[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
While in the 'incorrect' definition, with a similar case, the reason I would bet out in this situation (assuming everyone calls) is because my hand equity of 35% is greater than my 10% pot equity and therefore gives me a 25% edge. But isn't this example just a more proactive version of implied odds?

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason why this is an incorrect way to calculate pot equity is because it ignores the size of the pot.

For example, lets say that you have a 5% make a winning hand on the river and there are ten players in the hand. Should you call a bet? Using this incorrect definition, you should fold, because your "hand equity" is 5% but your "pot equity" is 10%. But the truth is that if the pot is larger than 20x the size of the bet, then of course you should call. Since this definition ignores the size of the pot, it is an incorrect calculation.

Implied odds are totally different. Implied odds are bets that you will win on future streets if you make your hand.