Implied Odds and Reverse Implied Odds (Day 9 Course Discussion)

[Collin Moshman]

The implied odds are not so easy to apply; They can help you win a big pot but if you make a mistake and don't have the right connectors it can turn into reverse implied odds and can make you lose a lot of chips.

Yes, although reverse implied odds only apply when you have a made hand already. Implied odds apply when you're trying to make a hand or draw. So usually it wouldn't be that one situation turns into another, but you're right that it can take a lot of practice to use these concepts well!

 

[hanio75]

Hello Collin, I thought the content of the class on the 9th was great "Dueling concepts: implied odds and
Reverse implicit odds ". However, I still didn't understand well the calculations. I was able to understand that the implied odds refer to future gains, while the reverse implied odss for future losses, in addition to the calculation, can we improve the decision making to clarify these calculations. Could you help me to work these calcs? Thanks!

 

[Collin Moshman]

Hello Collin, I thought the content of the class on the 9th was great "Dueling concepts: implied odds and
Reverse implicit odds ". However, I still didn't understand well the calculations. I was able to understand that the implied odds refer to future gains, while the reverse implied odss for future losses, in addition to the calculation, can we improve the decision making to clarify these calculations. Could you help me to work these calcs? Thanks!

Sure Hanio, Is there a specific aspect to these calculations I can help with? Let me know and I’ll be happy to elaborate!

In the meanwhile, keep in mind that we’re not doing a specific calculation for reverse implied odds. It’s just a concept that’s useful but doesn’t require any math the way we’re using it in this course

 

[bruno13xs]

you can call a bet even with some inverse probability

 

[gabrielcsgo93]

If you think that the opponents have high cards you can enter with low connectors cards in odds situation!

 

[Collin Moshman]

If you think that the opponents have high cards you can enter with low connectors cards in odds situation!

I agree with this statement. No matter how bad your hand, there's always a price where you become correct to play it!

 

[nwhitney118]

So I feel like I understand the pot odds and implied odds concepts fairly well separately (for a newbie) but what I'm unsure about is how I should use them together to develop a strategy. My assumption in terms of thinking in levels is that pot odds come in first to work out if the call is profitable, and then implied odds come in the next step of the process to determine maximising profit in regards to likelihood of hitting your outs.

Interested as to if this is an accurate summary. Also what takes priority if the pot odds are good but the implied odds weak or vice versa?

 

[fundiver199]

They both matter. There are plenty of situations, where we might actually be getting correct odds to call based on pure equity, but where we should choose to fold, because our implied odds are bad. This will often be the case, when we are in the big blind, because we are getting a good price and closing action.

However if we have a hand like J4o, often connecting on the flop will not give us the best hand, because our opponent either has a better pair or a better kicker. To make matters worse we are out of position, so we have a lot of reverse implied odds, and therefore we should fold.

 

[Edison A]

Learning Implied odds is the basic rule that every poker player must learn, sometimes learning to do it correctly helps you improve your winnings, professional poker players apply it a lot, thanks for the article.

 

[Katie Dozier]

They both matter. There are plenty of situations, where we might actually be getting correct odds to call based on pure equity, but where we should choose to fold, because our implied odds are bad. This will often be the case, when we are in the big blind, because we are getting a good price and closing action.

However if we have a hand like J4o, often connecting on the flop will not give us the best hand, because our opponent either has a better pair or a better kicker. To make matters worse we are out of position, so we have a lot of reverse implied odds, and therefore we should fold.

Excellent post, Fundiver (as always )

 

[Marekd]

Science

Science suitable for everyone at any age has no infallible people

 

[Collin Moshman]

So I feel like I understand the pot odds and implied odds concepts fairly well separately (for a newbie) but what I'm unsure about is how I should use them together to develop a strategy. My assumption in terms of thinking in levels is that pot odds come in first to work out if the call is profitable, and then implied odds come in the next step of the process to determine maximising profit in regards to likelihood of hitting your outs.

Interested as to if this is an accurate summary. Also what takes priority if the pot odds are good but the implied odds weak or vice versa?

Certain situations lend themselves to one or another. And in a lot of cases, you must use a specific version (either pot odds or implied odds).

For example:

** Facing a shove on any street you have to use pot odds.

** Deciding whether to call a bet on the river, you would only consider pot odds.

** Considering whether to call with a draw versus an opponent on a strong range with deep stacks, you would just use implied odds.

I'm thinking now that this would make a great topic for future content. Either a video breaking this concept down or a full list of when to use one or another. Great question!

 

[nwhitney118]

Certain situations lend themselves to one or another. And in a lot of cases, you must use a specific version (either pot odds or implied odds).

For example:

** Facing a shove on any street you have to use pot odds.

** Deciding whether to call a bet on the river, you would only consider pot odds.

** Considering whether to call with a draw versus an opponent on a strong range with deep stacks, you would just use implied odds.

I'm thinking now that this would make a great topic for future content. Either a video breaking this concept down or a full list of when to use one or another. Great question!

Now I've got further into the course it's starting to become a lot clearer as to how they work with each other and the dynamics of deciding which to use, a video dedicated for it would definitely be really useful too though

 

[Katie Dozier]

Now I've got further into the course it's starting to become a lot clearer as to how they work with each other and the dynamics of deciding which to use, a video dedicated for it would definitely be really useful too though

That’s great to hear that it is making more sense as you dive further in. Thanks for the great video idea

 

[Geyomobama]

What separates implied odds from a gambling decision? All supporting factors aside. And if you decide to follow implied odds...should you do it all the times? How do you train your mind to accept that it doesn't work out all the times.

 

[Collin Moshman]

What separates implied odds from a gambling decision? All supporting factors aside. And if you decide to follow implied odds...should you do it all the times? How do you train your mind to accept that it doesn't work out all the times.

All poker decisions are gambling decisions; implied odds are just a math based framework for gambling with the highest EV.

You should always use it so long as you’re considering calling with a draw that doesn’t have showdown value. If you’re considering raising or calling in part because you might have the best hand, then it’s not just implied odds.

Lastly, just remember that there are no guarantees in poker. All you can do is make the best decision possible!

 

[userme4321]

1. Implied Odds; 35-36% The title and formula is new, I always play in consideration of implied odds and reverse implied odds. Still need to work on the math, I get shoved out a lot... I'm still shocked at peoples play at times, I have work to do.
2. Call I would have bet on the river, the opponent showed weakness and had a better pair. To each his own. I would not have called with 5-6s, I quote 9-1 odds, but he won, just feel it sometimes I guess.

 

[Collin Moshman]

1. Implied Odds; 35-36% The title and formula is new, I always play in consideration of implied odds and reverse implied odds. Still need to work on the math, I get shoved out a lot... I'm still shocked at peoples play at times, I have work to do.
2. Call I would have bet on the river, the opponent showed weakness and had a better pair. To each his own. I would not have called with 5-6s, I quote 9-1 odds, but he won, just feel it sometimes I guess.

Great. Improving the math will still really help your game, but it sounds like you have a solid intuitive grasp of these concepts and making reads of your opponents.

 

[CMack3]

Day 9 Implied & Reverse Implied odds

It feels like at this point in the course Morpheus would ask if I wanted to take the red pill or the blue pill. Continue on, realizing ALL future decisions are analyzed and calculated to be + EV, which will require hours upon hours of study and work. Or forget it all, close my eyes, ram and jam, gamble away and hope for the best. Ignorance is bliss...
I'm taking the red pill. I'm riding the ship with Morpheus or at least Colin and Katie. More good stuff. Thanks guys. (Sorry, that's what happens when you take a break and watch TV in between studying)
I do have a question though. Hand 9-2 gut shot. It says you are getting 7:1 on a call which is not enough to draw to a gut shot. My calculations using rule of 4 & 2. 4 outs for the gut shot, 4x4 = 16%. 100/16 = 6.25. So as I understand it, I am 5.25:1 to hit my gut shot and I'm getting 7:1 to call. Is this not a call even without factoring in implied odds?
Maybe it is because if I only see one street, I have to use the 2 from the rule of 4 & 2 and then I am 11.5:1 (2x4=8. 100/8 = 12.5)? The way they all limped on the flop I like my chance of seeing two streets. Am I missing something here?
Thanks and Peace!

 

[Katie Dozier]

It feels like at this point in the course Morpheus would ask if I wanted to take the red pill or the blue pill. Continue on, realizing ALL future decisions are analyzed and calculated to be + EV, which will require hours upon hours of study and work. Or forget it all, close my eyes, ram and jam, gamble away and hope for the best. Ignorance is bliss...
I'm taking the red pill. I'm riding the ship with Morpheus or at least Colin and Katie. More good stuff. Thanks guys. (Sorry, that's what happens when you take a break and watch TV in between studying)
I do have a question though. Hand 9-2 gut shot. It says you are getting 7:1 on a call which is not enough to draw to a gut shot. My calculations using rule of 4 & 2. 4 outs for the gut shot, 4x4 = 16%. 100/16 = 6.25. So as I understand it, I am 5.25:1 to hit my gut shot and I'm getting 7:1 to call. Is this not a call even without factoring in implied odds?
Maybe it is because if I only see one street, I have to use the 2 from the rule of 4 & 2 and then I am 11.5:1 (2x4=8. 100/8 = 12.5)? The way they all limped on the flop I like my chance of seeing two streets. Am I missing something here?
Thanks and Peace!

I love your analogy here and am flattered to be uttered in the same sentences as Morpheus! The Matrix is awesome and I’m glad you’ve chosen to take the red pill!

You’re right that in the 9-2 example we need to use the rule of 2 and that’s why we’re not getting the immediate odds to draw to a gutshot. Since there’s a bet on the flop, it follows that there is likely to be a bet on the turn, which is why we can’t use the rule of 4 because we’re likely to be charged again to see the river.

Hope this helps

 

[jg_flush]

Wouldn't it be better to include our own future betting when calculating implied odds?

Let's take Hand 9-2 from the book as an example: The pot odds at the flop are $210:$30 (7:1). Considering future betting rounds gives implied odds of $400:$30. But to win this pot, we again have to call with at least $30, because the $30 on the river won't be enough when facing another bet on the turn. This would add up to at least $60 we have to call with to win the pot.

 

[CMack3]

You’re right that in the 9-2 example we need to use the rule of 2 and that’s why we’re not getting the immediate odds to draw to a gutshot. Since there’s a bet on the flop, it follows that there is likely to be a bet on the turn, which is why we can’t use the rule of 4 because we’re likely to be charged again to see the river.

Hope this helps

Thanks for the reply. Yes this does help.

 

[Collin Moshman]

Wouldn't it be better to include our own future betting when calculating implied odds?

Let's take Hand 9-2 from the book as an example: The pot odds at the flop are $210:$30 (7:1). Considering future betting rounds gives implied odds of $400:$30. But to win this pot, we again have to call with at least $30, because the $30 on the river won't be enough when facing another bet on the turn. This would add up to at least $60 we have to call with to win the pot.

Good question. You wouldn’t win the amount of the call on top of your opponents bet. In other words, if your opponent bets 20 into 80, the total pot is 100 and it costs 20 to call giving 5:1 odds. If you added that 20 again to the pot you’d be over estimating your odds since we already added it once.

But your explanation of implied odds to account for future betting is exactly right!

 

[Good Man]

Hi everyone. From today's lesson, I realized that I can call bets even with some reverse potential odds if my pot odds are very good, but if I have bad pot odds and reverse potential odds, then I'd better fold my cards.
I have had such cases when I thought about making a call or not. And I thought for a long time. After watching this lesson, it became much easier for me to make decisions in such cases. As everywhere, you can't do without formulas and mathematics.
The main thing to remember is 20:1 !:top:
Often I made mistakes, making a big bet when I saw only a pair and the opponent had a set. Or I put a full bet when I saw a flush or a straight lower, as always the opponent had a straight and a flush older, and I lost. After this article, I will be more careful and accurate in my actions in the game!
Thank you for the article!

 

[BigDice75]

Today I have learned to calculate implied odds and have better understood the concept of reverse implied odds.

That was my answer to the quiz on day 9:

The implied odds in this spot, if we were to keep all the villain's stack would be 34 to 1. Taking into account that the open raise is UTG and therefore we assign it a strong range, we have enough implicit odds to pay the bet, because if we get the set we can stack the villain.

I have a question for Collin or Katie:
What happens if there is a re-raise from one of the remaining players? Do we recalculate the implied odds?

See you in day 10!