View Single Post
  #13  
Old 02-22-2007, 04:33 AM
AKQJ10 AKQJ10 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hsv or the Tunica Horseshoe, pick one
Posts: 5,754
Default Re: Fundamental Theorem of Poker vs. Pot Odds

[ QUOTE ]
You have exactly enough outs to the nut hand to call a pot sized bet. The problem is that both you and your opponent have $200 left. If you call this bet on the flop, then the pot will be $300. If the board blanks, then your opponent surely is going to be $100 all in and you will be forced to call $100 into a $500 pot and will surely have to do this.

If there isn't enough money left for a full PSB on the next street (turn), where you will be pot committed, how can you just call on the flop? It seems that you don't have enough pot equity to push all in on the flop, but folding would be a "mistake".

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, to understand your example I need to resolve the ambiguity in the bolded sentence. Are you saying that 2:1 is sufficient with one card to come, or with two cards to come? If the latter, then you really need to figure whether it's either worth it to call $100 to see one card or worth it to call $200 to see two cards. I'm not sure if you could construct a big-bet scenario where only the latter rationale would make a call worthwhile. In other words, I don't think you could construct a draw where 2:1 is insufficient to see one card but 3:2 is sufficient to see two cards, and so on regardless of how big the stacks get.

This is handled in TOP, I believe, but it's from more of a fixed-limit perspective. It's called something like effective odds.

I'm sleepy so my numbers may be screwed up.
Reply With Quote