In reading The Theory of Poker, Small Stakes Poker and others there seems to be some ambiguity regarding Pot Odds (or at least it’s unclear to me). I had a couple of fundamental questions that I’m sure someone can clear up for me. The first is quite simple, the second is more cumbersome. Please help a new guy out!
First, do you include your bet in the pot figure? For instance, if the pot sits at $50, the bet to you is $10, and you intend to call (and close betting for the round), are the pot odds 5 to 1 or 6 to 1? In this case your additional $10 brings the pot up to $60. This is so basic, but I seem to see both methods mentioned in different places.
Second, when calculating pot odds for a call, and then someone raises behind you, are your pot odds thereafter calculated on a cumulative basis for that round? For instance, when it comes back around to you, and say you intend to call the raise, are the odds based on the sum of both of your calls? The Theory of Poker at pg. 41 seems to state pretty clearly that it is cumulative, but what about the argument that once your money is in the pot it’s dead and you shouldn’t consider it?
I can see a rationale for either approach. On the one hand, your earlier call is already in the pot and the only question at hand is whether to call the latest raise – which will almost always be giving improved pot odds (unless it was raised and re-raised once or more). This would lead to very rarely calling an original bet but then folding in the face of a subsequent raise in the same round.
But perhaps, TOP is just saying when making the FIRST call and you KNOW a raise will come behind then you should factor it in, in which case you may be advised to just fold on the first call. But are they saying once you are raised behind that you should calculate pot odds based on both of your calls (which would likely decrease pot odds), and thereby lead to more situations in which you might call a bet only to fold to a subsequent raiser in the same round?
Also, if pot odds are to be calculated cumulatively, then doesn’t this undercut the rationale that you hurt opponents behind you more if you raise right after the player to your right has bet (since subsequent betters have to call 2 bets at worse pot odds). This seems logical, however, if you calculate pot odds cumulatively, why would it matter if the original better was to your right or to your left when you raised the bet? Because even if the better was to your left and you raised when it came around to you, the subsequent better would only be calling 1 additional bet on that very call, but it would still be the 2 bets for the overall round.
Hopefully this is clear enough. These seem like very basic principles, but surprisingly, I can't seem to find crystal clear explanations in the texts I have seen.
Thanks much for any input,
Darren