[AaronBrown]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, "losing poker" as you explained it sounds to me like being afraid of what can beat you, rather than looking at what you can win. I already knew I was behind, I was looking at the money I could win.

If someone offered you 10-1 on the fact a six-sided die might roll a 6 on one roll, shouldn't you take it? Sure, it could turn up 1,2,3,4 or 5, but the odds are better than the bet and you should take it(assuming you know the die is fair).

[/ QUOTE ]
No, by "losing poker" I meant that if you applied the same reasoning in many hands, you would lose more than you would win. It's not quite the same thing as implied pot odds, because that only considers the one hand. A play can have a negative expected value for the one hand, but earn it back later in its effect on your opponents. The traditional bluff is an example of that, although some theorists like Sklansky say even a bluff should have a positive expected value for the hand.

Yes, I would take 10-1 on a fair die coming up 6. I didn't enumerate the ways you could lose to suggest you fold, I meant it to be a rough calculation of implied pot odds. By calling you could lose small (fold after the flop), win big (hit the flop and rake in a big pot) or lose big (hit the flop and still lose). I agree with you that you had a decent probability of a big win, and that made up for the larger probability of a small loss. My point was the possibility of a big loss, in my opinion, tips the scales against this play. You got a flop among the best possible for you, and still had only a moderate positive expectation. I would have called knowing I would get this flop, but considering all the flops that you would fold, I think the implied pot odds were against you.

But it's not an exact science, you could well be right. After all, you were at the table and I wasn't. You know the players and the game. You might be a much better poker player who can make money in situations I can't. That would make your implied pot odds better than mine in this situation.

I suspect from your post that you like to play situations with lots of unknowns. I respect that. Lots of otherwise good players shy away from these, so there's money to be made. I know good players who don't mind getting in with the odds a little against them if there are lots of possibilities, figuring that in a wide-open situation, their playing skills will make up the deficit.

I don't think I'm afraid of such situations, although you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't seek them out either. I prefer to seek advantage in other ways.