implied odds

[richestorags]

do implied odds justify the most ridiculous chases? when is a longshot, too much of a longshot not bother with it.

[crockpot]

it's often worth chasing a longshot when someone makes the ever popular min bet. however, i believe that way too many people take longshot draws at non-nut hands for a cheap bet, figuring their implied odds justify it. they fail to consider the very possible chance that they will hit their hand and still lose. this is especially evident at omaha but also at hold 'em. reverse implied odds can be your death in these games if you are in trouble even after hitting your hand.

[Hung]

I love it when people bet the min bet. Most of the time I call. And when I hit my card they're gonna pay for it. One day I called a chipbet with smallest pair. And they guy had KJ double top pair. He bets chips and I call till the end. I hit trips and I take down a huge pot because he called my last all in bet. He got mad of course. But he should have bet more.

[ArtVandelay]

I think this question depends entirely on your skill versus the skill of your opponents. Suppose it's folded to the button who open raises for the pot and the SB folds. Against some players in the button I will call with almost any two cards in the BB, and against others I'll throw away hands like AQo. These are obviously the extremes, but my point is that you're not guarenteed to get paid if you hit, you need to not get stacked when you make a non-nut out, and what really matters is how well you play against the bettor. Especially if you're new to big bet, you should probably play tightly even for min bets and in general require immediate pot odds or close to it rather than just implied.