means all action has been made and the bet is
to you. You're trying to pick at semantics when I've given about 30 examples of
NO MORE BETTING TO COME...THE POT IS 600...YOU ARE FACED WITH A 100 CALL.
I know how to calculate pot odds. I didn't just start playing poker last week
like 99% of the people on this board.
No wonder no one posts on this board anymore. I need to stick to 2+2. This is
an argument on a 3rd grade level.
_______________________________________________________________
KKsuited
Facing a bet means someone has already bet into the pot. Why in the hell would
you be facing $100 bet when you're deciding to bet or not? That's comical.
Let's calculate the pots odds when there's no freak'n bet in front of me.
Jesus, I'm really wasting my time here.
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
mo_charles
>
> >The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> > with one card to come.
>
> That is what you had under the title POT ODDS. Your definition of pot odds.
> The intent of my thread was to say basically, don't title something POT ODDS,
> then give a definition like that. Draw only? One card to come? I know you
> said you didn't want to go through every example. Thank god. Nice cover up.
kk - you're getting slaughtered - stop.
mo_charles
____________________________________________________________________
Omaholic
KKsuited wrote:
> dude, come on. "facing $100 bet" means all action has been made and the bet is
> to you. You're trying to pick at semantics when I've given about 30 examples of
> NO MORE BETTING TO COME...THE POT IS 600...YOU ARE FACED WITH A 100 CALL.
You can't figure out the pot odds from that unless you know how many
people have already called the $100. If 4 people have already called
the $100 then you are getting 10 to 1 on your call. But if you'd read
what people wrote in this thread, you'd know that already.
Howard Treesong
everyone realizes that if the enemy has bet $100 into a $600 pot and
you have to call, the pot odds are 7:1. If you're faced with a $100
call into a $600 pot, they're six to one. There's not much to argue
about here, is there? Your construction of this is reasonable, but so
is the original one; I believe he had the other scenario in mind, and
his calculation is entirely correct given his premises. You can change
his premise if you want, but that doesn't make him wrong.
-Howard Treesong
Super Steamer
On Jun 16 2005 2:04 PM, Super Steamer wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 16 2005 12:47 PM, Omaholic wrote:
>
> > You do count the bet that you're facing in addition to the pot. If
> > someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, your $50 call gets you 3 to 1.
> > The $100 in the pot and the $50 that will be in it if you call.
>
> No you don't, it's 2 to 1 only. You're counting money that you are about to
> put
> in for pot odds? Think about it, that makes no sense.
>
> Steamer
If someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, that means that the pot is $100
including that persons bet already. If the pot is $100 and then somebody bets
$50 then the pot is really $150. Is that what you meant? It really matters in
what order you state these things because it means two different things.
_______________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
Plastic Sklansky
> okay, how about this sentence.
>
> The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> > with one card to come.
>
>
> That is what you had under the title POT ODDS. Your definition of pot odds.
> The intent of my thread was to say basically, don't title something POT ODDS,
> then give a definition like that. Draw only? One card to come? I know you
> said you didn't want to go through every example. Thank god. Nice cover up.
Like I said (as you recap), I was demonstrating the differences between
pot odds and implied odds. How was my example inaccurate?
Maybe I should just be more efficient and say "Read Theory of Poker,
sections on Implied Odds and Pot Odds" to satisfy your lust for compressed
and thorough answers.
Super Steamer
On Jun 16 2005 2:29 PM, Howard Treesong wrote:
> You've managed to spark a semantic debate, not a poker debate.
I realized that right after I made my first reply. I was just responding to
incorrect phrasing by someone, but now I realize that the person I responded to
seems to understand the underlying concept correctly.
Plastic Sklansky
> On Jun 16 2005 3:14 PM, KKsuited wrote:
>
> > okay, how about this sentence.
> >
> > The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> > > with one card to come.
> >
> >
> > That is what you had under the title POT ODDS. Your definition of pot
odds.
> > The intent of my thread was to say basically, don't title something POT
ODDS,
> > then give a definition like that. Draw only? One card to come?
As a caveat to this response, I would also like to add that I never said
"Draw only". Pot odds applies to drawing with one card to come, calling
bets on the end with potential second best hands, and deciding whether or
not to bluff when you miss on the end.
"One card to come" is entirely accurate in relation to drawing hands.
Unless your opponent is all in before the turn, then what you consider
with drawing hands that have more than one card to come are EFFECTIVE
odds, not pot odds.
ezc3m
in that exact instance of time, you're indeed winning 700 PROFIT. the money
that went in before doesn't concern the current equation one bit, it could've
been placed there by lesbian martians or whomever, but you have absolutely no
claim to that money UNLESS you WIN.
in that timeframe, your asset is the chip pile sitting in front of you, not
what's in the pot. if you fold, or leave, all you can take is the chips in your
posession. thus, in that time slice, you lose nothing if you fold. if you
call, you either win 700 PROFIT, or LOSE 100.
On Jun 16 2005 4:26 PM, Blackize wrote:
> Sigh. It isnt 700 PROFIT because you need to count all the money you put in
> the
> pot to build it to 700. You are right however that the pot is offering 7-1
> > > The odds the pot is laying you if you make your draw, when you are drawing
> > > with one card to come. This is calculated by dividing the current pot
> > > size by the unit of investment. If the pot is $80, and the bet is $20
> > > (putting $100 in the pot) then the pot odds are $100 to $20 or 5 to 1."
> > >
> > > Uh, no. First off, you don't have to be on a draw to worry about pot
> > > odds.
> > > If
> > > you're facing a $100 bet into an $600 pot on the river, then you're second
> > > pair
> > > is facing 6-1 odds. What that tells you is your hand has to be good one
> > > time
> > > out of 7 times to break even. If you call and are right 2 in 7 times,
> > > you'll
> > > make money. Sometimes it's right to call when there might be a good
> > > chance
> > > you
> > > are beat, but because of the amount in the pot, you have to call.
> > >
> > > And, once again, you don't count your bet in the odds. So, a $20 bet into
> > > a
> > > $80
> > > pot is 4-1, not 5-1.
> > >
> > > Hopefully I won't piss anyone off too bad, but I want to clear up some of
> > > the
> > > bad info from this thread.
> > >
> > http://ezc3m.blogspot.com/
> >
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________________________
* New Release: RecPoker.com v2.2 - http://www.recpoker.com
Tad Perry
news:1118953428$537...@recpoker.com...
>
>
> Can anyone comment on the chart that calculates implied odds?
It won't work. You have to calculate a function in your head if you want the
right answer because there are variables regarding chance of a call, chance
of a raise, what a person likely holds, how they play the situation at hand,
and so on. The future is not set in stone. There is no way to say "The
future action will be X." You could build such a table if it were understood
in terms of "the average future action in this situation is X" but it will
be less accurate. A person should be evaluating the exact players and exact
board in question, and trying to come up with the very best intuitive
guesstimate regarding future action that one can. Sometimes the pot odds
themselves cover the odds of your draw and you don't need to figure any
future action at all. It will all be gravy (so to speak) if you make your
hand. Other times, you might be a little short on pot odds and in that case
you would like to be certain that you can get later what you're short now.
Being against a raise-bot, a calling station, and a folder are three
different situations.
tvp
torx
100 in the pot someone bets 50 makes 150 in the pot which is 3 to 1
-Alexander Knopf
https://secure.pokerchamps.com/pokerpublic/arequest?acode=TORX
http://www.empirepoker.com/index.htm?wm=2206738
----
torx
if you put 2000 into an 800 pot on a pure bluff with no chance to win if
called you are risking 2000 to win 800
On Jun 16 2005 11:19 PM, KKsuited wrote:
> Your $100 bet will win you $600. I (and most people that know what they are
> talking about) usually don't chips already in front of me as profit in a pot,
> but thanks for you effort.
>
> So if there's 800 in the pot and I be 2k, I win 2800? No, risk 2,000 to win
> 800. Or I risked another $100 to win $600. Not rocket science here.
-Alexander Knopf
https://secure.pokerchamps.com/pokerpublic/arequest?acode=TORX
http://www.empirepoker.com/index.htm?wm=2206738
-------
torx
number of folds in 1000 river bets, bets to gain on river if you hit
0 1
etc etc
On Jun 16 2005 11:23 PM, KKsuited wrote:
> Can anyone comment on the chart that calculates implied odds?
>
>
> On Jun 16 2005 4:06 PM, Tad Perry wrote:
>
> > KK, dammit, why can't you just let them be stupid and doubt that my answers
> > are golden?
> >
> > Then, SOME get it and SOME lose their pants!!
> >
> > It's a WAY COOL way to do it!!!
> >
> > tvp
> >
> > "KKsuited" wrote in message
> > news:1118950366$537...@recpoker.com...
-Alexander Knopf
https://secure.pokerchamps.com/pokerpublic/arequest?acode=TORX
http://www.empirepoker.com/index.htm?wm=2206738
_______________________________________________________________________
torx
On Jun 17 2005 4:48 AM, torx wrote:
> and people wonder why i always want them to be specific
> as someone else has mentioned .... you started a semantic debate
>
> there is a huge difference between
> someone bets 50 into a 50 dollar pot, it's 50 to call
> and, someone bets 20, raise to 40, all in raise to 50, it's 50 to call
> into a 100 dollar pot (even tho it would be 110 (preflop, blinds still in))
>
> so again, specific questions get specific answers
----
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
torx
------
MrSlingshot
think he meant that there's $100 in the pot and someone bet $50 into it, making
it $150 in the pot after the bet.
You should count his $50, but you shouldn't count your own $50, unless you want
to change your odds from "to" to "for", but who wants to deal with that?
Best of luck at the tables.
MrSlingshot
On Jun 16 2005 4:29 PM, Super Steamer wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 16 2005 2:04 PM, Super Steamer wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Jun 16 2005 12:47 PM, Omaholic wrote:
> >
> > > You do count the bet that you're facing in addition to the pot. If
> > > someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, your $50 call gets you 3 to 1.
> > > The $100 in the pot and the $50 that will be in it if you call.
> >
> > No you don't, it's 2 to 1 only. You're counting money that you are about to
> > put
> > in for pot odds? Think about it, that makes no sense.
> >
> > Steamer
>
>
> If someone bets $50 and the pot is $100, that means that the pot is $100
> including that persons bet already. If the pot is $100 and then somebody bets
> $50 then the pot is really $150. Is that what you meant? It really matters
> in
> what order you state these things because it means two different things.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------
Why haven't you visited http://www.slingshotpoker.com yet?
Super Steamer
On Jun 16 2005 7:14 PM, MrSlingshot wrote:
> Having re-re-re-read all the relevant posts, I'm not sure what he meant. I
> think he meant that there's $100 in the pot and someone bet $50 into it,
> making
> it $150 in the pot after the bet.
>
Yes, I gather that now, but that's not how he wrote it. Anyways, we all know
what he meant now, and I don't want to talk about it any more.
Good luck,
Steamer
Michael Sullivan
> This is the most retarded thread I've ever been apart of.
>
> I obviously know you count what the other player into the pot.
>
> "facing a $50 bet" means the beat is on YOU.
> If the pot is already $100 and the action is on you at $50, that's 2-1.
What part of "into" didn't you understand?
"bet X into a pot of Y" *means* that there is Y in the pot before the
bet.
English, learn it, use it. It's *your* language.
Michael