Pot odds
Every poker book tells you to calculate pot odds using only the cost to call vs the total amount in the pot at that time. I don't see how this makes sense.
Let's use an example of hoping to hit a set on the flop when holding a pair, just for simplicity. We'll round the odds of hitting that to 7 to 1. Now let's say there's three people in the pot and the total is $80 at the time you have to call a $10 bet. These are just made up amounts for the purpose of this discussion and we'll say that if the set misses you will fold right then and if it hits everyone will check from there to the showdown at which point you win, again for simplicity.
So using the published method of pot odds calculation it looks like you would make a profit by calling $10 to win a $80 pot at 7:1 odds. Problem is, though the total pot is then $90 you put $30 of that in the pot yourself. So seven times you lose $30, for a total loss of $210, and one time you win $60 (what the other two players put in). Total loss $150. Where's the profit?
Would it not make more sense to disregard the amount in the pot and simply call or fold based on the calculated win percentage of your hand, based on an odds calculator, in comparison to the number of opponents you're facing? Over the long term, the amount in the pot when you hold that same hand against the same number of opponents is going to average out. Say the average pot is $90, including your call, and your winning percentage is 40% (not using the pair in this example but whatever hand would have that win percentage against two opponents). After 100 such hands you would have won $2400 (40 x the other two players' $60 share of the pot) and lost 60 x your $30, $1800, for a profit of $600. It wouldn't matter what the pot amounts actually averaged out to, as long as your win percentage is higher that 33.33% you're going to make a long term profit, disregarding the rake. Figuring in the rake, of 5%, you would have to have a win percentage above 35% to make it profitable.
Now, admittedly, if every poker player in the world used the published pot odds method it would even out between all the players because they would all be losing to each other every time they did it. On the other hand, if you happen to be the only player in the world using the win percentage method regardless of pot size then you're going to clean up because everybody else will basically just be handing you their money.
Let's use an example of hoping to hit a set on the flop when holding a pair, just for simplicity. We'll round the odds of hitting that to 7 to 1. Now let's say there's three people in the pot and the total is $80 at the time you have to call a $10 bet. These are just made up amounts for the purpose of this discussion and we'll say that if the set misses you will fold right then and if it hits everyone will check from there to the showdown at which point you win, again for simplicity.
So using the published method of pot odds calculation it looks like you would make a profit by calling $10 to win a $80 pot at 7:1 odds. Problem is, though the total pot is then $90 you put $30 of that in the pot yourself. So seven times you lose $30, for a total loss of $210, and one time you win $60 (what the other two players put in). Total loss $150. Where's the profit?
Would it not make more sense to disregard the amount in the pot and simply call or fold based on the calculated win percentage of your hand, based on an odds calculator, in comparison to the number of opponents you're facing? Over the long term, the amount in the pot when you hold that same hand against the same number of opponents is going to average out. Say the average pot is $90, including your call, and your winning percentage is 40% (not using the pair in this example but whatever hand would have that win percentage against two opponents). After 100 such hands you would have won $2400 (40 x the other two players' $60 share of the pot) and lost 60 x your $30, $1800, for a profit of $600. It wouldn't matter what the pot amounts actually averaged out to, as long as your win percentage is higher that 33.33% you're going to make a long term profit, disregarding the rake. Figuring in the rake, of 5%, you would have to have a win percentage above 35% to make it profitable.
Now, admittedly, if every poker player in the world used the published pot odds method it would even out between all the players because they would all be losing to each other every time they did it. On the other hand, if you happen to be the only player in the world using the win percentage method regardless of pot size then you're going to clean up because everybody else will basically just be handing you their money.
Comments
in your EV calc, you have to ignore the money you have already put in the pot. This is dead money.
The odds are still there. Once your inital $20 is in the pot it is no longer yours, so it's still just a $10 call into a $70 pot.
pretty confusing but I think he was indicating $10 into an $80 pot so the final pot is $90 pre-flop; more reason to make the call.
welcome timmy.
yes, think of it as 10 into an 80 pot. 7 times you lose for 70. 1 time you win for 80. net +10.
if you fold all 8 times, you lose 0 extra. net 0.
your way of thinking has you losing 30 7 times and winning 60 once for a net of -150 but don't forget if you fold 8 times your net is -160. you are still up +10 by calling.
You are correct sir.
Now in regard to the replies, yes, that's what the books all say. It's not your money anymore after it's in the pot. That may sort of make sense on paper, but let's face it, that money came out of your bankroll and if you win the pot one third of it is not profit but simply getting back your own money. All you've really won is the other two thirds of it. If the odds against making the winning hand are more than 2:1 you can't possibly profit in the long term.
I think it's a major fallacy to derive the pot odds from the single call amount compared to the full pot amount. As I showed, the math clearly indicates some big losses doing that. How did anyone ever think that made sense? Actually, it's probably best that nobody here agrees with me. That makes me the only player on Earth who won't be giving back all the money that the flawed pot odds players will be losing to me. Ka-ching!
Don't let your 1st error influence your correct pot odds call.
1st call getting 2:1 bad call for strict odds.
2nd call getting 5:1 again no odds.
3rd call getting 8:1...you've backed yourself into a corner of having to make the call based on pot odds.
See you at the tables
Ship it
not necessarily:
a) pair board on the flop
b) three of the same suit (even if you missed)
c) open ended straight draw (with one of your cards)
d) etc., etc.
Even if I missed my trips, there are various situations I may represent or continue in the hand depending on the flop. Also, I'm not sure of your position based on how you described the opening hand. It depends.
Overpair.
Bluff
how about this example based on your theory:
$1/$2 cash game. You have small pocket pair on the button. Middle position makes it $100 to go ($98 raise). You feel frisky and decide to call. SB has exactly $100 left and goes all-in for a raise of $1. MP calls.
Based on your theory, you put $101 of the pot in yourself. So seven times you lose $101 for a total loss of $707, and one time you win $202 (what the other players put in). Total loss of $505.
You fold.
Me personally, for $1 raise, I'm going to see a $303 pot. Call me crazy.....
If you think the math is wrong, you're using the wrong math.
in short, you are wrong, and "the book", not to mention the various posters, is correct.
Damn, forgot to do the doggerel bit. Crap.
I have now tried all possible bet combinations for a limit game, at pre-flop, flop and turn stages, and although you always lose money whether you call or fold you always lose less by calling with the correct pot odds based on the last call as specified in the books, or folding when pot odds are insufficient. Either way you never make a profit unless the hand winning odds are better than the number of opponents (like 3:1 odds with 5 opponents), you just lose less by calling or folding based on the pot odds as the books say. Of course, in poker taking the route that results in the lowest loss is the best course of action if you will lose either way anyhow. If you don't believe that you will lose either way try it yourself, and I mean lose based on the actual total amount of money you put in the pot in relation to the total amount put in by the opponents.
I don't know if this works out the same with no limit type betting but it always works with all limit type betting possibilities. I say this because it's not actually exact, because when you use exact hand odds with the exact same pot odds the losses don't come out exactly even when folding or calling. You actually still lose less calling than folding with the exact odds. So this is a bonus. But the fact that it's not exact suggests to me that with infinitely variable betting as in no limit there may be a point where this method is not entirely in your favor. Probably is, but you'd have to check it out to be absolutely certain. It also probably doesn't work out perfectly if you just use the odds of hitting a certain hand rather than the precise hand win odds, because you don't know for sure if the hand you're trying to hit will be the winner, unless it's a monster and practically certain to win, meaning full house or better.
So that's why this method has worked all these years, not because you profit by it but because you lose less by it than you would otherwise. A rather surprising outcome, I must say. As far as I know, this is the first time anyone has actually worked this out and found that this is why the pot odds method works. It works in the long run by minimizing losses but you won't make money directly from doing it as the books seem to suggest. The only time that will happen is when the hand win odds are greater than the number of opponents, as I said earlier. Live and learn, huh? I just figured something out that Brunson and Sklansky didn't even know. Not bragging, just pointing it out. Anyone is welcome to try to disprove what I have stated here.
Thanks to everyone who answered my posts.
it is rare for someone to make such a valuable contribution to the poker world with a mere few posts. you have achieved the unthinkable.
i hunger to learn more of this incredible wisdom. the forum needs more advanced thinkers like you. please continue to share.
i look forward to sitting across from you at the poker table where i can profit firsthand from your amazing insights.
in the meantime, prepare to take your place amongst poker's all-time greatest strategists.
I look forward to the new line of TimmyX poker books coming to a Chapters near you. The only thing I don't get is someone who is obviously making millions of dollars playing poker (his edge is above those of the best pros) whose wasting his time teaching us schleps here at pokerforum. A true humanitarian to be sure.
They're supposed to be here with things to learn..(Tim, you are completely wrong..Hobbes had a good post about not compounding your errors)
I'd much rather we smoke the old guard still playing .02/.05 after 4 years...and let the n00bs put some roots down.
Okay, here's some more of this incredible wisdom. I made a little error in the case where it looked like it turned out to not have equal losses fold or call when the pot odds were exactly the same as the hand odds. They actually do come out exactly equal. That 's not a major part of my last post anyway, the main point being that you most definitely lose whether calling or folding using pot odds unless the hand odds are better than the ratio of opponents to you. This has never been reported in any poker book I've seen yet so it qualifies as a new revelation. Now it's Brunson, TimmyX and Sklansky, in no particular order. Hey, quit elbowing, Sklansky! Very perceptive of you to recognize my remarkable contribution to poker knowledge, pkrfce9.
Well, considering that there IS no "Intruductions" forum, which they suggest you use to introduce yourself, it's a little hard to post on it. Look on the forum list, I don't see one called "Introductions", do you?
25 carat. By the way, I can't tell you how awesome it feels to win a WSOP bracelet either, yet.
"General Poker Chat Discuss anything to do with poker right here. New members also feel free to introduce yourself here."
Good luck with your new pot odds theory. Don't be offended but I'm not smart enough to wrap my head around it so I'll stick to the "old school" one for now. If you can come up with a better explanation that lay persons can understand, I'm willing to listen.
Second, sometimes things based on past events doesn't make sense. Think of it this way. You need to spend money to make money.
I also want to say good job on thinking outside of the box though! You may not end up changing the pot odds, but thinking outside of the box is for sure a good trait. Just shrug off the rude remarks and continue to think about things. It's the best way to understand fully.
Now, here is why pot odds works.
Lets say you get a hand
:as :ks - It's a strong hand, so you bet pre-flop against 3 other players.
Two of them call your big bet. You decide to bet the following flop, because all books say to represent your pre-flop raise no matter what.
:10h :8h :qs
Now, you put the other guys on pairs, but higher pairs, or flush draws. One of them may have JA, so you aer going to include two of your A's as a winning hand. This gives you 5 outs to make the best hand
:ad :ac :js :jc :jd
Those are your outs.
The pot is at $100.
The turn comes up
:5s
Now you have 13 outs to win. Your 9 spades and the Ad Ac Jc Jd. The Js is already included.
Both guys have called. One guy acts before you and raises the pot $20.
Do you call?
You're looking at 28% chance to win. Lets round to 25.
EDIT ABOVE - You're looking at 28% chance to hit your cards to win, based on what you can see and know about the other players and their hands - you could have the winning hand right now!
Therefore, if you are given this situation 4 times, you will lose 3 times and win 1 time.
Therefore, if you don't consider any other money coming in, you will win $120 back one time and lose roughly 30-50 each other time, or 90-150, depending on how many people are in the pot.
So, you're looknig at a possible loss, but the pot odds are there to hopefully bring you to breaking even. However, YOU have to play the cards to come ahead.
So, you still have one round of betting. Lets say you hit your flush.
:9s
You have highest club flush possible (the nut flush). The good thing is, this just completed another players straight draw. You are gonig to pull another $200 from this guy. You have to factor in that win!!!
Pot odds are there simply to take your given circumstance and say, ok, given that you have this many outs, you are going to win this many times out of 100. If you call exactly the same percent, you will break even, if the game were to end there. The beauty about poker is that it doesn't start or end there.
This is why you need a good start and end. Pot odds are the middle portion of the play. Your start and end of the game are the places you make the money. Raising with the hands that will likely win to begin with will make you the money and getting the most out of people when you make a hand will make you the most money.
Does all of that make sense?
Sorry about ranting and any cancer, folks. I think Timmy will understand this a little better. Seems he likes to type a lot, like me.
Here is one example showing my pot odds theory;
Below are the bets for pre-flop, flop and turn, from bottom to top, with three players participating, you're the one on the right. You have to decide whether to call the 2 bet or fold.
2 2
3 3 3
3 3 3
When the 2 bet came to you the pot odds were 11:1. Suppose you had hand odds of 8:1. This looks favorable to you based on the published pot odds betting method. If you call 9 times you will lose the total 8 units you had put in the pot 8 times, a total of 64 units lost, and win the other players' 16 units once for a total loss of 64-16=48 units. If you fold 9 times you would lose your two 3 bets for a total loss of 9x6=54 units. So folding instead of calling will cost you 64-54=10 units more than calling. So you can see that no profit was made even though your pot odds were higher than your hand odds. It's a matter of losing 64 units or 54 units, so you prefer the 54 unit loss.
Now let's suppose that your hand odds, with the same bets, is higher than the pot odds, 15:1 for example. Published pot odds method says fold. By calling 16 times you lose 8 units 15 times, total loss 120 units, and win the opponents' 16 units once for a total loss of 120-16=104 units. By folding 16 times you lose 6x16=96 units. By folding you lose 104-96=8 units less than by calling. Again, you have a loss by either calling or folding but this time folding produced a lower loss than calling because your pot odds were lower than your hand odds.
Now suppose your hand odds and pot odds were identical, both 11:1. Calling 12 times you lose 8 units 11 times, total 88 units, and win the opponents' 16 units once for a total loss of 88-16=72 units. Folding 12 times you lose 6x12=72 units, exactly equal. Though you had perfectly even pot and hand odds you lost 72 units whether you called or folded. You probably would have expected to have no loss or profit whatsoever but you lost money in both cases.
Now let's say you have the same bets with the 11:1 pot odds but your hand odds are 2:1, the same as the ratio of number of opponents to you. Theoretically, according to the published poker literature, you should have a huge advantage by calling, making almost 6 times what you lose. Let's see if you really do. Calling 3 times you lose your 8 units twice, total 16 units, and win the opponents' 16 units once, exactly even. Folding 3 times you lose your 6 units 3 times, total 18 units. Where did the expected huge profit go?
Now this last result is surprising, because I expected it to work out even. Nonetheless, the main point is that although your hand odds were vastly better than your pot odds you made no profit whatsoever by calling. In all instances, all you could do was minimize your losses by choosing to call or fold based on pot odds being either higher or lower than hand odds.
what, I'm up to $0.05/$0.10 now. Don't rush me!