Poker theory - odds vs. table reads

[A-Baum]

Been playing hold'em on and off for a few years, but I'm not very good at it yet. Just want to get some input about what information some of the better players use to make decisions at the table.

When you check, fold, bet, or call a raise, have you made that decision based on specific information every single time? Are you always calculating odds? Have you looked at the odds and calculated your move? How much of a factor does table reads come into this?

For example, if you feel you have a good read on an opponent, will you make a play that is mathmatically -EV just because of your read?

These are the kinds of things I wrestle with and believe that's why I'm not a winning player. I just don't have a grasp on when to use odds vs. table reads. Do winning players ever make an -EV call? (table reads excluded).

[xxxxx]

I play B$M limit hold 'em against a bunch of calling stations. It is hard to figure out exactly how many bets are in the pot unless you stop and think about it. Also, I don't need the fluctuations even if I'm leaving a few bucks on the table. What I find is that you have to discount outs a lot in this setting because with enough monkeys drawing to backdoor flushes and gutshot straights, one of them will hit. I'll draw to OESD and flushes and throw the rest away.

[New York Jet]

You should always make the play with the highest EV. If you do not know the odds, you cannot determine if you are making the play with the highest EV, regardless of your read.

[ QUOTE ]
When you check, fold, bet, or call a raise, have you made that decision based on specific information every single time? Are you always calculating odds? Have you looked at the odds and calculated your move? How much of a factor does table reads come into this?


[/ QUOTE ]
To answer your questions directly: Yes, yes, yes, and only when the decision is close.

[ QUOTE ]
Do winning players ever make an -EV call?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. You may have a decision where each outcome is -EV. You should select the highest EV (i.e. -1.2 or -0.8, take the -0.8)

Try reading Small Stakes Hold'em or the Theory of Poker. Either will provide you the wisdom you seek.

[Louie Landale]

I'll be a monkey's uncle if someone says they calculate odds quickly and accurately and consistently: there are far too many subjective variables.

Try this: you call in late position with Kh5h, 4 of you take the flop, the flop is Ks9s7d. Early position bets, fold, up to you...
[1] If this is a tight passive player there's no need to calculate your possible 3 out hand. Toss it. [2] If its a real agressive player there's no need to calculate your "3-out hand": its far too likely you have the best hand. Folding is out of the question: call if he'll keep bluffing, raise if he will only take one stab at it. Call also if this will make him suspicious enough to call you down with a small pair. [3] Its a reasonably solid player. Now you've got a problem. Can you figure out the chances he's slow playing? Or is willing to call UTG with KJ or KT? Or he's chances of betting a draw? Good luck calculating all that out.

Mostly its experience and being in the same situations. Odds are good for home work and when you find yourself at a rare pure draw situation (more often on the turn); table presence is good when you are playing.

- Louie

[elmitchbo]

i don't think i agree with your assessment. i can and do calculate odds for almost every hand, maybe not to the penny but close enough to know my odds. it doesn't matter how tight or loose your opponent is, if you have the odds to call you need to call.

i find myself in the situation the OP laid out pretty often, as i'm sure most people here do..... 1. you know you don't have the oods to call but you're sure that the other guys doesn't have anything, 2. you know you do have the odds to call but you're pretty sure you're beat. my conclusion is that the math is much more reliable in those situations than the reads.

[gulebjorn]

I in no way count myself among the "better players here", but i'll reply anyway.

Shouldn't we be making a distinction here?

I think there are two forms of odds:

[ QUOTE ]
I'll draw to OESD and flushes and throw the rest away.

[/ QUOTE ]
- card odds: the combination of the board and your cards determines your number of outs and the probability you will improve to the best hand. I suspect that most better than average players do not have to think very hard about this, and for most common situations, they will make an automatic decision.

[ QUOTE ]
Can you figure out the chances he's slow playing? Or is willing to call UTG with KJ or KT? Or he's chances of betting a draw?

[/ QUOTE ]
- people odds: the odds that a specific player could be holding specific cards, or take a specific action. You might say: i estimate there is a 70% chance that this guy is not holding aces, or: i think i have a 20% chance of getting a free card on the turn.

The first type of odds has nothing to do with reads, the second one has everything to do with reads.

I think that read-dependant player odds will always be more important than mathematical card odds. If you are facing a 100$ bet into a 10$ pot with the nut flush draw, you will call if you are 100% sure that you can take this guy's stack, assuming he has enough left. You will fold if you are sure that you won't get another buck off him if the flush draw hits.

[xxxxx]

If you are playing limit, no fold'em hold'em, it is a game of odds and probability. If you are playing NL, knowing the people becomes more important.

[johnc]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are playing limit, no fold'em hold'em, it is a game of odds and probability. If you are playing NL, knowing the people becomes more important.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! I find the concept of domination esp. w/aces can be very valuable due to the fact that most of the people will play ANY ace (reads are very important here) and often TP situations come down to best kicker. Also, implied and reverse implied odds are critical to a vast majority of decisions I make as well as discounting outs that improve my hand but may also complete draws. Pretty basic but it's amazing how many people don't apply any sort of thought process to their play!

[golFUR]

In response to this post I may have finally come up with a brief way of explaining what I've tried to explain a dozen times before.

Odds calculations are for people who can't read their opponents.

First, let's expand the definition of odds a bit. As a previous poster noted, you can talk about card odds and people odds. There are more though. Sitting at an NL ring, playing against someone who has their whole stack at the table, with a super strong image, what are the odds I can bluff this guy off his tptk? Friggin great. He is afraid, he will fold. Who cares what your pocket is? Who cares about the odds of your hand being the best? If you are better you are better, if you have the read you don't need anything else.

I point, over and over again, to Stu Ungar. Gus and others should be added to the list. They play(ed) hands with terrible friggin odds, they call on the flop with absolutely lousy odds, they still take the pot down. If you know who your opponents are and what you look like to them you don't need to look at your cards, you only need to look at theirs and the board.

Granted, this is a different kind of game. Every other time I've posted ideas like this in this section I've either been flamed or mildly rebuked - "You aren't Stu" Well, no kidding I ain't Stu, I'm me. But we can play the same game... If you try this, if you work at this, and you lose over and over, maybe you don't have what it takes. Learn to do fast math and play for the long long long term results. Personally, I like the big paydays more, I like unrestrained aggression and totally dominating the table. I can't do that if I'm counting on my fingers every time the board shows two of a suit.

[New York Jet]

[ QUOTE ]
I point, over and over again, to Stu Ungar. Gus and others should be added to the list. They play(ed) hands with terrible friggin odds, they call on the flop with absolutely lousy odds, they still take the pot down. If you know who your opponents are and what you look like to them you don't need to look at your cards, you only need to look at theirs and the board.


[/ QUOTE ]

You could not be more WRONG.

Gus says, "I am definitely more aggressive than most players, but I also have a different philosophy about my game. My outlook is a little more from a mathematical perspective. Other players rely too much on their instincts and reading abilities. Sometimes they allow that to overshadow the mathematical truth. Usually, I let the math do its thing. Sometimes, people put too much into their reads, and ante off all of their chips and then suddenly have no chips at all." Link

Learn the odds, then work on your table reads. At the lower limits, knowing the odds is extremely important. You cannot put a "read" on a drunken moron. You can determine if you have the correct pot odds to call.