Equity or Implied odds?

[Panutes]

Hey everyone, I'm new to these forums and pretty to to playing poker in general as well. However, I have taken the liberty to read several books since my start, some of which I have found very helpful with my game.

These books suggest two common methods for determining wether a call is justified in terms of money odds... these being Implied odds or Pot odds. After reading some forum threads here, I have pretty much thrown away the idea of pot odds, and have attempted to just try to understand implied odds, as they seem more applicable.

In spite of this skill, reading updated forum posts here have lead me to believe there is another NEWER and MORE ACCURATE approach known as equity. I have looked at some forum threads explaining this, and the calculations seem too impractical to use at the table. (I play at the casino, rather than online, I prefer to see my opponent's face/body language)

Anyways, I have two questions for you:
1)Which is the better method, or are they used in different scenarios?
2)How are both methods carried out at the table. Basically, can someone direct me to a thread or explain to me themselves a simple method of carrying out these skills on-the-fly at the table for practical use. Without decimal multiplication...

Thanks fellas, I look forward to your feedback.

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
These books suggest two common methods for determining wether a call is justified in terms of money odds... these being Implied odds or Pot odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're asking all this in reference to considering a call. Implied odds are huge but only come into play if there are more cards to come and more money behind. Otherwise it's a straight pot odds exercise.

Calling based on equity isn't really a different concept. If, for example, you somehow knew your opponent holds AJ and you hold KQ, you have about 40% equity in the hand because that's the percentage of the time you will win. Or, you're a 3-2 dog, both of these figures really reflect the same thing. If an opponent pushes for his last 400, and there's already 300 in the pot, your pot odds (implied odds don't apply here) are around 2.5 to 1. Saying you have the pot odds to call this all-in is the same as saying you have enough equity in the pot to call it.

A lot of work done with equity is something you do at home using PokerStove or tables/charts away from the game. It's useful to know what the value of a given hand is against a given range of hands.

Implied odds are pretty simple a concept and it's huge in NLHE. If you need 3-to-1 to call on a flush draw, but aren't quite getting it, often you can still call if you think you can extract the rest on a future betting round.

Example: You're drawing to a flush. You assume you have 9 good outs with one card to come and need 4-to-1 to make a correct call in terms of pot odds. (Or, you could say you have 20% equity in the pot). However you're not getting those odds but you think that if you make your flush you can get at least enough to get the rest on the river and a little more. It's IMPLIED that this opponent will either raise you on the river or call your bet.

[If you or your opponent had no more money, or if this were the last betting round, there would be no implied odds - no way you can win any more if you hit.]

So if there's 2000 in the pot, and he bets 1000, you'd be getting 3-to-1. Not enough to meet your 4-to-1 requirements. But, if you hit the flush, can you get at least another 1000 out of him on the river? Say you estimate that if you hit you can get him to call a 2500 bet. Now, you're really paying 1000 for a chance at winning 5500 (the 3000 in the pot now, plus the extra 2500). That's giving you 5.5-to-1 to call this turn bet and draw.

Sorry if I'm explaining something you already understood or if not enough detail -

[Gonso]

Grab pokerstove if you don't have it already, also.

[Gonso]

Here is something on hand ranges to give you an idea.

Also check this out, it's an article written by Galfond (another 2+2er) that touches on hand ranges a little bit, especially in paragraph 5.

Just for good measure. RA is tired

[Red_Diamond]

Gonso, the visual chart on hand ranges is rather interesting to me. Reason being I know the hand ranges by % and have them committed to memory. I just never did notice a lot of the symmetry between them from visual reference on the 13x13 charts (yes I really should pay more attention to them I guess).

This is most likely one of those things that is obvious to many but somehow I skipped over it. Goes to show you some things...

[Gonso]

Tell you what will probably help a little bit, running pokerstove on your screen when 2 tabling. Keep an eye on the VPIP and PFR stats, and you can get a rough idea of range sliding the percentage bar in real time. It's nice to eyeball it.

Be careful with the default ranges though, since some players ranges are assembled differently than others. IOW, the top 20 percent of hands for one player may not match another's, especially at lower limits where more people overplay hands like Axs or small pairs, but will incorrectly fold marginal hands like K9s in situations where they should play them. This is less common as you move up, but it's very helpful to keep in mind when playing low or micro limit.

I'd REALLY like to see someone design a calculator like Stove where you could realign the starting hands, and also to be able to assign probabilities to particular holdings to calculate custom ranges, and also account for some bluff chance, rather than just a probabilistic distribution.

If this already exists, though, someone let me know.

[JavaNut]

[ QUOTE ]
If this already exists, though, someone let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

They keep it secret, they use it to win a lot of money [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

BTW you avatar is making me seasick, and I never get seasick even in heavy seas [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[Gonso]

ill see what i can do later on

[Red_Diamond]

BTW, Gonzo, there seem to be some significant rounding errors between the percentages listed on the tables on that page, and from what PokerStove produces. I'm tired and maybe missing the obvious somewhere...

[Guizones]

[ QUOTE ]

Also check this out, it's an article written by Galfond (another 2+2er) that touches on hand ranges a little bit, especially in paragraph 5.


[/ QUOTE ]

Very good article!! Thxx