Is Pot Odds a very important factors in Holdem?

[Steve Chase]

I played poker in a few months now and have read two books.
I saw many posters say they win 90% or 80% of the time when they play. Unforturenately, I win about 40-50% of the time
(that means I am losing :-)). I try to figure out why I cannot win consistently like others.

I play tight. Only in with solid hands.
I play at dime and quarter tables a few times so not much bluffing around the table.

After I look at my data, I found I don't lose much pots (I win 65% of pots I am in), but for the pot I lose I lose big.
I mostly play NL Holdem.

A few reasons I lose big are:
* Got beat bad by kickers. e.g. A3 Lost to AJ
* Draws didn't materialize. I have to say I am not a lucky guy. Most draws I am in, hardly any are made.
I am not a calling station, I seldom call with inside draws, two over cards, ..etc., most of time I only call with a 4flush draw and open ended straight draws (with two cards to come)

So I figured I should call less when in draws and try to apply pot odds in a more strict way.

My questions are:
* Is pot odds really important in Holdem (limit or NL)?
If someone follow it strictly, will it improve the winning percentage a big way?
* How do I calculate pot odds when I hold A3 and flop is A82 and someone bet into me, and I am afriad he has AJ ...? Put it another way, how should I play with a small kicker.

Thanks

[burningyen]

The short answer is yes, pot odds are important in all poker games.

The long answer is yes, but "winning percentage," which I think means how many pots you win, isn't important. The object is to win the most money, not the most pots. No offense, but you need to read a lot more. I highly recommend you read another hold'em book and then The Theory of Poker. I can't imagine any good hold'em book out there recommends you play stuff like A3.

[jimymat]

Pot odds are equally important in both limit and no limit. Lee Jones book Winning at low limit holdem should be your next purchase. He will explain the pot odds so you will understand. The book is right up your alley.
As far as increasing your winning % in a big way id say no. But it will decrease your losing % on your open end draws and flush draws when you miss.
When playing with a small kicker the best advice I can give is dont. In a low limit game you should not be playing A 3. Tight is right and the only way to play at the type of structured games your playing in.

On your drawing hands there has to be enough money in the pot to justify calling a bet. If your on a flush draw on the flop with two other people in and the first guy bets, second guy calls, what do you do? First count how many bets are in the pot. 50 cents times 3 preflop plus 2 bets on the flop equals 5 bets. You are getting 5 to 1 and the the flush draw is around 4.2-1 so you can call. The turn you miss the flush. The first guy bets , the second raises, now what do you do? Ther are now 12 small bets in the pot or 6 big bets, it is now gonna cost you 2 big bets to see the river or 3-1 on your odds. Now you have to fold because your not getting the proper odds to make the call. There is a theory for implied pot odds that says you could make this call so if you do hit the flush on the river, your oppenents will call your bets on the end to make it a correct call at the turn. Lee Jones will make it a lot more clearer hopefully than I did but this is a start.
Tighten up your game so you dont get into kicker trouble. Pay attention to how much money is in the pot compared to what you have to call. Big pairs in the early positions, none of that big little crap like A 3, even if its suited. You can play a little looser in the late positions but when the flop comes and you dont get much of it fold your hand.
Ex. You play A 3 spades on the button because there are 6 people in the pot and you will make 7. You know that if you can pick up the flush draw with that many people in you will have the odds you need to continue. But if the flop comes J clubs 3 diamonds 2 spades and theres a bet in front of you and then a raise, dont fool yourself. You did not hit the flop. The pair of threes suck you dont go runner runner for the spade draw. Just fold the hand knowing that you saved a lot of money by not chasing the draw or the Ace.
Like I said this will get you started to plugging some of your leaks but Winning at Low Limit Hold Em is the plumber your looking for. Let us know in a month or so how its going and what you think of the book. Good Luck.

[DonkeyKong]

dude, at low level limits like that (where 4-8 see the flop), top pair/terrible kicker is not a profitable hand to continue with. Paying off a AJ is like just writing him a check... if there are lots of callers, you will need to make 3 of a kind, straights and flushes and 2 pair -- not top pair/no kicker... I strongly recommend Small Stakes Hold 'Em by Ed Miller. Hold Em Poker for Advanced Players and Theory of Poker (both by Sklansky) are both excellent but are not targeted for micro limits so while useful -- I would read SSH 2 or 3 times first...

[Scavengerfolk]

Sure, pot odds are very important and mastering them will make you a winning player at low-limit limit hold 'em.

I think you should stick to limit hold 'em (and other limit poker games) while you are developing a "feel for the game".

"Feel for the game" is another way of saying "implied odds." The real key to winning NL Hold 'em is by mastering implied odds, or how much you're bet or hand is going to make you if...

If what? Well, if he folds, if she calls, if he folds, if I make my flush, if he makes his flush...

PS: Not that one example defines your play but it does sound like you need to be much tighter and much more patient to win at NL.

[Louie Landale]

Presuming the opponents are betting close or bigger than the size of the pot: In NL, even calling with flush draws isn't that great, unless you can win a big bet AFTER you make the flush.

Sounds like you are calling way too much. If you have A3 flop AT4 and someone bets the flop, you are in pretty bad shape with A3. If they bet again on the turn you can only beat a stone-cold-bluff. If you routinely call in that spot then you are dead meat. A much better way to play the hand, other than of course to fold, is to RAISE the flop. You end up putting in about the same amount of money, plus he may lay down AJ.

In PotLimit where folks bet the pot, everyone is getting 2:1 to call heads-up. Its similar in NL, sometimes better sometimes worse. Implied odds are much more important, where you figure to win (or perhaps lose) a big bet later in the hand.

Straight draws are probably better than flush draws since you are much more likely to get paid off (everyone sees the flush draw).

Your session win-rate is NOT directly correlated to your overall win rate. I win about 50% of the time but my wins are a lot bigger than my losses. More conservative folks win more often, but probably not as much.

- Louie

[Steve Chase]

Thanks. This makes a lot sense for me.
I just bought SSH book and will read it soon

[ACW]

You've had some good advice here, and the bit about not playing Ace-rag will serve you well. If you do ever find yourself playing that hand (e.g. free from the big blind!), I find a useful way to handle it is to imagine it as second pair top kicker. In other words, you'll fold it to a bet, but might try a bet if it gets checked around on the flop and the turn blanks. If you're playing it in late position (perhaps it's suited and there are lots of limpers), a bet is worthwhile if it's checked to you. If you get a caller, be very careful unless the turn pairs your kicker. If you get raised, dump it. If the flop misses your ace and pairs your kicker, the hand is trash.

The only really good thing that ever happens to hands like A3 is if they flop a straight - even then they often get rivered by some loose idiot with a 6!

[Jim C]

Steve.. you said that pots you lose, are big. Is it possible you are giving too much away in implied odds?

IE: If the bunnies make wierd calls, and their card hits, are you gonna have to pay big time?

2nd part of this is ... Are you kicking hard enough preflop?

[Steve Chase]

Thanks.
Here is an example of BIG.
Let's say the pot is $1. Now someone bet $3 after flop. I call. Didn't get my draw on the turn. Now he bets $8. I call. Didn't get my draw on the river. Bet again, I fold.

I guess the problem with me is that I make call decisions based on number of outs. Not on pot odds. I am not a calling station. I never call anything when number of outs is smaller than 10. However, if the number of outs is bigger than 15 (open ended straight plus flush draw, ..etc). I would call no matter what the bet is. I typically play NL Holdem. So you see many big bets include All In bets.

No. I do not use implied pot odds. I just counts number of outs.

Actually, I win more pots than I lose. But my net winning is negative. So I am kind of thinking the reason why I am losing is not apply pot odds to my draws.

My question to your winners is: do you strictly apply pod odds in your plays?
In other word, if you have open ended flush draw plus one overcard, and some one bet All In. You have one card to draw. Will you call?

I only played poker for three month. I only play them online. Never been in a live game. The only live games I see is on TV. But when I watch top players play on TV such as WPT, I don't feel anyone is using any pot odds in their bets.

[DonkeyKong]

You are much better off learning to play limit and then switching to NL. Draws in NL are largely dependent on the size of the bet to you and the size of your opponent's stack... If you are only counting outs, you have no shot at winning at NL. When you get all the fundamentals of limit worked out and start beating it, I would build your bankroll and only play NL after a ton of experience at limit. The two are very different games but learning about the other helps you understand the first better.

[adamstewart]

[ QUOTE ]
I ... have read two books

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
How do I calculate pot odds...?

[/ QUOTE ]

Gezuz, which do books did you read?? Pot odds are CRITICAL.

[DonkeyKong]

>>But when I watch top players play on TV such as WPT, I don't feel anyone is using any pot odds in their bets.>>

oh boy... at least you are coming and asking these questions.

stop playing for real money immediately, read SSH and then play some micro limits for practice and wait until you are consistently winning before moving up. you have zero chance of winning without accurately calculating pot odds and adjusting outs properly given board texture.

[burningyen]

Imagine someone offers you the following proposition: you each bet $1, someone will toss a die and you win the $2 pot if the die shows 5 or 6 and he wins the $2 pot if the die shows 1,2,3 or 4. That's equivalent to how you are currently playing poker. Now imagine the same scenario except the opponent offers to put $10 in the pot, while you still only put in $1. Then the pot odds justify taking the lesser chance of winning.

[dnsthemns]

I agree pot odds are CRITICAL. Moreso in ring games than tourneys though...

[Steve Chase]

Thanks for everyone.

I indeed read two books.
One is Phil's book: Play poker like a pro.
Another is David's book for Tournament Pokers.
Just bought the SSH book by Ed Miller.
I guess this is the right book to read first.

Well, poker is one of my hobbies. My goal is not making money on poker everyday. Otherwise, I will be focused on playing cash limit games. I just enjoy play NL Holdem tourneys.

So I started with Phil's book to know poker rules. I never played any poker until three months ago.
Then started to play tourneys on Pokerstars while I am reading David's book.

My tourney skills are improving, but I cannot make into the final tables. So I start to study leaks in my plays.
I feel I need to know more about rings games so after play tourneys for 2 1/2 month, I just started to play ring games.
I play NLHE rings games for the purpose of improve my tourney skills.

After I played NLHE ring games for a few weeks I realized the importance of Pot Odds. This is why I started this post.
When I play tourneys, I didn't feel pot odds are so important. Maybe I am wrong.

So my questions to your gurus:
1. Should I really play more limit ring games than NL ring games to improve my skills? I feel it is boring to sit at a table waiting for monster cards to come. If I play poker to make a living, I will do that. But as a hobby, I do not want to do that unless it helps me with my skills.
I like NL ring games more since you can play bluffing, trapping, .....etc. You can still have fun if you don't catch good cards.

2. I realized now Pot Odds is very important in ring games.
But is it the same importance as in tourneys?
At later stages of tourneys, I don't see anyone play according to pot odds. Blinds are moving up so fast, you media stacks suddenly become short stacks. You don't have time to wait for a good hand to be in the pot.

Thanks

[CrisBrown]

Hi Steve,

I agree with the others who say you should practice and learn with limit rather than big-bet (PL and NL) poker. While there are significant differences between the two games, and the skills you learn at limit will have to be adjusted for big bet play, you can still work on the key skills in limit games. If you haven't yet, read The Theory of Poker, by David Sklansky. In fact, I'd make that your #1 must-read as a starter. The other books will start to fit into place once you've read that.

Cris

[jason1990]

[ QUOTE ]
I feel it is boring to sit at a table waiting for monster cards to come. If I play poker to make a living, I will do that. But as a hobby, I do not want to do that unless it helps me with my skills.
I like NL ring games more since you can play bluffing, trapping, .....etc. You can still have fun if you don't catch good cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by all this, but it sounds like you're saying you don't want to wait for good starting hands. You just want to jump right into a pot with T4o. Well, I'm definitely no expert, but it seems to me like that's what poker's all about. I read a book in which they said that beginners often want to play many more hands than they should because that's the impression they get from the movies. They see the cowboy strut into town and play poker. He doesn't fold! He's in there playing! How can you win if you fold? Well, we may not like it, but to play successful poker, you must fold a lot. In some sense, poker is a game of patience. Wait...wait...wait...then be aggressive! Then wait some more... If that's not appealing to you, perhaps you might enjoy a different hobby.

[Michael Davis]

"if there are lots of callers, you will need to make 3 of a kind, straights and flushes and 2 pair -- not top pair/no kicker... I strongly recommend Small Stakes Hold 'Em by Ed Miller. Hold Em Poker for Advanced Players and Theory of Poker (both by Sklansky) are both excellent but are not targeted for micro limits so while useful -- I would read SSH 2 or 3 times first..."

I really hate this piece of advice, it is so smarmy. I'm going to throw it right back at you, though.

-Michael

[Michael Davis]

He will probably do worse in the long run if he folds top pair in multiway pots with no good reason to do so than if he can't accurately adjust his number of outs based on the texture of the board.

-Michael

[garyc8]

Don't start with Ed Miller. You need the basics first. Someone suggested Lee Jones. This is a good plan. Also consider Hold'em Poker (David Sklansky). I'd also consider Theory of Poker before moving on to Ed Miller. Hold'em Poker for Advanced Players (S&M) is also a must at some point. Anything from 2+2 should be helpful after that.

I'd stay away from NL for now. If you're chasing a lot of draws and playing "kicker school" hands (A3 /images/graemlins/crazy.gif) in a NL game, you're in way over your head. No offense meant. Just trying to help. Start with low limit structured games.

[BlueBear]

Knowing your pot odds is very very important in all forms of poker as many close decisions can be decided by a sound knowledge of it. That aside, **generally** playing top pair with a poor kicker in a full table game (NL or limit) is usually suicide and it's best not to navigate the murky waters with such marginal holdings.

[DonkeyKong]

<<He will probably do worse in the long run if he folds top pair in multiway pots with no good reason to do so than if he can't accurately adjust his number of outs based on the texture of the board.>>

You may be right. When an Ace flops, I don't have to come up with a reason to stay or fold because I won't be playing A3 in the first place. But rather than label my post smarmy, why don't you add some value re pot odds or multiway pots Mr Poohbah?

A3 is one of the most unprofitable hands played at pokerroom.com (149th/169) so clearly, a lot of people are overplaying this hand... so why you would say that playing top pair (in this case A3) is better than something else and then offering no other value is what is smarmy...

comment on the content and teach me and others something, don't hate the player by calling it smarmy... very weak posts bro...

[chaz64]

I've read both Hellmuth's book and Jones book. Jones' is a MUCH better book for a beginner IMHO, and I would agree that one should play limit before NL.

Please don't play A-2 thru A-5 unless

A. You're in the blinds and can see a cheap flop

B. They're suited and you're on or near the button.

And, you don't really want top pair with this hand because someone will have you outkicked. You're hoping for two pair, trips (with your kicker, not the ace), or better with this hand, or the nut flush if its suited.

Oh, and don't play A6o ever, I hate that hand.

[burningyen]

[ QUOTE ]
When I play tourneys, I didn't feel pot odds are so important. Maybe I am wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you are wrong. Especially early on in tourneys, pot odds are critical. They are still important in the later stages but have to be balanced against other factors.

[ QUOTE ]
I feel it is boring to sit at a table waiting for monster cards to come. If I play poker to make a living, I will do that. But as a hobby, I do not want to do that unless it helps me with my skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waiting for good cards (you don't have to wait for "monster" cards, but A3 is trash in most situations) will make you a better poker player. Playing poker well involves lots and lots of patience. It's not as action-packed as you see on TV, where they edit the tourneys down to the most dramatic hands. If you won't enjoy playing well, then you should either take up a different hobby or just enjoy being a losing player. There's no shame in that, by the way.

[ QUOTE ]
At later stages of tourneys, I don't see anyone play according to pot odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you say that if you don't understand pot odds?

[ QUOTE ]
Blinds are moving up so fast, you media stacks suddenly become short stacks. You don't have time to wait for a good hand to be in the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but this has nothing to do with pot odds. What you're noticing is that starting hand standards drop as the blind pressure increases. To be honest, I have trouble believing you read a Sklansky book on tournament poker without understanding this topic. I don't mean to sound harsh, but you come here for advice, people offer it, and then you dismiss it as boring and too serious for a hobbyist.

[Steve Chase]

Donkey, your advise is valuable. Always appreciated.

However, I do not agree with your point on A3.
Yes, A3 is not a very good hand if you play tight and you are in a limit ring game. However, my interest is in NL tournament. People are more aggressive in NL tournament.
When blinds are moving up fast in late stage of a tournament (often half of players have stacksless than 5xBB). You cannot afford to wait for a good hand like AQ to be in a pot.

A3 may not win you a lot pots but when it wins, it can win you a lot of chips. An afterflop AA can win big from guys who have KK or QQ preflop.

[Michael Davis]

First off, "Pooh Bah" status just means that I have too much time on my hands, not that I have anything to offer.

Secondly, I obviously do not support playing A3. However, if you for whatever reason are in a hand with A3, as will sometimes happen on the blinds or when your hand was suited, then flopping an ace has made your hand a TON stronger than A3 preflop. You cannot routinely fold because you have no kicker.

Finally, I only identified part of your post as smarmy, the part where you recommend the OP reread SSH. I hate this line and I cringe every time someone uses "reread TOP" in lieu of giving actual advice or reasons. Furthermore, I believe in your post, you seriously mischaracterized the advice in SSH by telling the OP that in multiway pots he needs two pair or better to have a real hand. This is not true, and SSH does not say this; in fact, if one were to credit SSH with one specific thing, it is eliminating this type of thinking prevalent in other "weak-tight" poker books.

Anyways, I honestly don't even remember what the original post was about. Your assertion that one must be able to figure out odds and count outs is completely correct, but I think you general advice that one should devalue one pair hands is wrong, or at the very least dangerous.

Sorry if I offended. You are a good man and I hope you stick around the forums even if some dick like me sometimes gets out of line.

-Michael

[CrisBrown]

Hi Michael,

[ QUOTE ]
Finally, I only identified part of your post as smarmy, the part where you recommend the OP reread SSH. I hate this line and I cringe every time someone uses "reread TOP" in lieu of giving actual advice or reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

You weren't talking to me, but I'd said the same thing (i.e.: "read The Theory of Poker"), so I guess I'll respond. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Yes, I agree that, in general, this is horrible advice. To someone who's read the book(s) and is trying to clarify and apply what he's read, obviously, specific advice is better than "go read it again."

In this case, however, Steve seems really and truly lost. He's said what books he's read, and my instinct is that he doesn't have enough of the fundamentals in place to really grasp what he's reading. That's why I recommended that he read The Theory of Poker first, so he can groove in those fundamentals.

I'd considered giving some more specific advice, and realized that anything I wrote would be basically an attempt to summarize The Theory of Poker anyway. Rather than give him what might be a bad summary, I felt it'd be better for him to just order and read the book. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Cris

[DonkeyKong]

cool post Michael, cool... your original post sucked because it wasn't clear what was smarmy. in retrospect you are right, my post re SSH wasn't all that good. you are right that getting players off weak-tight was a core message of that book. in my opinion, you should have explained why or been clearer on where you were challenging my post. I am here to learn so being forced to explain myself helps me understand these concepts better.

on the other hand, my comment regarding board texture is entierly consistent with the book.

let's discuss the issue at hand rather than any more smarmy comments...

quoting SSH, bottom of p 118, "A/images/graemlins/heart.gif4/images/graemlins/heart.gif on a flop of A/images/graemlins/club.gifT/images/graemlins/spade.gif9/images/graemlins/club.gif. This is a poor hand. You have top pair, but no kicker. Unless you spike a 4, you can do no better than tie against another ace. The two high cards (T and 9) are dangerous. Even if no one else has an ace, many people are likely to have bottom or middle pair, or a straight or a flush draw. In a multiway pot there could be several opponents with good draws. You will win the whole pot only rarely; usually you will be beaten or tied at the river."

My original point was simply that a coordinated board in a multiway pot devalues your pair considerably to the point of folding. Whereas an uncoordinated board like A/images/graemlins/spade.gif9/images/graemlins/heart.gif2/images/graemlins/club.gif is a pot to stay engaged. (note that this example is quite different than A3o as the back-door flush draw "sometimes makes the difference between a profitable and an unprofitable hand" pg 119)...

[Felipe]

I feel it is boring to sit at a table waiting for monster cards to come. If I play poker to make a living, I will do that. But as a hobby, I do not want to do that unless it helps me with my skills.


<font color="red"> Hello! </font> Looks to me you are more interested in the fun aspect, than the winning money and making profit side of playing poker. If you want to have just fun, why post questions on this forum? WIth all respect, post questions that will aid you in winning money. Patient players take money from the impatient players. Remember that.

[onegymrat]

Hi Steve,

Poker is a game of strategy and mathematics. You need to master both. Therefore, pot odds is essential.

[lastchance]

[ QUOTE ]
Donkey, your advise is valuable. Always appreciated.

However, I do not agree with your point on A3.
Yes, A3 is not a very good hand if you play tight and you are in a limit ring game. However, my interest is in NL tournament. People are more aggressive in NL tournament.
When blinds are moving up fast in late stage of a tournament (often half of players have stacksless than 5xBB). You cannot afford to wait for a good hand like AQ to be in a pot.

A3 may not win you a lot pots but when it wins, it can win you a lot of chips. An afterflop AA can win big from guys who have KK or QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]
In an NL Tourney, people are more aggresive because blinds are worth more. You are always looking to blind-steal. I would steal with A3 from the CO or button many times.

But you can't play A3 out of position. Your KK and QQ point is useless cuz people are much more likely to have AK and AQ than compared to KK and QQ. Either way, when they do reraise back at you with those hands, and they will, you can't call them. You're just giving them your chips, especially to AQ, AK, AJ even. For every time you beat KK and QQ, you're going to lose some, and more, when you lose to two pair, straight and flush draws making it, and when you get outkicked. AA3 is just not a hand you want to be value betting to the end.

In No-Limit tourneys, you can't play A3 because of how strong it is, but because of POSITION. In No-Limit HE Tourneys, Position will allow you to steal a lot. You must look to pick up blinds uncontested.

You're looking to play certain types of hands. Two Big cards, pocket pairs, AX suited, and suited connectors.

After the flop, you're looking for an OESD/flush draw or better (throw in two overcards, etc), stealing, check-folding, or you have TP2K or better.

Lastly, read Lee Jones's book, learn to play tight (don't play A3), then read something to the effect of SS, learn to play aggressive, and finally, learn to blind steal.

[fujowpai]

[ QUOTE ]
Donkey, your advise is valuable. Always appreciated.
A3 may not win you a lot pots but when it wins, it can win you a lot of chips. An afterflop AA can win big from guys who have KK or QQ preflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

With 8 other players at the table, there is almost a 2/3 chance someone else is holding an Ace too. Sure, KK may hang on when the Ace hits the board, but you are not the likely beneficiary.