Re: Sklansky\'s Implied Odds
4:1 would be 20%, not 25%.
Yup; pot-odds is money in the pot; implied odds is money not yet in the pot. And lets not forget that you must consider that YOU may invest poorly later if YOU make the hand. Drawing to a straight when the opponent already has a flush falls into this category.
Reverse or "bad" implied odds comes into play for good but vulnerable hands. Yes, you may win often enough to justify playing, but you will often have to pay off better hands. Trouble hands fall into this category when someone else raises. KJ may win more often than 87s; but many of those wins and losses feature checking-and-crying-calling on the river.
These reverse-implied odds can and often do turn a call into a fold. But the authors are INCORRECT when they suggest that, once your figure your hand is still worth calling, they should turn a raise or bet into a call or check. No. If you have a favorite hand then bigger pots is good for you now AND reduces the affects of reverse implied odds. Having said that, I think Sklansky came up with a hoplelessly unrealistic pot-limit example where reverse implied odds prevented the favorite from betting; but not from raising.
- Louie
|