zachvac
Legend
Bronze Level
So if you've played poker at all, you no doubt know what pot odds are, and if you're a good player, you can calculate them and understand what they mean. But few people know, understand, and can apply calculations to pot equity. They express very similar concepts, but pot equity is easier to comprehend and applies in more situations.
1. Let's start with a pot odds example, you know you are 25% to win (don't ask me how, this is just an example), the pot size is 300, and you are facing a bet of 100 (new pot size=400). Pot odds are 4:1, odds to win are 3:1, you call. Look at it this way. 400 in the pot, pot equity determines how much you will win in the long run ie how much of the pot is yours. If you call, 25% of that 500 is yours, which we could calculate (500/4), but the only thing that matters is that we are paying 100 to get 500/4 > 100 back, making it a good decision.
Now that may seem too complicated and pot odds may seem easier, now let's go onto what I had trouble with: reverse pot odds.
What happens when you have the best hand. I know from being on the other side that I shouldn't give correct odds for them to call, so do I check? I have the best hand, so I want them to put money in the pot, so I don't want to bet enough to that they fold, right? So what exactly does it mean to give them odds to call? The solution is understanding pot equity.
Let's take the same example, but you are the 75% to win and have yet to make the bet. There is 300 in the pot and you are 75% to win. This means that 300*.75 = 225 of that 300 is yours. Now the question about wanting them to fold becomes clear. If we simply check it down all the way, we win an average of 225 per hand. If we bet enough to make them fold, we win an average of 300 per hand. Obviously we know which is more desirable.
Say we bet like the person in the previous example did. We bet 100 into the 300 pot. Assuming they know the odds, they should call. We put in 100 of our money, 75 of which is ours based on the odds. They also called 100, 75 of which is ours. Therefore the pot is now 500 and we own 375 of it. But we have invested another 100 so really we gain 275 total based on that play. While that is better than the case of checking, in which case we gain an average of 225 per hand rather than 275, it's still not as good as the 300 per hand of getting them to fold.
So now we bet the exact amount to give them even odds between calling and folding. Into a 300 pot, we bet 150. Now if they call the pot is now 600, 450 of which is ours. But since we just invested another 150, we only have a total net gain of 300, equal whether they call or fold. Now what happens if we don't give them odds to call?
Same situation, we bet 250 instead of 150. If they call, pot is now 800, 600 of which is ours. we bet 250 so the net gain is only 350. But note that is better than the 300 we get if they fold. If we bet and they chase their draws without outs, we're getting more money on average than if they fold.
SO... it follows that when you are ahead in a hand, the goal should be to bet enough such that
1. You bet enough to not give them odds, ie if they call your equity is greater than if they fold
2. You should bet as low as you can over the amount to not give them odds such that they will call.
In other words you want to bet enough such that they will call, it will be an incorrect call, and you should maximize the bet (as long as it's over the number to give them odds) but still get a call. This is why you should LOVE it when people will chase their draws without odds. Many people will push all-in or bet an unbelievable amount because they don't want draws chasing. If they call without odds, it's better for you than them folding. If you give them odds, you're not making as much money as you would have by making them fold.
And finally, this interpretation is a way to understand any situation. When you have AA vs. 77, you are 80% to win. Some people assume they will win, when they lose they call it a suck-out (rightly so) and people convince them "it happens 20% of the time". Instead of simply thinking like that, think of how much of the pot is yours. You went all-in first hand of a tourney so 1500 chips each. 3000 pot (assume no limpers for simplicity sake), so 2400 of those chips belong to you, 600 belong to your opponent. Whenever you win, you are sucking out for those 600 chips. Whenever they win, they are sucking out for your 2400 chips. It probably won't help when your AA gets busted by 77 to bust you out of a tourney, but at least looking back you can see that one of you had to suck out, in that case the other guy did. Whether you win that hand or lose that hand, in essence you won 2400 chips. Usually doesn't help when playing, but if you can think of it that way, you'll be well on your way to getting past tilt. I can't do it yet, hopefully I can get myself to think that way.
1. Let's start with a pot odds example, you know you are 25% to win (don't ask me how, this is just an example), the pot size is 300, and you are facing a bet of 100 (new pot size=400). Pot odds are 4:1, odds to win are 3:1, you call. Look at it this way. 400 in the pot, pot equity determines how much you will win in the long run ie how much of the pot is yours. If you call, 25% of that 500 is yours, which we could calculate (500/4), but the only thing that matters is that we are paying 100 to get 500/4 > 100 back, making it a good decision.
Now that may seem too complicated and pot odds may seem easier, now let's go onto what I had trouble with: reverse pot odds.
What happens when you have the best hand. I know from being on the other side that I shouldn't give correct odds for them to call, so do I check? I have the best hand, so I want them to put money in the pot, so I don't want to bet enough to that they fold, right? So what exactly does it mean to give them odds to call? The solution is understanding pot equity.
Let's take the same example, but you are the 75% to win and have yet to make the bet. There is 300 in the pot and you are 75% to win. This means that 300*.75 = 225 of that 300 is yours. Now the question about wanting them to fold becomes clear. If we simply check it down all the way, we win an average of 225 per hand. If we bet enough to make them fold, we win an average of 300 per hand. Obviously we know which is more desirable.
Say we bet like the person in the previous example did. We bet 100 into the 300 pot. Assuming they know the odds, they should call. We put in 100 of our money, 75 of which is ours based on the odds. They also called 100, 75 of which is ours. Therefore the pot is now 500 and we own 375 of it. But we have invested another 100 so really we gain 275 total based on that play. While that is better than the case of checking, in which case we gain an average of 225 per hand rather than 275, it's still not as good as the 300 per hand of getting them to fold.
So now we bet the exact amount to give them even odds between calling and folding. Into a 300 pot, we bet 150. Now if they call the pot is now 600, 450 of which is ours. But since we just invested another 150, we only have a total net gain of 300, equal whether they call or fold. Now what happens if we don't give them odds to call?
Same situation, we bet 250 instead of 150. If they call, pot is now 800, 600 of which is ours. we bet 250 so the net gain is only 350. But note that is better than the 300 we get if they fold. If we bet and they chase their draws without outs, we're getting more money on average than if they fold.
SO... it follows that when you are ahead in a hand, the goal should be to bet enough such that
1. You bet enough to not give them odds, ie if they call your equity is greater than if they fold
2. You should bet as low as you can over the amount to not give them odds such that they will call.
In other words you want to bet enough such that they will call, it will be an incorrect call, and you should maximize the bet (as long as it's over the number to give them odds) but still get a call. This is why you should LOVE it when people will chase their draws without odds. Many people will push all-in or bet an unbelievable amount because they don't want draws chasing. If they call without odds, it's better for you than them folding. If you give them odds, you're not making as much money as you would have by making them fold.
And finally, this interpretation is a way to understand any situation. When you have AA vs. 77, you are 80% to win. Some people assume they will win, when they lose they call it a suck-out (rightly so) and people convince them "it happens 20% of the time". Instead of simply thinking like that, think of how much of the pot is yours. You went all-in first hand of a tourney so 1500 chips each. 3000 pot (assume no limpers for simplicity sake), so 2400 of those chips belong to you, 600 belong to your opponent. Whenever you win, you are sucking out for those 600 chips. Whenever they win, they are sucking out for your 2400 chips. It probably won't help when your AA gets busted by 77 to bust you out of a tourney, but at least looking back you can see that one of you had to suck out, in that case the other guy did. Whether you win that hand or lose that hand, in essence you won 2400 chips. Usually doesn't help when playing, but if you can think of it that way, you'll be well on your way to getting past tilt. I can't do it yet, hopefully I can get myself to think that way.
