Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

Extra step. I'm sure you are lightning fast going from % to odds to Pot odds but if someone is just learning, wouldn't you suggest the most efficient method?

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

Each out is 2% for the next card, or 4% for the next 2 cards

I thought I was SOOOO slick for inventing this very good approximation myself, just based on a chart I have in a book [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I know of that one.

That is the ghetto way to do it. Plus, you're left with percentages, which is no good. It's better to know if you're getting 8 to 1 or 5 to 1, etc.

Here's a better, more precise way.

On the flop take your outs (we'll use a flush draw with one overcard as an example) and subtract them from the 47 unseen cards remaining (you have 2 in your hand and 3 on the flop (52-5=47)


So you have 12 outs in this example. 47-12 = 35

So there are 35 cards that won't help your hand on the next card and 12 that will, so 35/12 = 2.9 or about 3 to 1 to call.


On the turn you do the same calculations except you now subtract your outs from the 46 unseen cards.

These are of course, the odds of hitting your card on the NEXT street. But to decide your odds of completing by the river from the flop just take the 3 to 1 and divide by 2 and you will hit your flush or overcard 1.5 to 1 on the next two cards to come.

[/ QUOTE ]

isn't this the lee jones way? i have always found the lee jones way to be faster and more effective then the SSHE method

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

I think it's important to understand the statistics behind it first. Once you know that then you can use shortcuts (I've noticed - so far - that poker books don't give the statistics formu1as).

The samp1e size for turn+river is 2. Because there is no rep1acement, we use the hypergeometric formu1a. So, prob of at 1east one other diamond on turn and river (if 4 diamonds have shown up before) is:

(38) (9) (38) (9)
(1) (1) + (0) (2)
__________________
(47)
(2)

A bit crude I know - the parantheses are supposed to cover each pair (top/bottom) to represent combination. Formu1a for combination is (r!)/k!(r-k)!.

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

"It is very difficult to calculate the exact odds of hitting a drawing hand when you're sitting at the poker table. Unless you're a genius with a gift for mathematics like Chris Ferguson, you will not be able to do it. That leaves two options for the rest of us: The first option is to sit at home with a calculator, figure out the odds for every possible combination of draws, and then memorize them. That way, no matter what situation comes up, you always know the odds. But for those of us without a perfect memory, there's an easier way. Here is a simple trick for estimating those odds.

The first thing you need to do is to figure out how many "outs" you have. An "out" is any card that gives you a made hand. To do this, simply count the number of cards available that give the hand you are drawing to. For example: suppose you hold Ac 8c and the flop comes Qh 9c 4c. You have a flush draw. There are thirteen clubs in the deck and you are looking at four of them -- the two in your hand, and the two on the board. That leaves nine clubs left in the deck, and two chances to hit one.


The trick to figuring out the approximate percentage chance of hitting the flush is to multiply your outs times the number of chances to hit it. In this case that would be nine outs multiplied by two chances, or eighteen. Then take that number, multiply times two, and add a percentage sign. The approximate percentage of the time you will make the flush is 36%. (The exact percentage is 34.97%.) Now let's say that on that same flop you hold the Jd Th. In this case you would have an open ended straight draw with eight outs to hit the straight (four kings and four eights). Eight outs with two cards to come gives you sixteen outs. Multiply times two and you will hit the straight approximately 32% (31.46% exactly) of the time.

One important thing to keep in mind is that the percentage stated is merely the percentage of the time that you will hit the hand you are drawing to, NOT the percentage of time that you will win the pot. You may hit your hand and still lose. In the first example, the Qc will pair the board and may give somebody a full house. In the second example both the Kc and the 8c will put a possible flush on the board, giving you the straight, but not necessarily the winning hand. Still, knowing the approximate likelihood of making your hand is a good beginning step on the road to better poker. "

-Clonie Gowen

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

all too hard whilst playing plenty of tables

i multiply my odds by my outs - the number generated represents a number of cards - if the number is less than 30 on the flop i fold - if its between 30-40 i contemplate my implied odds some more - on the turn it nearly always needs to be around 40 or i fold

same job quicker - at least for me it is

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

EAsy - make a chart that tells you how much has to be in the pot with so many outs.

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

teamfu have a wallpaper with a pot odds chart on it. It's on my desktop, so I slowly absorb it. Now I just have work on not always assuming "plus two or more outs fold equity from my leet skillz"

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

The reason I prefer percentages is because my poker thinking revolves around pot equity and not outs per se. I like knowing, say, that my draw will come in 35% percent of the time because then I know if I'm only putting in 33% of the money I have an edge and should keep playing. This thinking comes more natural to me and is especially useful in multi-way pots.

Re: Easy Way to Estimate Odds from Outs
 

It's only an 'extra step' if you then convert your percentages to odds.. What he's saying, is that there are some people (like myself also) who find it easier just to think in terms of percentages. Perhaps it's the engineering background in me - I don't know. But that's how I function...