The 2-to-1 Pot Odds Rule

[EasilyFound]

I'm mostly thinking about No Limit tournament play, but I guess the rule applies across the board for Hold'em.

If you are getting 2-to-1 pot odds to call a preflop all-in raise by your opponent (let's say you raise preflop, and are re-raised all-in by a shorter stack), is it correct to say that the price is right here to call and see five cards?

I ask because I saw the most recent episode of WPT, and a hand came up where the button raised, was re-raised, and getting 2-to-1 to call. Sexton was surprised the button folded, despite crappy hand, becasue the button was getting more than 2-to-1 to call.

And, if the price is right to call in that situation, does the same rule apply if the re-raiser is not all-in and has a deep stack? Are the 2-to-1 pot odds a good price to see a flop or no?

[TheShootah]

You shouldn't really try to generalize this in my opinion. Let's say you have 88, and you raise, and a really tight player reraises, giving you two to one. Let's say the last three times he has done this, he has shown down a big pair. Of course you would want about 4 or 4.5 to 1 to make that call, because you are pretty sure your opponent has a bigger pair. On the other, lets say a short stack reraises you, giving you 2 to 1, and you have that same hand. You should probably make the call, because the range of hands that he will move in with is much larger, and you have most of them beat, some really badly. So it really depends on who does it, what the situation is, how many people are in the pot, etc. You can work it out mathematically whether you should call or not if you are good enough. It's in Harrington on Hold em, and also, the analysis at the table section in The Theory of Poker covers things like this as well. Basically, you determine the range of hands this guy could have, and then assign probabilities to each. Then you multiply that probability (in percents) and the percent that you beat him with that hand together. After you do that for all the ranges of hands, you add all those together to get a final percentage. You convert that to ratios, and you know whether or not you are getting a good price or not. Buy Harrington on Hold Em.

[elmitchbo]

i don't think 2 to 1 is enough to call with just anything. if you already raised i guess it means you have something descent. i think it is a little bit player dependent as well. if he's really tight and you're not holding much... it might be hard to pull the trigger.

then again, maybe i'm too tight. i don't mind pushing all in, but i don't like calling an all in without a solid hand, even at 2 to 1 odds.

[TheShootah]

I just did a basic calculation for you, against the tight player. Lets say that you estimate 30% of the time he will have something like AJ, AK, AQ, etc, that you are a 55% favorite to beat him. All the rest (70%) he has you beat with a bigger pair. He never bluffs, so:

.30 * .55 = .165
.70 * .12 = .084 ----> .165 + .084 ~ .25

So you win 25% of the time (3 to 1) So that is what you need to be getting to call this guy down. Poker should never be generalized, because it's just too situation specific. Hope I helped....

[johnc]

This may be shooting from the hip but I would personally apply the the gap theory here. You must have a better hand to call a raise or all-in, taking into consideration to stack size of the all-in, than you would to raise. How wide that gap is depends on your opponent and their standards of play. Tight players I would personally fold a hand like 88, due to likelyhood of big pairs or domination. Looser players, the gap narrows so your call may be justified. My 2 cents.

[RobGW]

The 2:1 rule only applies when your opponent is all in. When he is that short he should be pushing with a wide range of hands not just high PP.

[TheShootah]

This makes no sense. There is no 2:1 rule. Frankly, that is just dumb.

[grimel]

I THINK I saw the episode in question.

As I understood Sexton, with the size of the short stack's raise (1 or 2 BB's with the blinds coming), the size of the folder's stack, the size of the pot, and the chance to eliminate a competitor 2:1 was good enough price to call.

The SS was going to be forced all-in withing the next 2 hands, thus his current hand was "any 2 random cards" making the crappy hand of the folder much less crappy.

[EasilyFound]

Exactly. The rule applies really only to tournament play and calling short stacks who are on the verge of blinding out and push all-in.

[spentrent]

[ QUOTE ]
This makes no sense. There is no 2:1 rule. Frankly, that is just dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Go take this statement to the 1-table Tournaments (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=singletable) forum and see what happens. Really, try it. I'm as interested as you should be in that potential thread.

I'm thinking that the OP wants to apply tournament strategy to ring game strategy, which MAY be where the "rule" breaks since a player has no survival instinct that would force him to raise trash on a steal.

[EasilyFound]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm thinking that the OP wants to apply tournament strategy to ring game strategy, which MAY be where the "rule" breaks since a player has no survival instinct that would force him to raise trash on a steal.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are correct my friend. The "rule" really only applies to tournament play and calling blind stealers. Doesn't apply to ring games.