Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

u really don't have set odds for sure... it's very close. However, I'd probably call regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]

I probably call as well, vs. an unknown.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

To calculate otherwise is to artificially inflate the opportunity by ignoring the cost to play the hand up to the decision point. It's true that by the decision any prior outlays are no longer your chips, they are the pot's chips, but the only way to rate opportunities in a relative context is to use a standard method that can be applied everywhere.

Another way to look at it: Imagine a series of pre-flop min-re-raises by two players on either side of you. If you calculate your implied odds based on cost to call each time the action comes to you, eventually you will be allin and obviously not getting the implied odds you need to play for set value.

Regarding odds to hit: It's 11.8% for a PP to hit a set or better on the flop. That works out to 8.47:1. I like to approximate that as 9:1 because I like to err on the side of caution.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

baltostar, your numbers are correct in a raised pot, but you def don't need 18:1 implied odds in a reraised pots, esp in shannon's spot, since villain almost certainly has a big hand to three bet here, and implied odds are higher than usual.

i also call PF and think folding > calling

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

Ok. Well, what should the multiplier be? Villain's only risked 1/16 of his stack. I don't think it's anywhere near a lock he players for stacks. 8.5:1 * 3:2 = 12.75:1 ? In any event the odds aren't there.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

[/ QUOTE ]

No its not, you're process is really terrible and makes no sense.

1800 is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of implied odds, 1200 is your number.

You arent even taking into account the current pot odds, which lessens the implied odds you need.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Nowhere close having right implied odds to play for set value.
16725/1800 = 9.3:1

[/ QUOTE ]

Your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

[/ QUOTE ]


The correct way to calculate these is total pre-flop outlay divided into the smallest of your stack and the stacks you think you are likely to play for stacks post-flop, plus any dead money from other players.

To calculate otherwise is to artificially inflate the opportunity by ignoring the cost to play the hand up to the decision point. It's true that by the decision any prior outlays are no longer your chips, they are the pot's chips, but the only way to rate opportunities in a relative context is to use a standard method that can be applied everywhere.

Another way to look at it: Imagine a series of pre-flop min-re-raises by two players on either side of you. If you calculate your implied odds based on cost to call each time the action comes to you, eventually you will be allin and obviously not getting the implied odds you need to play for set value.



[/ QUOTE ]

LOL!!!

By the way, if you haven't read my post you are quoting, your math is off. It's not 16725, and not 1800.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
No its not, you're process is really terrible and makes no sense.

1800 is absolutely irrelevant to the matter of implied odds, 1200 is your number.

You arent even taking into account the current pot odds, which lessens the implied odds you need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Trust me. I know my game theory. The "event" is the flop, not each time the action comes to you.

As I said earlier: imagine you're sandwiched between two big stack opponents who min re-raise each other until one is allin. If at each decision point you calculate implied odds to play for set value based on your cost-to-call, you might easily make every successive call, and would become allin yourself, at which point you would have ~2:1 going into the flop -- hardly sufficient odds to play for set value.

Pre-flop pot odds are not directly relevant to calculating maximum implied odds.

Pre-flop pot odds are relevant to calculating the odds required to play for set value because committed chips reduce the multiplier used to discount the likelihood of stacking if you hit.

In this case, the max implied odds are hero's max payoff achievable post-flop (in this case: hero's stack + dead money in blinds) against hero's total pre-flop outlay = (16725 + 300)/1800 ~= 9.5 : 1

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an easy call, you can see a flop and reevaluate, plus you have set odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

u really don't have set odds for sure... it's very close. However, I'd probably call regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]


Oops, thought Hero covered Villain for some reason. Still a call though.

Re: QQ from upfront early in Warmup...Is this ok?
 

"Trust me. I know my game theory. The "event" is the flop, not each time the action comes to you.

As I said earlier: imagine you're sandwiched between two big stack opponents who min re-raise each other until one is allin. If at each decision point you calculate implied odds to play for set value based on your cost-to-call, you might easily make every successive call, and would become allin yourself, at which point you would have ~2:1 going into the flop -- hardly sufficient odds to play for set value."


Baltostar,
this is very wrong. its wrong because you are closing the action, so you do not have to worry about the possibility of putting more money in on this street.