Terms & Conditions

Internet Magazine

Non–US new players
Get five 2+2 books

Order Books
Book Translations

Expand All   Collapse All

Forum Archives

## The 2+2 Forums

Be sure to read the   Two Plus Two Internet Magazine

This is an archive. The main forums are here

 You are not logged in. [Login] Main Index · Search · Classified Ads New user · Who's Online · FAQ · Calendar

PL/NL Texas Hold'em >> Small Stakes

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | >> (show all)
Tickner
A game of inches...

Reged: 03/01/06
Posts: 3554
Overestimating Implied Odds
#7443252 - 09/27/06 01:51 AM

This is probably a basic concept that many of you have thought about before. I've been thinking about this a lot lately and I thought I'd post about it.

Consider the following HH...

100BB stacks at x stakes

You have 67 in the BB.

UTG opens for 5BB, Button and SB call, and you in the BB call.

Flop 2 8 K (20.5BB)

Checked to UTG who bets out 20, and its folded to you, do you call/raise/fold?

When it gets to you the pot is 40.5BB and its 20BB to call. According to pot odds you should fold, getting 2-1 on a 5-1 shot. However, many players call and justify it be saying they have the implied odds to make the call profitable.

But they they ever really think about it? How big exactly, are their implied odds? That's the tricky part. It's so dependant on many many things, but most importantly, your opponents tendencies.

Let's analyze it.

We are going to assume for this example that if we hit we will always have the best hand and never be outdrawn - which is not true but we need to assume it for our example.

We will hit one of our 9 outs, 9/47 times. Or, approx 20% of the time.

So lets just say 1 out of every 5 times we call the bet, we will win the hand.

This means that 4 times we lost 20BB and 1 time we win 40.5BB + Implied Odds...

So our Profit...

x = implied odds value
P = .8(-20) + .2(40.5 + x)

x is such a volitile value (meaning it has a wide range and is dependant on so many factors) that we should find the breakeven point to help us figure out the approx. value we need it to be on average.

So, solving for x when profit = 0 (breakeven)...

0 = -16 + .2x + 8.1
-.2x = -7.9
x = 39.5

So we need to, on average, extract exactly 39.5BB from our opponent every time we hit.

Considering the stack sizes in our example, the pot will be 60BB after you call and there will be 75BB remaning in each stack. Out of the 75BB in his stack we need to extract almost 40BB JUST TO BREAK EVEN. We need to do this every single time we hit (on average).

It's going to be pretty clear to our opponent that a FD is in our range, and that if we come out betting when we hit, he may not pay us off often enough for our initial call to be profitable.

Against many non thinking players (and even many thinking players) we can usually do this on average because the pot is so big. But what if the effective stacks were smaller? Even slightly? What if the stacks were much bigger? What if we remove our assumption that we will always win, and include the % of times we are outdrawn or are already behind when we make our hand?

This is a marginal spot on the flop. If we hit our hand, we NEED to extract more than half of his stack EVERY TIME we hit or it's just a bad call. We need to use our judgement to determine this, but if we overestimate our implied odds, we can be making bad calls left and right, and not even know it.

Sometimes, its ok to muck a flush draw. Do not overesimate the value of your implied odds.

 Post Extras:
Sunny Mehta
Co-Author of PNL

Reged: 04/17/04
Posts: 1124
Loc: coaching poker and writing "Pr...
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Tickner]
#7443334 - 09/27/06 02:03 AM

We are going to have a chapter in the book called "Biggest Mistakes Beginning Players Make" and one of the sections is titled exactly "Overestimating Implied Odds." I'm not sure at this point whether it'll be in Volume One or Volume Two.

I only skimmed your math, but your analysis is absolutely in the right direction. You can take the conclusion even further though. See where I'm going?

 Post Extras:
Iwineverypot
member

Reged: 01/06/06
Posts: 156
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Tickner]
#7443347 - 09/27/06 02:04 AM

Thats why you dont call here in this situation, you push to add the value of folding equity to your hand. I hardly consider flush draws an implied odds situation, as against most decent players the flush card will kill your action. The main thing I think implied odds refer to is preflop - you make the call with suited connectors/small pp's to stack opponents with overpairs by hitting monster draws/2pairs/sets. This type of a situation though is marginal and hardly one where I'd even consider the possibilty of implied odds. Calling here is such a horrible play, push it or fold.

 Post Extras:
cbloom
Carpal \'Tunnel

Reged: 07/20/03
Posts: 8940
Loc: communist
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Iwineverypot]
#7443435 - 09/27/06 02:21 AM

Tick, when you account for the chance that he has a higher FD it makes it really awful to draw here.

In fact, I'd say one of the few times drawing is good is when you have the nut draw, since in that case you are likely to get paid by a lower draw.

People overestimate implied odds preflop too, bigtime.

 Post Extras:
kslghost
Pooh-Bah

Reged: 08/16/04
Posts: 1833
Loc: Cal (6-4) We suck
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Iwineverypot]
#7443459 - 09/27/06 02:24 AM

I would have bet out But this is a good example.

 Post Extras:
74o_Clownsuit
Lord Magnus

Reged: 05/16/06
Posts: 1557
Loc: I FIGHT VAMPIRES
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: cbloom]
#7443467 - 09/27/06 02:24 AM

The fact that the better is UTG, you're only 100bb deep, you're 00P, and your draw is not to the nuts, makes this a pretty standard fold.

This thread is kinda similiar to the one I just started.

 Post Extras:
goofyballer
Emo Communist

Reged: 06/12/05
Posts: 7108
Loc: THESE IZ THE OLD FORUMZ
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Tickner]
#7443495 - 09/27/06 02:27 AM

Good post. FWIW, a quicker method you can use at the table to figure out how much you need to extract is to subtract the pot odds from your required implied odds. For example:

With the flush draw, you're getting 2:1 pot odds on a 4.2:1 shot (you said 5:1 but didn't use that figure anywhere else so your math looks ok). So, 4.2:1 - 2:1 = 2.2:1 implied value you need to make off of your hand when you hit; when calling a 20BB bet, 2.2 * 20 = 44BB you need to make when you hit to break even.

Another example is with pocket pairs; say you open to 4BB UTG with 55, one person calls, and CO squeezes to 12BB. There's 22BB in the pot, so you're getting 20:8 or 2.5:1 pot odds to call the bet. Since you need 7.5:1 implied odds to flop a set, you need to collect (7.5:1 - 2.5:1) = 5:1 implied odds postflop, or 40BB to break even. If CO is tight and you know this raise means QQ+, you can probably call profitably expecting to stack him often enough for calling to be +EV, but against a looser player you might consider letting it go (although you can factor in that you can usually expect to snap off a CB of ~20BB against most players).

 Post Extras:
Tickner
A game of inches...

Reged: 03/01/06
Posts: 3554
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: cbloom]
#7443536 - 09/27/06 02:33 AM

Quote:

Tick, when you account for the chance that he has a higher FD it makes it really awful to draw here.

In fact, I'd say one of the few times drawing is good is when you have the nut draw, since in that case you are likely to get paid by a lower draw.

People overestimate implied odds preflop too, bigtime.

Yeh, this is just a simple example to show my point. Most poeople probably recognize that check calling here isnt a good play. But if you devide the effective stacks by 3 and subtract 4BB from each stack, for example, and do the same to the best sizes, it wont be as obvious. It can be applied in a ton of situations.

For example, tonight I had a FD with position against a short stack.

On the flop the pot was \$10 and he had \$20 in his stack. He bet \$5 and I called. This hand actually triggered this post, because I have to stack him for \$15 EVERY TIME I hit and not get outdrawn in order for the play to be profitable. Now I know...

Also, Mr. SSNL Co-Author, this is the first I have heard of this book... care to explain?

 Post Extras:
cbloom
Carpal \'Tunnel

Reged: 07/20/03
Posts: 8940
Loc: communist
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: Tickner]
#7443571 - 09/27/06 02:39 AM

Quote:

Also, Mr. SSNL Co-Author, this is the first I have heard of this book... care to explain?

Some bad-ass poker wizards are writing a sick book that will make the games 100X harder and reduce our win rate to 0.1 PTBB/100, but we'll be so skilled from reading it that we can play 10,000 tables and still make bank.

 Post Extras:
Sunny Mehta
Co-Author of PNL

Reged: 04/17/04
Posts: 1124
Loc: coaching poker and writing "Pr...
Re: Overestimating Implied Odds [Re: cbloom]
#7444058 - 09/27/06 03:59 AM

lol...cbloom pretty much nailed it on both counts....

Quote:

People overestimate implied odds preflop too, bigtime.

Quote:

Some bad-ass poker wizards are writing a sick book that will make the games 100X harder and reduce our win rate to 0.1 PTBB/100, but we'll be so skilled from reading it that we can play 10,000 tables and still make bank.

 Post Extras:
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | >> (show all)

Extra information
0 registered and 59 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Isura, orange, ajmargarine, 4_2_it, Matt Flynn, Sunny Mehta, Mike Haven

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics