11-24-2005, 09:03 PM
Hello everybody!
I'm reading Theory of Poker by David Sklansky and I didn't understood one concept about efective odds.
Here is the scenario: You have a back-door flush drawn in hold'em and an opponent bets $10 in a $250 pot.
Pot odds: 26 - 1
Odds of making the flush: 24-1
Then, Mr. Sklansky says:
"One out of 25 times you will win $260 in there, plus probaly another $40 on the last two rounds of betting. Twenty times you will lose only $10 when your first card does not hit, and you need not call another bet. But the remaining four times you will lose a total of $30 each time when you first cards hit and you call your opponent's $20 bet, and your second card does not hit. Thus, after 25 such hands, you figure to lose $320 while winning $300 for a net loss of $20"
OK, but, if my odds to get flush card are about 4-1 each round how i'll miss the first card TWENTY times in 24?
I'm reading Theory of Poker by David Sklansky and I didn't understood one concept about efective odds.
Here is the scenario: You have a back-door flush drawn in hold'em and an opponent bets $10 in a $250 pot.
Pot odds: 26 - 1
Odds of making the flush: 24-1
Then, Mr. Sklansky says:
"One out of 25 times you will win $260 in there, plus probaly another $40 on the last two rounds of betting. Twenty times you will lose only $10 when your first card does not hit, and you need not call another bet. But the remaining four times you will lose a total of $30 each time when you first cards hit and you call your opponent's $20 bet, and your second card does not hit. Thus, after 25 such hands, you figure to lose $320 while winning $300 for a net loss of $20"
OK, but, if my odds to get flush card are about 4-1 each round how i'll miss the first card TWENTY times in 24?