[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for going to such lengths to put together a clear example. I do now understand it...

[/ QUOTE ]

Big Dave - You’re welcome.

[ QUOTE ]
however it does lead to some counter-intuitive examples. Let me expand on one:

You are first to speak headsup on the turn. You have exactly a pot sized bet left, as does your foe. If you bet, you know 100% your opponent will call. If you check, you know 100% your foe will also bet and you will call. So in the latter case you will be getting 2 to 1 for your money. But in the former you are not???

[/ QUOTE ]

Big Dave - All odds are basically ratios. A ratio is a mathematical concept.

We’re talking about two distinctly different odds concepts, (and therefore two distinctly different ratios): (1) pot odds and (2) new money odds.

Your pot odds here are whatever is in the pot before the betting round plus the amount your opponent contributes this betting round, divided by the amount you put into the pot this betting round. That’s the mathematical concept called pot odds.

Your new money odds are whatever your opponent contributes this betting round, divided by the amount you put into the pot this betting round. That’s the mathematical concept called new money odds (or fresh money odds).

The pot odds in the example you have given are simply not the same as the new money odds in the example. In your example, whether you get your money in first or last, your pot odds are 2 to 1 and your new money odds are 1 to 1.

Maybe the problem is with your usage of the phrase “for your money.” The context in which you’re using “for your money” means “pot odds.”

In my humble opinion, “for your money” can mean either “pot odds” or “new money odds,” depending on whether you're calling a bet or initiating a bet.

Buzz