Effective Odds Examples

QTip · #1 06-15-2005, 03:51 PM

While reading "The 8 Mistakes in Poker", I noticed in Mistake #3 that this mistake in often made in the early found of betting because players don't understand the concept of effective odds. This mistake was mentioned in the summary of the article as being quite costly in comparison to those mistakes that don't cost you the pot.

Now, I understand the concept of effective odds; however, I'm not thinking about them much during play. Maybe this thought crosses my mind about once every 10K hands or so...but I think that I should be considering it more.

This isn't a term that I see in these boards much, and I remember maybe 4 months ago someone pointing out that fact as well.

So, what I would like to see is if we (as a group) can come up with some hand examples where understanding effective odds would stop us from making mistake #3 "Calling When You Should Fold".

Anyone have one to share and/or discuss?

flair1239 · #2 06-15-2005, 04:10 PM

This post if the pot were smaller

Basically the times when I am thinking of "effective odds" are when I have a weak made hand, that may be best, but has little hope of improvement.

I think this concept and reverse implied odds are simaliar.

For instance in the post referenced above I was getting 9-1 (if you ignore the possibility of being beaten by the all-in) to call the checkraise. However my effective odds were only 10-2, because I would most likely have to call another bet on the river.

I think another place they come into play a lot is defending against a blind steal. For instance in the BB you call a steal w/33. On the flop if you check and the stealer bets, you are getting 5.5-1 on your call.

However assuming that he will fire the whole way you effective odds are more like 1.9-1.

I might be mixing the two a bit, but they are closely related.

QTip · #3 06-15-2005, 04:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I might be mixing the two a bit, but they are closely related.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are...but, I may be wrong as well.

When I think of effective odds, I don't really think of made hands. I think of drawing hands....I'm chasing something. It may look like I have the odds to chase, but if I take later streets into account.

I think where they do start to get "fuzzy" is when you think about the fact that the hand you're drawing to may end up losing anyway.

When I look at the hand you posted, I don't really see effective odds playing a big role in it. Again, I may be wrong.

I guess what this reply really shows is that I'm a bit "fuzzy" on my comprehension of this topic anyway, which is why I have to keep saying "I may be wrong"...probably the explanation why I'm not thinking about this concept often.

And...many times when I do think about it, it's after a hand is over, and I'm thinking about it while I'm screwing up the next one. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

QTip · #4 06-15-2005, 04:30 PM

Hero limps UTG with Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]J [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

An MP player limps, the button raises, BB calls, and hero and limper call.

Flop: T [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] A [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

BB bets, Hero?

bigalt · #5 06-15-2005, 04:30 PM

are we not compensating for effective odds when we're discounting outs?

brick · #6 06-15-2005, 04:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Basically the times when I am thinking of "effective odds" are when I have a weak made hand, that may be best, but has little hope of improvement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a "weak made hand, that may be best, but has little hope of improvement"?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=1#Post2645006

QTip · #7 06-15-2005, 04:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Basically the times when I am thinking of "effective odds" are when I have a weak made hand, that may be best, but has little hope of improvement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a "weak made hand, that may be best, but has little hope of improvement"?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=1#Post2645006

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this has to do with effective odds as much as it does reverse implied odds.

QTip · #8 06-15-2005, 04:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
are we not compensating for effective odds when we're discounting outs?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I think that has more to do with reverse implied odds.

I keep saying this in this thread, and I may be off, but I don't think I am.

Edit: or reverse domination is probably the better concept when discounting odds actually....not reverse implied odds.

brick · #9 06-15-2005, 04:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think this has to do with effective odds as much as it does reverse implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain the difference or point me in the right direction?

thejameser · #10 06-15-2005, 04:37 PM

to me, when taking effective odds into account it essentially consists of trying to predict what the future rounds of betting are really going to cost me to draw to my hand. i may be getting what seem to be profitable odds on the flop, but if it is raised after i call, or if it is raised on later streets, these all affect your effective odds because they increase your investment in the pot(worsening your pot odds)to the point it may prove to be long term loss while initially taking only the flop bet odds into account, it seems justified. it has been a while since i read HEPFAP so i am a little fuzzy and i am at work so i cannot reference. currently i'm in the middle of rereading the best poker book of all time TOP but i was reviewing HEPFAP the other day on the throne and it got me to thinking about how effective odds are rarely discussed on this forum, and yet they essentially dictate what our true potential for profit or loss on an unmade hand will be based on what we must actually pay to see it to the end.