Question from the book "Small Stake's Hold'em"

[jcg]

I just started reading the book and have a question on how the bets are calculated. On page 86 the example shows 10.5 small bets, but to me it looks like 21 small bets (and 10.5 big bets). Is this just a typo or am I doing the math wrong.

jcg

[Jim Shears]

Looks correct to me.

UTG 1 bet +
Limper 1 bet +
MP 2 bet +
Button 3 bet +
SB 1/2 bet +
BB 3 bet =
10.5 SB

[jcg]

OK, I get it now. I was doing an example with $2/$4 bets and it came out to $21, but I see that I have to divide that by $2 to normalize to small bets. Thanks.

jcg

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, I get it now. I was doing an example with $2/$4 bets and it came out to $21, but I see that I have to divide that by $2 to normalize to small bets. Thanks.

jcg

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see why you ever used big bets at all.
That example is completely preflop and uses only small bets.

[jcg]

I have another question on the example used on page 108. I see pre flop that we are at 10 small bets. What does in mean in the next part when they say "big blind calls two cold"? It seems like there are only 3 people in (player to the right, me, big blind) so that there would be 6 big bets? Also isn't the bets supposed to be a running total so the 5 big bets from the pre flop betting need to be added in?

jcg

[Guthrie]

It's still small bets on the flop. The player on your right bets 1 SB. You raise, so now it's 3 SB. The big blind calls, so it's now 5 SB. The player on your right, the original better, calls your raise, so now it's 6 SB. Divide 6 small bets by 2 and you get 3 big bets. Add those to the 5 big bets in the pot and you get 8 big bets.

[jcg]

OK that makes sense. It was just confusing as the author switches to big bets for the total running even though you are still betting small bets. Seems like he should have said the pot was at 16 small bets, and then changed to big bets for the next round.

jcg

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
OK that makes sense. It was just confusing as the author switches to big bets for the total running even though you are still betting small bets. Seems like he should have said the pot was at 16 small bets, and then changed to big bets for the next round.

jcg

[/ QUOTE ]

It IS changed for the next round. He tells you how many BBs it is after the flop action is completed.

I'm honestly not sure what you are asking about the BB calling two cold. He does call two small bets cold. Calling a raise cold means you haven't put any money in on that bettting round and then just call a raise.

You seem to be pretty confused about a lot of things here. I really think you should go back to the beginning of that chapter or perhaps even the whole book and start reading again.

[Dead]

I think he should read WLLH first.

[AKQJ10]

Oops, I misinterpreted Guthrie's reply. But perhaps explaining p. 86 slowly can help the original poster:

"Two loose, passive opponents limp,..."

So now there are four players with chips in the betting area in front of them: two limpers, the big blind, and the small blind.

"and you raise."

Now there are five players with bets in front of them: two limpers, "me", and the two blinds. I have two bets in front of me, the small blind has half a bet in front of her, and the other three have one bet in front of them. Those last four have yet to decide to call my raise.

"The blinds and the limpers call."

The small blind calls 1.5 additional small bets. The big blind calls 1 additional small bet. Still five players in the pot:

/images/graemlins/diamond.gif The 2 limpers who each called a second bet.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif The reader, who's on the button.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif The small blind, who called an additional 1.5 bets.
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif The big blind, who called an additional 1.0 bets.

"(10 small bets)."

That makes sense -- five stayed in for two bets a piece; that would make ten small bets.

Now on the flop, three players are in for two more small bets: The bettor, the raiser ("me"), and the big blind who called two cold. That makes six more small bets on this round, or 16 small bets total. Because small bets are useless as a unit of measurement once the turn card is dealt, Ed reports this as "8 big bets".

Does this make it any clearer? I can see how this might get confusing if you thought the limpers and the blinds were the same people, but "limp" means to call the unraised big blind from a non-blind position.

That said, I agree with the assessment that the OP should go read Jones' book before Miller's.