New question on Pot Odds: Sklansky vs. Harrington

[Bill Kolter]

Quick quesiton on calculating pot odds. David Sklansky and Dan Harrington differ on how to calculate pot odds.

In "Theory of Poker," Sklansky includes the call bet in the pot odds numerator. In "Harrington on Hold 'em," Harrington does not.

Example.

$300 pot, $100 to call.

Sklansky: pot odds are $400/$100
Harrington: pot odds are $300/$100.

What is the accepted method of calculating pot odds?

[jojobinks]

seems odd. page #'s please?

[Bill Kolter]

Seemed odd to me, too. I don't have either book with me now, but if you have them, you might check the Sklansky index. As far as Harrington's book, he uses dozens of specific examples. Pretty much any page that has a problem on it (back of the chapters) will show how he calculates them.

Anyway, the question remains: what is the accepted method?

[Robk]

sklansky is correct. try the beginner forum for similar questions.

[David04]

[ QUOTE ]

Anyway, the question remains: what is the accepted method?

[/ QUOTE ]
Harrington's way.

[Geddon]

The "slansky method" is right (you stand to win $400 by betting $100) but are you sure Harrington does it the other way? I'm just starting his book but on page 92 he totals everyone's bets and calls into the pot for calculating odds.

[Robk]

i guess one of us is wrong. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] i think the problem is in the way the poster stated his question.


[ QUOTE ]
$300 dollar pot, $100 to call

[/ QUOTE ]

i assumed this meant someone had bet $100 into a $300 pot. if the $300 dollar figure includes your opponents' $100 bet already im wrong.

[Leo Bello]

The correct method is to calculate:
The total pot to the moment including the bet u have to call (meaning the value from your opponent) : the amount u have to call.

On the flop, POT TOTAL 300.
Player A Bets: 100

Player B ODDS: 400 : 100 4:1

He must call 100 to win the 400 already in the pot.

[Bill Kolter]

I can certainly check it again, but I've read dozens of problems in the book and continually run into wording along these lines: (not a quote, just an example).

"If there is $300 in the pot, and it will cost you $100 to call, you stand to gain a $300 reward for a $100 bet, so you pot odds are 3-1." Note that he is talking about a player considering making a $100 bet into a pot that already has $300 into it. I interpret this as a $300 pot that will have $400 in it AFTER the call; hence, 4-1, as I have always understood it, as as Sklansky explains it.

Anyway, the consensus on this thread seems to be that the $100 you put in to call counts in the pot odds numerator, which is what I had always thought.

But I see your point: when a shlub like me asks the question, "Who's wrong: Sklansky or Harrington?" the correct answer MUST be: "It must be you."

Thanks to all for the input.

[stenaf]

That shouldn't be the general consensus, as it's wrong.

Please refer to a page in ToP where this is the case please. On page 36, this part of a sentance can be read "... you would be correct to call a $10 bet when the pot is $50 since your chanse of making the flush or the straight is better than 5-1".

You put $10 to win $50. Not $10 to win $50+$10. You don't win your own money, kind of.