For Your Amusement

[Jon MW]

...

equity - 6.26 comes from the 5.26 to 1 odds u were getting on the turn , u add 5.26 to the 1 = 6.26 then to work out your equity you divide 1 by the 6.26 which equals 15.97%
...

5.26 to 1 odds is a ratio
3950/750 is a fraction

3950/750 = 4.26:1 (work out your "equity" from that)

or you could just stick with -

it costs 750 to call, the pot is 3950
So your pot odds are 750/3950 = 0.18987 or 18.987%
Or you could say 750 is approximately 1/5th of 3750 therefore its probably about 19%

My outs are 11 hearts, 2 6"s and a 2, 44 cards left

Therefore my odds of winning (specifically what I thought my odds of winning were, because I had foolishly discounted the fact he was playing from the SB) are:

15/44 = 0.3409 or 34.09% (or 15 x 2.2 = 33%)

But even if I knew what he had I still had 11 hearts and a 2

12/44 = 0.2727 or 27.27% (or 12 x 2.2 = 26.4%)

Obviously he could have surprised me, if a third heart had come he might still have called my all in - but if I was playing to bluff I would have raised on the flop, and if I was playing with a made hand I would have raised - the only hand that it made sense that I was playing was a flush draw (or a slow played set - either of us could have been doing that).

So whichever way you look at it, the percentage chance to win is larger than the percentage you have to contribute i.e. pot odds - call.

NB: I never said I had 19% chance to win before, I only said I had >19% chance.

...
i"ve been going through a lot of my friends mtt hand histories recently who has just started playing at poker and he plays the 1 and 2$ mtts on stars, one thing i have noticed going through them is the weak play and calling light on the river ...

But I"m not talking generally, I"m talking specifically about players I"ve played all the way to the bubble with - that takes a while, and it takes a lot of hands.

... but i do find it intresting how u discount all those hands for some1 in the small blind when it only costs them 125 chips to see a flop with a 8000+ chip stack,...

Not widening his hand range because he was in the small blind was my mistake, but he wasn"t just automatically making up the small blind every round - there was still a fairly tight range he was playing. If he had been automatically making up the small blind every round, I would certainly hope that I would have spotted his much wider range from the SB - but as it was he only had a slightly wider range (which I didn"t spot).

... but looking at his bet pattern, weak lead flop check raise turn ... those hands i give him are quite reasonable for his position in the hand and how quite a lot of players at this level play them....

again I would refer you to the fact that I wasn"t calculating this for "...quite a lot of players at this level...", but for a specific one.

[Roscopiko]

I refer to the title of this thread!

I am not amuzed, i am bemuzed! Odds smods u won and had fun, move on!

[Jon MW]

[Swinebag]

lets get ready to rumble
In the blue corner, representing rags, we have the master of disaster, the jazz with the Razz, The british cowboy

JOOOOOOOOOOONEMMMMMMMMMDOUBLEYOOOOOOO

In the red corner, representing correct mathematical poker theory, we have the pokerbot, undefeated

ROWWWBOWWWWNOWWWWWBLE1

Heads up for Rollz

[Roscopiko]

^^ ^^

Anyone got too much time on their hands lol

[kinboshi]

JonMW = Legend.

[/end thread]

[Jon MW]

JonMW = Legend.

[/end thread]

Why would you want to spoil my fun and end the argument prematurely?

[kinboshi]

JonMW = Legend.

[/end thread]

Why would you want to spoil my fun and end the argument prematurely?

Why would you want to listen to me?

[noble1]

...

equity - 6.26 comes from the 5.26 to 1 odds u were getting on the turn , u add 5.26 to the 1 = 6.26 then to work out your equity you divide 1 by the 6.26 which equals 15.97%
...

5.26 to 1 odds is a ratio
3950/750 is a fraction

3950/750 = 4.26:1 (work out your "equity" from that)

or you could just stick with -

it costs 750 to call, the pot is 3950
So your pot odds are 750/3950 = 0.18987 or 18.987%
Or you could say 750 is approximately 1/5th of 3750 therefore its probably about 19%

My outs are 11 hearts, 2 6"s and a 2, 44 cards left

Therefore my odds of winning (specifically what I thought my odds of winning were, because I had foolishly discounted the fact he was playing from the SB) are:

15/44 = 0.3409 or 34.09% (or 15 x 2.2 = 33%)

But even if I knew what he had I still had 11 hearts and a 2

12/44 = 0.2727 or 27.27% (or 12 x 2.2 = 26.4%)

Obviously he could have surprised me, if a third heart had come he might still have called my all in - but if I was playing to bluff I would have raised on the flop, and if I was playing with a made hand I would have raised - the only hand that it made sense that I was playing was a flush draw (or a slow played set - either of us could have been doing that).

So whichever way you look at it, the percentage chance to win is larger than the percentage you have to contribute i.e. pot odds - call.

NB: I never said I had 19% chance to win before, I only said I had >19% chance.

...
i"ve been going through a lot of my friends mtt hand histories recently who has just started playing at poker and he plays the 1 and 2$ mtts on stars, one thing i have noticed going through them is the weak play and calling light on the river ...

But I"m not talking generally, I"m talking specifically about players I"ve played all the way to the bubble with - that takes a while, and it takes a lot of hands.

... but i do find it intresting how u discount all those hands for some1 in the small blind when it only costs them 125 chips to see a flop with a 8000+ chip stack,...

Not widening his hand range because he was in the small blind was my mistake, but he wasn"t just automatically making up the small blind every round - there was still a fairly tight range he was playing. If he had been automatically making up the small blind every round, I would certainly hope that I would have spotted his much wider range from the SB - but as it was he only had a slightly wider range (which I didn"t spot).

... but looking at his bet pattern, weak lead flop check raise turn ... those hands i give him are quite reasonable for his position in the hand and how quite a lot of players at this level play them....

again I would refer you to the fact that I wasn"t calculating this for "...quite a lot of players at this level...", but for a specific one.

the 5.26 to 1 i give ,  those are the odds , i use this method to work out equity 750 into 3950 goes 5.26 times add the 1   1 divided by 6.26 = 15.95%


you asked how i worked out the equity did u not ,,  not odds !!!



eg - 9 divided by 3 = 3   using your method you would say this is 2 to 1 odds    wow i can work odds   NO  NO  NO  NO
3 TO CALL TO WIN 9 IS 3 TO 1   NOT 2 TO 1
750 TO CALL THE TURN TO WIN 3950 IS 5.26 TO 1


as for your hand ranges you was putting him on , you discount nearly every reasonable hand i suggest he would logically raise on the turn with after the weak lead on the flop,, So i ask myself what on earth was you putting him on

this is not about the maths , this is about a bad poker hand being played badly and sucking out on the river. [i suggest also a bad bluff when the ace comes]
Your read of the villian is flawed as even though the board is paired he calls your reraise on the river thus i can only come to the conclusion that even if a heart came on the river that he would of still called you ,, so again i question your exceptional read on this player

THIS NEXT PART IS MATERIAL FROM POKERSTOVE

Calculating Poker Pot Odds

Poker pot odds are calculated by the size of the bet in relation to the pot as a whole. A simple example would be if the pot currently had 50 dollars in it and you were required to pay 5 dollars to remain in the hand, you would be getting 10/1 on your call. You can quickly determine the long term profitability of an action by determing whether or not the likelyhood of your hand being made is greater than the current percentage of the pot it is to call. In our example to calculate the percentage you reduce the numbers to 10/1 and then add them to get 11 which from there you divide the cost of the call (the 1) by the sum (11) to get .09 or 9 percent. Therefore, if your hand was going to be made greater than 9 percent of the time, it would be profitable in the long run as you would have a positive expected value on your call

Poker Pot Equitiy

The situations we have looked at so far tend to tell us what to do when we have to face calling a bet. Pot Equity looks at situations when we should decide whether or not we should be betting or raising in order to win a pot. In order to understand the concept of pot equity you are going to want to know the percentages of your hand winning in the long run, given every possible deal. Once you have determined your percentage of winning the pot you can compare that action to the price of the action in front of you. If for instance you had a hand that would win the pot 40 percent of the time from the current spot and the size of the pot was 200 the equity you would have is $80 (200*.40). If your equity is greater than the action in front of you, you want to be calling or raising as in the long run you have a positive expected value.

NOTE ON POT ODDS AND POKER POT EQUITY: Understanding each one of these concepts will advance your game greatly and will give you an advantage over some of your opponents. In order to do this you must learn how to calculate the probabilities of hands being made and be able to do the simple calculations relatively off hand. There is no real better way to do it that to practice and to memorize the necesary information. Once you understand the more basic concepts, you can learn the more advanced ones and it will add to your game greatly.




right jonmw did you notice the $50 pot $5 to call equals 10 to 1  NOT 9 to 1
i can understand your logic as many people mis-understand this,maybe its bad info passed along or to many trips to the bookies.
If you went to the bookies and put £3 on a 2to1 shot which won you would win £6 plus your stake back equals £9
In your poker hand you are staking 750 to win 3950 if u win u will recieve 3950 plus your 750 call back which is 5.2666 to 1  does that make sense
if it was 4.2666 to 1 as you think it is, you would only win 3199.95

now if you want to try and explain it as a fold equity situation please share your thoughts on this as i would be intrigued by your thought process.

So recapping -
I"m not a maths based player but i do have a understanding of it and i apply it in areas of my game such as all ins pre-flop,i judge there hand range look at the odds i"m getting to call , judge where i"m at chip stack wise , how my hand plays against there range and make a equity based decision as well as judging my position in the tourny, how many people are yet to act behind me etc etc
I have won mtts at a high level and still try to improve all areas of my game.

having read your explanation on this said hand , you DO have a few leaks in your game sir,and i cannot for the life of me see any logic in the way you have played this hand..

-1 point for thinking your odds are 4.26 to 1

Your current score is now -   minus 0.5 out of Ten   [jonmw shows promise as he is willing to experiment with various plays but needs to apply sound logic and more solid play,also he needs to re-evaluate hand ranges on the turn when he receives more betting information]

[duke3016]

My head hurts -- Allin pre flop any hand (but thats just me cos I can"t count)

[Jon MW]

...
right jonmw did you notice the $50 pot $5 to call equals 10 to 1  NOT 9 to 1
i can understand your logic as many people mis-understand this,maybe its bad info passed along or to many trips to the bookies.
...

Yes, you"re right - all this time I"ve been playing slightly too cautiously as I"ve been using the fraction [call]/[existing pot] - rather than the ratio [existing pot]:[Call]

The name pot odds should really have given me the clue

This is good because it means I"ll be able to loosen my game up a bit

...

[Jon MW]

...

But this is where I got the 19% figure from - as you point out the pot odds should actually be 15.95%.

So my call is even more clear cut

With the outs I thought I had I had 15 outs so a 34% chance of winning (with a flush draw)

Therefore I only need a 50% chance that he would fold to a shove on the river if a third heart came. Whereas I think the chance was more like 90%.

The reason he called on the river was because he was playing with the assumption I was on a flush draw - if he had thought about it, my raise on the river didn"t fit in with the flush draw - so it"s possible that he would still have called, but the probability still easily beats the 50% needed.

I didn"t factor into account this probability that he would still call at the time, because I was sure he would fold if a third heart came - but (a) the figures still hold up anyway, and (b) I could still fold and coast past the bubble.

[Jon MW]

...
as for your hand ranges you was putting him on , you discount nearly every reasonable hand i suggest he would logically raise on the turn with after the weak lead on the flop,, So i ask myself what on earth was you putting him on
...

Already covered this.

I discount the reasonable hands that an average player in this circumstance might be on - but I wasn"t playing a generic player, I was playing a specific player who I had played with over a great deal of hands. So I didn"t need to generalise.

I"ve already said
When he checked on the turn I put him on a flush draw
when he check raised I put him on a high ace.

EDIT: the reason why it was so specific is because he was barely playing one hand a round - he wasn"t playing many hands, he had a pretty small range of playable ones.

And obviously, as already suggested, he could have been slowplaying a small set all along, for example. But (a) I think he would protect against the flush draw more aggressively and (b) meh, good luck to him if he was.

[noble1]

So do you still maintain you made a correct read on your opponent and played this situation well ??

...

But this is where I got the 19% figure from - as you point out the pot odds should actually be 15.95%.

So my call is even more clear cut

With the outs I thought I had I had 15 outs so a 34% chance of winning (with a flush draw)

Therefore I only need a 50% chance that he would fold to a shove on the river if a third heart came. Whereas I think the chance was more like 90%.

The reason he called on the river was because he was playing with the assumption I was on a flush draw - if he had thought about it, my raise on the river didn"t fit in with the flush draw - so it"s possible that he would still have called, but the probability still easily beats the 50% needed.

I didn"t factor into account this probability that he would still call at the time, because I was sure he would fold if a third heart came - but (a) the figures still hold up anyway, and (b) I could still fold and coast past the bubble.

if you are assuming that your opponent has put you on a flush draw WHY does he only min raise
The answer imo is that either -
1.He has a read on your betting patterns and he knows you have no flush draw       hence the min raise.
2.He his a clueless idiot who is only playing his hand,and that even if a heart comes on the river he will call you no matter what.Thus your attempt to factor in , HIM folding , into your play is a waste of time....

-1 POINT for trying to bluff a bad player/situation

total score so far = minus 1.5 out of ten  

[nice attempt by jonMW to explain his plays but he needs to pick his spots and the right kind of player more carefully for this play to have any future success]

[Jon MW]

...
if you are assuming that your opponent has put you on a flush draw WHY does he only min raise
...

This was slightly incongruous as up to this point he had been good at protecting his hands with good bets and perhaps should have been a further clue that he had more than a good pair of aces which I didn"t pick up on.

But even in hindsight I"m still confident that if a third heart had come on the river he would have checked, I would have shoved and he would have folded.