what odds is he talking about?

[ksuhart]

PokerStars Game #12846772818: Tournament #65196375, $7.00+$0.50 Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2007/10/25 - 21:10:28 (ET)
Table '65196375 1' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: jac33142 (1430 in chips)
Seat 2: king333 (850 in chips)
Seat 3: JFreerksen (2280 in chips)
Seat 4: kickin lisa (1440 in chips)
Seat 5: TheCuteness1 (2090 in chips)
Seat 6: DIAMONDS8 (1470 in chips)
Seat 7: wabbit_foot (1040 in chips) is sitting out
Seat 8: littlehob0 (1130 in chips)
Seat 9: ksuhart (1770 in chips)
king333: posts small blind 10
JFreerksen: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ksuhart

kickin lisa: folds
TheCuteness1: folds
DIAMONDS8: folds
wabbit_foot: folds
littlehob0: calls 20
ksuhart: raises 60 to 80
jac33142: folds
king333: folds
JFreerksen: calls 60
littlehob0: calls 60
*** FLOP ***

JFreerksen: checks
wabbit_foot has returned
littlehob0: checks
ksuhart: bets 160
JFreerksen: calls 160
littlehob0: folds
*** TURN ***

JFreerksen: checks
ksuhart: bets 400
JFreerksen: calls 400
*** RIVER ***

JFreerksen: checks
ksuhart: checks
*** SHOW DOWN ***
JFreerksen: shows

(a straight, Seven to Jack)
ksuhart: mucks hand
JFreerksen collected 1370 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 1370 | Rake 0
Board

Seat 1: jac33142 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: king333 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: JFreerksen (big blind) showed

and won (1370) with a straight, Seven to Jack
Seat 4: kickin lisa folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: TheCuteness1 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: DIAMONDS8 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: wabbit_foot folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: littlehob0 folded on the Flop
Seat 9: ksuhart mucked

JFreerksen: come on no third bullet
ksuhart: had a set of Jacks... almost
JFreerksen: sorry flopped open end straight and flush draw
JFreerksen: you gave me odds everytime (????????)





Now, can anyone help me understand what odds he's talking about?

Thanks

 

[oluaris]

he was referring to pot odds...
you can read info on that here

 

[Wonka22]

400 chips wasn't even a pot sized bet....he had more chips and about 15 outs. I'd have seriously considered calling you.

 

[ksuhart]

he was referring to pot odds...
you can read info on that here

Yeah, I was more talking about the fact that I wasn't giving him the proper odds(at least on the turn), or perhaps I was missing something in my math... Was he talking about implied odds?

Guess I should have spelled it out

400 chips wasn't even a pot sized bet....he had more chips and about 15 outs. I'd have seriously considered calling you.

Pretty sure I don't have to bet the pot in order to deny proper odds...

 

[mrsnake3695]

He had good odds on the turn. It costs him 400 to call a pot of 960 better than 2-1 with 15 outs. When you factor in implied odds and the possibility you don't have an over pair then it looks like a good call. His mistake was not betting when he made his hand, a classic mistake. He was relying on you betting so he could reraise but considering the only hands that could call a river bet of yours is a hand that beats you it was a good check on your part and a horrible check on his part.

So since he didn't bet the river therefore giving himself a chance to get the implied odds the turn call was bad. If he bets the river and you call (which you almost have to with a set) then he gets his implied odds and the call was proper.

 

[Stick66]

Pretty sure I don't have to bet the pot in order to deny proper odds...

He was drawing to 15 outs on the flop AND on the turn. That's about 2-1 odds against hitting each street.

Flop pot amount during his turn = 410
Amount he has to call = 160
His pot odds = 2.56-1

Turn pot amount during his turn = 970
Amount he has to call = 400
His pot odds = 2.42-1

...and none of that includes implied odds that make things even better for him. So actually, you would have had to bet MORE than the pot on each street to "deny proper odds". But don't fault yourself too much since you could not have known for sure that he had such a huge draw. But that's why I always bet at least the pot on such a draw-heavy board since I can't be sure.

 

[jeffred1111]

Turn is not that bad, but not that good either since he figures to have very low implied odds if he makes his hand since the board will scream "I have my my hand" if any heart, 5 or T comes out. I cannot see ksuhart calling any significant bet on river here (or even any bet) if that comes out, even with a set because pretty much only a combo draw will check call such bets.

But yeah, he had tons of outs, I'd overbet pot here all night long or even give a free card and fold to any card that hits him (very bad and a fondamental cash game mistake, I know, but it's early and we are facing the big stack, no need to play for big pots now). Or take the limit line and basically bet minimum without being ridiculous (1/3 pot?) and hope that he gets greedy and reraise me than I hammer him by shoving. But I'd go 80% of the time for the overbet.

 

[blankoblanco]

if you're checking behind this river with any sort of regularity, you're burning huge amounts of sklansky bucks. pleeeease valuebet and go broke to the T9

 

[jeffred1111]

if you're checking behind this river with any sort of regularity, you're burning huge amounts of sklansky bucks. pleeeease valuebet and go broke to the T9

I'm sure you're meaning 89 (not T9 since this hand has only one pair), but I'm liking checking behind a lot here for several reasons:

a) Sure we lose expected value but what is our line here ? Simply going broke ? What do we beat that has called on the turn and checks here, wich isn't the most transparent move ever ? Not much. We might be behind less often, but the time we do, we go broke (assuming cash game). I might eb playing a small variance game, but everything points to villain getting there, no point in trying to valuebet this.

b) It establishes a weak-tight image that can be used agaisnt the opponent who might try to valuebet a crappy hand later on.

c) Betting here is only a pure value bet and will never get better hands to fold (no bluffing aspect). I like my value bets to have some FE when I can, especially agaisnt big stacks. The truth is, against this board, JJ isn't looking to hot, especially since we know what villain had. If I knew you'd valuebet this all the time, you can be sure I would check this down to you and come over the top 100% of the time.

 

[Redred]

This is trny play, as soon as I see the J on the turn, I go all-in.

No re-raise on your bet to open, no re-raise on your bet on the flop, you have to go now that you made a good hand on the turn. It's go up or go out time!

 

[jeffred1111]

This is trny play, as soon as I see the J on the turn, I go all-in.

No re-raise on your bet to open, no re-raise on your bet on the flop, you have to go now that you made a good hand on the turn. It's go up or go out time!

This is a mistake, even in tournament play since you will lose a lot of EV unless you know you will be called. On this board, on the turn, your equity is still higer than someone with the combo-draw: you want someone to commit chips to this pot while behind. Sure, this means that a lot of the times, we will be folding river, but remember that in my scenario, I overbet the pot on turn all day day long wich means that there's no need to cut your opponents' odds to zero by shoving. Stack are big and pot is still pretty manageable.

If the stacks were smaller and any bet would cripple you, yeah, shove. Not here though.