Implied Odds and Reverse Implied Odds (Day 9 Course Discussion)

[Collin Moshman]

Question about this rule of thumb that stood out to me as well though:
I noticed that in the pdf we calculated implied odds as ratio of our opponent's stack to our amount needed to call (which was $5,000: $80). I understand that this is merely the definition for how implied odds are calculated, but I ask: "why do we use opponent's entire stack for this calculation - wouldn't it make more sense to use the amount we think we can successfully extract from them?"

Just because I hit a set of deuces here, that doesn't mean I can get Villain to shove all-in against us. So are we really getting $5,000: $80, or about 63:1 here? Obviously, this is way better than the 20:1 rule of thumb given, but I feel that Reverse Implied odds would lower us to less than 63:1 since getting Villain to shove into our potential set is not 100% or am I misinterpreting something?

In this example, I'd probably at least see the flop with our pair of deuces, but in similar situations I'd be hesitant about even playing this hand at all preflop. Is this also acceptable from a theory perspective?

Great question Phoenix. The reason it's done this way is because we're not assuming we will always stack our opponent when we connect. If we're getting 10:1 implied and know we'll always get a full double when we connect, that's plenty to call with 22. But we fold because some of the time we won't hit our set.

So the idea is that we calculate implied odds this way and then only call to set-mine if we're getting much better than we "need" since a lot of the time we won't stack our opponent when we connect.

Hope that makes sense the way I'm explaining it here, if not just let me know!

 

[iveyfan]

I think the concept of reverse implied odds is incredibly important, especially on a wet board. When I was starting out, too often I only looked at the possibilities of my cards, which is a mistake I think quite a few amateurs make.

In reality, we might have to discount a fair number of outs, because they would make someone else's hand even stronger than ours.

 

[Katie Dozier]

I think the concept of reverse implied odds is incredibly important, especially on a wet board. When I was starting out, too often I only looked at the possibilities of my cards, which is a mistake I think quite a few amateurs make.

You're totally right and this was true of me too when I first started playing!

 

[Nafor]

Should we forget about implied odds at the final table when ICM is involved?
Let's say we are the middle stack and big stack is offering us good implied odds. Would it still be better to wait for the small stacks to get crushed if ladders are good enough?

 

[Collin Moshman]

Should we forget about implied odds at the final table when ICM is involved?
Let's say we are the middle stack and big stack is offering us good implied odds. Would it still be better to wait for the small stacks to get crushed if ladders are good enough?

No, it's still an important idea but the number you want might change. The example you give is a good one. If the big stack raises and we have 22, we might be a little tighter than 20:1 implied because of our risk aversion. But I'd still look at the implied odds and be happy to call if they were good.

 

[ronn6583]

Thank you, only now I understand the meaning of call 20.
Very practical part. Now I will not fold small pocket pairs if the call does not exceed 10% of the effective stack.
Understanding reverse implied odds is very important, now it will be much easier to fold in situations where the probability that I'm behind is high enough.

 

[carmenzu]

Implied odds aren't difficult to understand. The chapter is well explained.


.

 

[FF2586]

Hey Hey Hey!

Ouh la la! Feels like I got myself a new tool! Very exiting!

I mean I just completely understood the implied odds and the reversed implied odds concepts and how to estimate it... And it feels like buying a new tool for your little company, but in this case I got for free!!

Very greatful to be part of this community!

Great work!

gl gl gl

 

[BentleyBoy]

Thanks guys.

Two take always for me from this.

Reverse implied odds is a real way to determine when to give up on a hand that may look good but has real possibility to be a money drain.

Using effective stacks as the way to determine implied odds isn’t something I have previously done but thinking it through really justifies that call early on to give yourself a chance to win big.

Thank you

BB

 

[Tux97]

Response to the video question:

The scary part about this is the number of players to act behind. Before reading this this chapter I would have folded this hand instantly. However, putting implied odds into play, I see that the odds are about 38:1, well over the 20:1 guideline and worth taking a stab at hitting a 6 on the flop. If hero flops a set he can double up and then some.

I would call and hope no one else does, although I gave some thought to raising. It would be nice to drive the other players away with a raise.

Actually, I think it's better if other players get involved too. So I would call and hope for remaining players to call too. That way the pot will be bigger and the implied odds better! Our potential set would make us more money.

 

[Tux97]

More great information learned today many thanks.

In hand 9-2, the odds I think should be 240:30 or 8:1 and we still have UTG to act after us in the BB. So the pot odds are just about good enough for a gutshot straight draw if I am not mistaken.

In hand 9-3, I don't know why the pot is 18,500 but my question is: what if we take the initiative from UTG and donk bet our top pair to see what UTG would do. Is that recommend play?

 

[Collin Moshman]

More great information learned today many thanks.

In hand 9-2, the odds I think should be 240:30 or 8:1 and we still have UTG to act after us in the BB. So the pot odds are just about good enough for a gutshot straight draw if I am not mistaken.

In hand 9-3, I don't know why the pot is 18,500 but my question is: what if we take the initiative from UTG and donk bet our top pair to see what UTG would do. Is that recommend play?

Glad to hear that Tux!

Hand 9-2: You are completely right on that mistake. I'll pass it along. Thanks and great eye

Hand 9-3: The pot is $18,600 from the $6000 x 2 in pre-flop raise and call, $3000 small blind, and $400 * 9 in antes. Donk-betting is a nice option to consider, but still leaves us playing a large pot out of position when he calls, and we'll have to fold facing raise. Our preference is to check-fold unless Villain bets very small, or he checks back and the turn blanks (in which case we bet out at that point).

 

[Tux97]

Glad to hear that Tux!

Hand 9-2: You are completely right on that mistake. I'll pass it along. Thanks and great eye

Hand 9-3: The pot is $18,600 from the $6000 x 2 in pre-flop raise and call, $3000 small blind, and $400 * 9 in antes. Donk-betting is a nice option to consider, but still leaves us playing a large pot out of position when he calls, and we'll have to fold facing raise. Our preference is to check-fold unless Villain bets very small, or he checks back and the turn blanks (in which case we bet out at that point).

Thanks for the explanation Collin. Now I know why it's better not to donk bet on the flop in this case. BTW, the small blind is 1500 so maybe it was a typo in the book or just adjust the pot size to be 1500 less. In any case, the good analysis stays the same.

 

[Collin Moshman]

Thanks for the explanation Collin. Now I know why it's better not to donk bet on the flop in this case. BTW, the small blind is 1500 so maybe it was a typo in the book or just adjust the pot size to be 1500 less. In any case, the good analysis stays the same.

That's funny -- I somehow got it wrong twice now then. You're totally right Tux, thanks and I'll add it to the list of changes!

 

[ammje]

Magnificent article to better understand the implied odds and reverse implied odds, this article will undoubtedly help me make better decisions at the tables, which in the long run will be profitable.

 

[acidburnfx]

This tactic is already a more aggressive, because when you place a bigger bet it helps you to see the strength of other players hands, because only those who have good hands will remain.

 

[freddydr87]

This is a very important concept but u have to know very well your oponent iff is a louse agresive player and he raises us with a draw is very likly that we are going to strat max value iff we hit the draw,but iff the guy is very passive and tigh hardly we will be brake even iff we call out off odds.
The same way with poket pair, iff the guy 3bets very louse calling to set mining isnt so good because he has a lot off hands that will not impact the board and will be tend to fold to any shonw off agretion.

 

[Katie Dozier]

Magnificent article to better understand the implied odds and reverse implied odds, this article will undoubtedly help me make better decisions at the tables, which in the long run will be profitable.

Happy to hear this, thanks Ammje!

 

[morthiman]

Again, thx for the great content, sooo many questions about it but it all come to this:

If I got a pocket pair (They say 1 of 8 times I play i hit trips on flop) and I'm in a CALL position, pre flop, what should i Consider?

ODDS 1 to 8? OR IMPLIED ODDS, the max I can win considering how much is the call ?

 

[Collin Moshman]

Again, thx for the great content, sooo many questions about it but it all come to this:

If I got a pocket pair (They say 1 of 8 times I play i hit trips on flop) and I'm in a CALL position, pre flop, what should i Consider?

ODDS 1 to 8? OR IMPLIED ODDS, the max I can win considering how much is the call ?

You should consider your implied odds -- the ratio of how much you can win relative to the call amount. But for sure you can consider other factors too: How likely it is you get 3-bet by another player, how high your pair is (77 can get away with lower implied odds compared to 22, for example, because you're not just set-mining), and how well your opponents play post-flop.

 

[johnnylawford]

Thanks for another good summary chapter! If I were adding anything to the first example it would be how we consider the potential action behind in implied odds. In the example calling from UTG+1 means you'll have several players to act behind, so you might want to factor in the additional implied odds if you think you'll get additional callers behind. Might not work as well in the first hand of an MTT example, but after a few levels you'd probably know how loose the table is.

Just a thought!

 

[Katie Dozier]

Thanks for another good summary chapter! If I were adding anything to the first example it would be how we consider the potential action behind in implied odds. In the example calling from UTG+1 means you'll have several players to act behind, so you might want to factor in the additional implied odds if you think you'll get additional callers behind. Might not work as well in the first hand of an MTT example, but after a few levels you'd probably know how loose the table is.

Just a thought!

Good addition, thanks--just be sure to differentiate between loose-passive and a loose-aggressive table; the former will likely illicit more calls, but the latter may often result in you being raised off your hand

 

[Coinuss]

My favorite quote: "If you call pre-flop, hit top pair, and then check/fold to a single bet, that’s normally pretty weak poker."
The top pair, the second pair or the low pocket pair that I discovered, I often fold to cbet when the flop scares me. Now I'm more stubborn. But now I often fold with ATo without position when a flop like JhTh9d and SPR> 10, because the reverse implied odds. I like the 20 to 1 rule and I look at an effective stack with a number to compare.

 

[Katie Dozier]

My favorite quote: "If you call pre-flop, hit top pair, and then check/fold to a single bet, that’s normally pretty weak poker."
The top pair, the second pair or the low pocket pair that I discovered, I often fold to cbet when the flop scares me. Now I'm more stubborn. But now I often fold with ATo without position when a flop like JhTh9d and SPR> 10, because the reverse implied odds. I like the 20 to 1 rule and I look at an effective stack with a number to compare.

I def agree with generally folding the ATo in the spot you describe. I'm glad you like the 20-1 rule; I love to get to set mine and find that to be an easy way to make sure it is justified

 

[king11682]

The implied odds are not so easy to apply; They can help you win a big pot but if you make a mistake and don't have the right connectors it can turn into reverse implied odds and can make you lose a lot of chips.