Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

On ESPN.com's Poker Club, I read an article by Mr. Phil Gordon. I was outraged and perplexed at his statement, "The concept of pot odds is useless" ("Forget..."). I would like to know if his article that outlines his Break Even Percentage Theory holds any truth. As a reader of Mr. David Sklansky's "The Theory of Poker," I am not ready to dismiss the concept of pot odds.

-Gambler101

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

A link would be nice....

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

[ QUOTE ]
A link would be nice....

[/ QUOTE ]
"Forget pot odds"

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

You are misquoting him. He was mainly talking about taking implied odds also into the equation.

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

Phil's invented a way to turn odds notation into fractions! He's a friggin' genius!

That's all his article is. It should be titled "Pot odds for people who can't turn 4:1 into a percent in their heads." But that's kinda long, even for ESPN.com.

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

I have to admit, I liked this part of the article:

[ QUOTE ]

Beginner

The pot has $20 in it and Phil Hellmuth goes all-in for $30.

1. What are your pot odds?
2. What is your break-even percentage?

Bonus: How many expletives will Philly utter if you suck out and bust him?


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

I really hope all my future opponents fully believe that pot odds are a useless concept [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

Funny, his theory sounds alot like pot odds to me

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

Gordon's concept is nothing but changing odds to percentages. David Sklansky recommended the same in "GETTING THE BEST OF IT".

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

LMFAO That made me laugh!

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

I think the math for that advanced problem was a bit fuzzy.
They said the minimum bet to push him off the pot was 281.25. I found it to be 243.25 .

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

That's because he approximated 9 outs as 18% likely to hit. It should be 9/44=20.45%

BTW, I get $346
This gives him 1346:346 pot odds, or 35:9

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

gordon's just saying that pot odds need to be combined w/your estimate of winning to make a deciison.
nothing too insightful, but consider the person that calls drawing dead because of the "great pot odds" and you understand the need to hihglight the distinction.

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

[ QUOTE ]
On ESPN.com's Poker Club, I read an article by Mr. Phil Gordon. I was outraged and perplexed at his statement, "The concept of pot odds is useless" ("Forget..."). I would like to know if his article that outlines his Break Even Percentage Theory holds any truth. As a reader of Mr. David Sklansky's "The Theory of Poker," I am not ready to dismiss the concept of pot odds.


[/ QUOTE ]
Outraged? I would be thrilled.

Re: Validity of \"Break Even\" Theory
 

he's just making it easier for people with difficulty understanding the whole odd thing by introducing an alternative method to calculating pot odds using percentage.

you make it as if he proved the pot odd concept wrong.

it's not a theory because it's a fact btw.