| Posted by: aliengenius at December 21, 2007, 5:25 pm | | Topic: Effective odds vs odds for the next card only. Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Bentheman87
"If you call both the flop bet and the turn bet, then you have paid a total price of 800 (200 + 600) to win 1200 (initial 200 pot + 1,000 behind): that's only 3:2 money odds on a draw that is 2:1 event odds to make."
Yeah, that is exactly what effective odds are. It's when you have to make a decision with more than one card to come. When you compare the total amount you will win if you hit s the total amount you will lose if you miss, and compare those odds to the odds against you hitting on the turn and river. But I thought effective odds were supposed to take implied odds into account. Using your example Alien, you're paying 800 to win 1200, so you're effective odds are 3:2. But what if you believe you're opponent will call a 500 chip bet on the river, even though the flush card is now showing. Then you're effective odds would improve to about 2.125:1.
Now here's what I really meant to ask. Say you have a flush draw o... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Bentheman87 at December 21, 2007, 4:57 pm | | Topic: Effective odds vs odds for the next card only. Forum: Card Chat |
"If you call both the flop bet and the turn bet, then you have paid a total price of 800 (200 + 600) to win 1200 (initial 200 pot + 1,000 behind): that's only 3:2 money odds on a draw that is 2:1 event odds to make."
Yeah, that is exactly what effective odds are. It's when you have to make a decision with more than one card to come. When you compare the total amount you will win if you hit s the total amount you will lose if you miss, and compare those odds to the odds against you hitting on the turn and river. But I thought effective odds were supposed to take implied odds into account. Using your example Alien, you're paying 800 to win 1200, so you're effective odds are 3:2. But what if you believe you're opponent will call a 500 chip bet on the river, even though the flush card is now showing. Then you're effective odds would improve to about 2.125:1.
Now here's what I really meant to ask. Say you have a flush draw on the flop. Odds against you hitting the flush on the tu... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: aliengenius at December 21, 2007, 6:25 am | | Topic: Effective odds vs odds for the next card only. Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Bentheman87
Is there any real difference between these two? Wouldn't using the odds for the next card only plus factoring in implied odds be the same as effective odds?
No. You are two confusing separate ideas.
Implied odds are what you can expect to make if you hit (which might be zero, if you wont get paid when, say, the easily seen flush card hits).
But using what you are calling "effective" odds (if I'm understanding you here), you are NOT factoring in the PRICE you will have to pay on the turn (in NL, typically at least half the pot or more).
When making a gambling decision you are comparing the price to the odds of the event occurring. So you compare the amount you can win to the amount it will cost you, then compare that in turn to the chances of the event happening.
Simply put, "implied odds" can make your money odds better, but it isn't necessarily correlated to the "effective&... | | Read Entire Entry |
|