Why Two Dimes Data Is Wrong (Continued...)

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
But what twodimes does NOT do is translate how much MONEY those portions of pots are worth to you. This is because there is a fixed cost you must pay for the right to earn a portion of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
What you're talking about here is the concept of effective odds, which is applicable to straight high games as well as split games.

There is nothing in the nature of Omaha-8 that makes the twodimes data more "misleading" than it would be for a holdem problem.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But what twodimes does NOT do is translate how much MONEY those portions of pots are worth to you. This is because there is a fixed cost you must pay for the right to earn a portion of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
What you're talking about here is the concept of effective odds, which is applicable to straight high games as well as split games.

There is nothing in the nature of Omaha-8 that makes the twodimes data more "misleading" than it would be for a holdem problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm not referring to effective odds.

I'm referring to the fact that in split pot games you don't get back all the money in put in to call. This is wholly unlike holdem.

ie. let's say its the turn. there are 6 big bets in the pot. you know your opponent has the high side locked up and will check down on the river. you can call 1 big bet for the chance to win low. The holdem, way of thinking would be to say, "I call 1 bet for the chance to win half the pot. the pot is 6, therefore half of 6 is 3. so I'm getting 3:1 pot odds. but that is incorrect. In a split pot game, you'd call that 1 bet making 7 bets in the pot. then you'd get half the pot back or 3.5 bets. then you subtract the 1 bet you put in for 2.5 bets. So you're true odds here are 2.5 to 1, not 3 to 1 as in holdem.

Try this problem out when its heads up on the flop with many bets to come and your opponent is freerolling and you'll see your return is very different than a holdem problem.

the difference is in holdem, if you win you get back the entire amount of money you put in to call. But not so in split pot.

This effect gets larger as more money goes in relative to the existing pot (ie. on earlier streets). This is what i'm referring to.

-g

Actually, I consider the size of the pot *going into* the action on a given street when considering odds. In this case, there must actually be 5 bets in the pot, then you and villain each put in 1. So the obvious math is "I am getting 2.5 (half of 5) bets to my 1." 2.5:1 odds is correct. I would never be so stupid as to watch the opponent put a bet into a 5-bet pot, and assume that I am getting 3:1 odds on that. I also don't think 2dimes encourages this type of thinking, unless the user is very inexperienced.

Now, I don't disagree that this is a non-trivial aspect of split-pot games. However, it should *definitely* not be used as a reason to favor high draws over low draws when the odds are the same.

Also, I agree with you that in situations where there are many bets to come, you have to think carefully, and 2dimes is not the place to go. I have already stated that in this thread, many times.

But that is not what we were ever talking about in the first place; we were talking about two players, each going all-in, in two situations where risk & EV are identical.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
ie. let's say its the turn. there are 6 big bets in the pot. you know your opponent has the high side locked up and will check down on the river. you can call 1 big bet for the chance to win low. The holdem, way of thinking would be to say, "I call 1 bet for the chance to win half the pot. the pot is 6, therefore half of 6 is 3. so I'm getting 3:1 pot odds. but that is incorrect. In a split pot game, you'd call that 1 bet making 7 bets in the pot. then you'd get half the pot back or 3.5 bets. then you subtract the 1 bet you put in for 2.5 bets. So you're true odds here are 2.5 to 1, not 3 to 1 as in holdem.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with you that in this example, drawing to low, you have pot odds of 2.5 to 1. But I don't know what you mean by "the holdem way of thinking". And this example doesn't have anything to do with "why Two Dimes Data is Wrong" (or "misleading" or whatever).

I agree with the idea that in actual play, a chance of scooping is usually worth a bit more than twice the same chance of getting half the pot. But the reason for that is simply the one stated by Mikechops a few posts back: "You are much more likely to drive the betting and win a bigger pot, if you have decent chance to scoop, than if you have a low and are worried about being quartered."

[gergery]

I mean that in ‘the holdem way of thinking’, when you win the pot, you win the whole pot. Essentially, you scoop everytime that you win. But in O8 you don’t.

And it has everything to do with twodimes, because depending on how many bets are still to be put in the pot and how many opponent you have scooping is often worth more than twice splitting and can sometimes be worth as much as 7x more in profit (and that has nothing to do with driving the betting, but instead is due to the fact that every bet you put in will at best return half of it to you).

My point is that how you think about pot odds needs to be very different in O8 than in holdem. In holdem you always get the bets you put in back so its straightforward. Not so in split pot, as half the bet you put in goes to the other guy.
Let's take a simple example. You're the button in a pretty tight game. The cutoff seat immediately to your right bets and you call. The small blind calls and the big blind folds. So there are 7 small bets in the pot. On the flop, the cutoff bets, you call, and SB folds, so there are 9 small bets in the pot. On the turn those 9 small bets equal 4.5 big bets, and cutoff bets and you call so there are 6.5 big bets in the pot. On the river, cutoff bets and you call so there are now 8.5 big bets in the pot. So if you scoop, you win 8.5 big bets, and if you get half, you win 4.25 bets.. Now of those 8.5 big bets in the pot, you put in 2 small bets preflop, 1 small bet on the flop, 1 big bet on the turn and 1 more on the river. That's a total of 3.5 big bets.
So, let's recap:
If you scoop, you win 8.5 big bets, minus the 3.5 big bets you put in yourself, for a profit of 5.0 big bets.
If you split, you win 4.25 big bets, minus the 3.5 big bets you put in yourself, for a profit of 0.75 big bets.
That is a HUGE difference! In that example, scooping is 6 to 7 times more profitable than splitting the pot!!!
If this was holdem, you would be putting in 3.5 big bets for the chance to win 5.0 big bets. But if this is O8 and your opponent was freerolling you, then you’re putting in 3.5 big bets for the chance to win 0.75 bets. Even tho in both of these scenario’s your twodimes equity could be 25%.

-g

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
I mean that in ‘the holdem way of thinking’, when you win the pot, you win the whole pot. Essentially, you scoop everytime that you win. But in O8 you don’t.

[/ QUOTE ]
Obviously.

[ QUOTE ]
And it has everything to do with twodimes, because depending on how many bets are still to be put in the pot and how many opponent you have scooping is often worth more than twice splitting and can sometimes be worth as much as 7x more in profit (and that has nothing to do with driving the betting, but instead is due to the fact that every bet you put in will at best return half of it to you).

[/ QUOTE ]
Twodimes already accounts for this. That's the point that you aren't getting, but I will try to explain by exploring your example.

[ QUOTE ]
My point is that how you think about pot odds needs to be very different in O8 than in holdem. In holdem you always get the bets you put in back so its straightforward. Not so in split pot, as half the bet you put in goes to the other guy.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. Again, this is obvious.

[ QUOTE ]
Let's take a simple example. You're the button in a pretty tight game. The cutoff seat immediately to your right bets and you call.

[/ QUOTE ]
I assume you mean the cutoff raises.

[ QUOTE ]
The small blind calls and the big blind folds. So there are 7 small bets in the pot. On the flop, the cutoff bets, you call, and SB folds, so there are 9 small bets in the pot. On the turn those 9 small bets equal 4.5 big bets, and cutoff bets and you call so there are 6.5 big bets in the pot. On the river, cutoff bets and you call so there are now 8.5 big bets in the pot. So if you scoop, you win 8.5 big bets, and if you get half, you win 4.25 bets.. Now of those 8.5 big bets in the pot, you put in 2 small bets preflop, 1 small bet on the flop, 1 big bet on the turn and 1 more on the river. That's a total of 3.5 big bets.
So, let's recap:
If you scoop, you win 8.5 big bets, minus the 3.5 big bets you put in yourself, for a profit of 5.0 big bets.
If you split, you win 4.25 big bets, minus the 3.5 big bets you put in yourself, for a profit of 0.75 big bets.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, so far.

[ QUOTE ]
That is a HUGE difference! In that example, scooping is 6 to 7 times more profitable than splitting the pot!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
I can see what you mean by this statement but I find it misleading in the context of this discussion because you haven't considered the probability of losing.

[ QUOTE ]
If this was holdem, you would be putting in 3.5 big bets for the chance to win 5.0 big bets. But if this is O8 and your opponent was freerolling you, then you’re putting in 3.5 big bets for the chance to win 0.75 bets. Even tho in both of these scenario’s your twodimes equity could be 25%.

[/ QUOTE ]
What you are overlooking is this: if my "twodimes equity" in both cases is 25%, then in the first case there is a much bigger chance I will lose 3.5 big bets than in the second case.

Let's go back to preflop, before I call my opponent's raise. In Situation A, let's say that someone watching me play the hand somehow knows what the betting action will be throughout the hand and also knows that I have a 25% probability to scoop and a 75% probability to lose (with 0% probability of splitting). Now based on that person's knowledge, what is my EV of playing the hand? 25% of the time I profit 5.0 big bets, and 75% I lose 3.5 big bets, so my EV is -1.375 big bets.

To make this absolutely clear, I arrived at the -1.375 like this:

(0.25 x 5.0) + (0.75 x (-3.5)) = -1.375

Now go to Situation B, where the person observing knows somehow that I have 0% chance to scoop, but a 50% chance to win half the pot and a 50% chance to lose completely. So 50% of the time I win 0.75 big bets and 50% of the time I lose 3.5 big bets. So my EV is:

(0.5 x 0.75) + (0.5 x (-3.5)) = -1.375

So in both situations from your own example my EV is exactly the same: -1.375 big bets.

[Buzz]

Let's go back to Greg's last example, but along a different line.

Flop: 6c 8d Qd
cards scoop HIwin HIlos HItie LOwin LOlos LOtie EV
Ad 2d Kh 3h 205 205 615 0 630 0 0 0.528
6s Tc Td 6d 159 615 205 0 0 0 0 0.472

After this flop, in heads-up limit play, the second hand is stuck in the pot. That's not necessarily true of the first hand.

No diamond flush, no low, no straight, the first hand can bail before the last betting round. But if any of these come in, in heads-up limit play, the second hand is stuck.

It may look like the hands are pretty close but I think you're going to lose a lot less with the first hand.

(This has nothing particularly to do with my suggesting a scoop is worth more than two half pots in a real game. This is a different consideration, but one perhaps worth noting at this time).

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
Let's go back to Greg's last example, but along a different line.

Flop: 6c 8d Qd
cards scoop HIwin HIlos HItie LOwin LOlos LOtie EV
Ad 2d Kh 3h 205 205 615 0 630 0 0 0.528
6s Tc Td 6d 159 615 205 0 0 0 0 0.472

After this flop, in heads-up limit play, the second hand is stuck in the pot. That's not necessarily true of the first hand.

No diamond flush, no low, no straight, the first hand can bail before the last betting round. But if any of these come in, in heads-up limit play, the second hand is stuck.

It may look like the hands are pretty close but I think you're going to lose a lot less with the first hand.

(This has nothing particularly to do with my suggesting a scoop is worth more than two half pots in a real game. This is a different consideration, but one perhaps worth noting at this time).

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[/ QUOTE ]

No one is disputing the fact that some hands have playing advantages on later streets which will make the twodimes equity less important. What people are saying is that if you are all in on a given street then the twodimes equity is all that is important and that it doesn't matter where the equity comes from (splitting, scooping whatever). Of course if there is betting on the later rounds there are implied odds and reverse implied odds which will drastically change the profitability of the hands. The point is that the EV calculation twodimes gives you the percent of the pot and every bet that goes in on that round that you will get IF YOU GO TO SHOWDOWN. If there will be more betting on later streets the cost on those streets may cause you to fold or cause you to make significant -EV plays that reduce the EV of the whole hand (or even make it negative), but this is why you should consider these things and not just the twodimes data.

The point FatBallz has been trying to make is that there is no statistical fast one being pulled by twodimes (which was what you indicated in your early posts). The fact is twodimes doesn't include implied odds or reverse implied odds, so with future betting, you must not rely entirely upon the twodimes EV, however, if you are going to be all in, then you should rely entirely upon the twodimes EV and the type of draw you have (scoop, low half, high half) is unimportant.