Confused about NL Pot Odds

[elohel]

Okay, I am not exactly a begginer but this seems like a begginer question so I thoght I would post it here. My question is with NL what odds are you using to calculate your pot odds. Example;

I have A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and the flop comes 8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 5 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] . Now lets say that my opponent flopped a straight so an A or a K is not an out. I know that with two cards to come my odds of making a flush are 1.9-1. I also know that with one card to come my odds of making a flush are 4.2-1. Now my question is this...In a no limit game when I do not know the price my opponent is going to lay me on the turn, and I have no garauntee of seeing the river, should I be calculating my pot odds using the 4.2-1 or the 1.9-1? Please explain which of these you are using and why.

Also, how do implied odds play into this? Thanks.

---elohel

[MightyA6]

Do you expect an opponent with a straight to fire once, then check turn? I'd go for the 4.2-1, else you'll be dreaming and drawing against the odds. This might be wrong but it does save you a lot of thinking and calculating about implied odds, or worse, reverse implied odds. (if he might get a straight flush.)

But if it's NL10 and there's 25 bucks in the pot and he goes all-in for like 10 more, then you would get 35-10 so I guess that's good odds for the draw at the turn and river.

[lucky_mf]

For the most part pot odds are not meaningful in NL and can't really talk about implied odds without mentioning stack sizes - and the amount of money already in the pot.

If this hand is played at 100NL with full stacks (for simplicity) then you can assume $9 in the pot preflop. He bets $7 on the flop. From a pot odds perpective you are calling $7 to win $16 ($9+$7). If all you were going to win is the $16 your call is marginal. You call because you think he has a str8 or 2pr and will pay you with most his stack if you hit. The turn is heart and the pot is now $23 ($9+$14). Now he bets $17. From a pot odds perspective you are calling $17 to win $40 ($23+$17). Again, if all you were going to win is the $40 the call is marginal. You call because you think he has a str8 or 2pr and will pay you off with the most of his stack if a club comes. On the river the pot is $57 ($23+$34) and you each have $72 behind you. The river is a club. He checks and you bet $50. He calls and you win a total pot of $157.

Assuming he would not fold, you called $7 for a chance at winning $83 (7-83). On the turn you called $17 for a chance at winning $83 (17-83). In both cases the calls were only marginally justified by pot odds (and maybe not if you consider he has 2pr), but there were justified by implied odds (assuming he would call semi-standard turn and river bets if you made your hand).

I might haver [censored] up the pot sizes somewhere, but the analysis is close.

If you didn't think this guy had a str8 or 2pr, but rather a hand like A8. You would be much better off playing the hand very aggressively with the aim of getting him to fold or getting all the $ in. I say this because your implied odds if he has a hand like A8 are not very good (he isn't going to pay you off if you hit), but you do have a near flip (statistically speaking) and a lot of fold equity (he should be happy about A8 on this flop).

Lucky

[elohel]

So basically what you are saying is that against an opponent that is passive postflop, if he is betting and you have a draw to a very strong hand you should be more apt to just call. You do this because it is more likely that your opponent has a very strong hand and will pay off a big bet if you hit.

Against an aggressive opponent or one that has been betting a lot of flops/turns it is in your better interest to play your draws aggressively to push weak 1 pair hands out or to committ a lot of chips to the pot so when you do hit it will be more difficult for him to fold in a large pot.

More simply...if you put your opponent on a marginal hand you bet with it strongly and if you put your opponent on a very strong hand you just call with hopes of having big implied odds when you hit.

So this brings up another question. When is it correct to fold a draw? If you are not looking at your pot odds what other factors play into the folding of a draw? It seems to be like if you are calling or raising every time you have a draw regardless of the pot odds you are going to be bleeding money over the long run. Please Explain. Thanks.

---elohel

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
So this brings up another question. When is it correct to fold a draw? If you are not looking at your pot odds what other factors play into the folding of a draw? It seems to be like if you are calling or raising every time you have a draw regardless of the pot odds you are going to be bleeding money over the long run. Please Explain. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here are some things to look out for when drawing. A draw to the nuts is a lot better than the non-nuts. Having Axs is better than 65s when drawing to a flush. As well, with straights, you could be drawing to a lower straight and get stacked.

Obviously, one card draws are a lot weaker. The exception would be having the A with a three flush on board. One more of the suit would give you the nuts although you might already be against a made flush so use pot odds with low implied odds since a player with a low flush might not pay you off.

Another obvious example is drawing to a straight with two suits on board. You may lose to a flush at the end.

All of this is especially true in multiway pots since the odds of your non-nut draw being beaten is higher. Heads up, you can push people off of marginal hands even when your draw doesn't come in so you have fold equity to go along with your pot equity.