New question on Pot Odds: Sklansky vs. Harrington

[jimymat]

I dont remember the exact way Harrington worded it but I believe hes refering to the odds of your opponent folding if you bet out. Pot odds is pot odds . A lot of people responding to this post seem to have trouble undersrtanding how it works. If there is 200 in the pot ont thre flop and your opponent bets 100 there would be 300 in the pot. It is now costing you 100 to win 300 or 3-1 odds. If you are first to act instead, and there is 200 in the pot and you bet out 100 in hopes of your opponent folding, you have to have your opponent fold two thirds of the time for this to be a positive EV play. 2-1 equals 33% so if you think you can win the pot a third of the time and your opponent will fold 66% of the time , you win over time. This is used when you hold a weak hand and or are bluffing and your wondering how to calculate your odds of successfully bluffing.
Just off the top of my head Im assuming thats what Harrington is speaking of. Ive never seen Sk;ansky represent that figure anywhere. Do you have a book with page #? If I could see it I could elaborate more for you maybe.

[Shoe]

I agree... I think Sklansky and Harrington both know how pot odds are calculated. I think the confusion just comes from how the post was worded, and whether the opponent has already bet out or not.

[FatBob]

As I was reading the Harrington book, I thought there was a difference in pot odds calculations as well, but it was when someone raises behind you. I don't have my ToP book handy, so I could be remembering wrong, but lets take Harrington's problem hand 2-1 as an example:

You are player E

Both Blinds = 150
Player C bets 100
D folds
So there's 250 in the pot - giving you 2.5 to 1
You call for 100
The button (F)raises to 200
The blinds fold
Player C calls for the additional 100.

Harrington says the pot is 650 and your 100 needed to call gives you 6.5 to 1 odds.

If I'm not mistaken, Sklansky would say you have 5.5 to 2 odds here. You are putting in 200 to get the 550 that the other players put in.

If I'm recalling correctly, then this is a major difference. The Sklansky method is giving you less than half the odds Harrington is. (Of course its slightly better than the 2.5 to one that you had when you called the first time.)

[BugsBunny]

I think that the 5.5 to 2 figure would be Sklansky talking about effective odds as opposed to pot odds.

The pot odds on the 2nd call are indeed 6.5 to 1.
The effective odds that you got for the entire round are 5.5 to 2.