When poker commentators say "he's getting 4:1 on a call or 4:1 on his money" what exactly are they talking about and what does that mean to be 4:1 on a call or on his money? Also how and when do you decide to use pot odds and hand odds and how to compare them to make a correct call or correct fold?

Getting 4:1 odds means that you are risking 1 unit to win 4 units. When you win, you'll win 4, when you lose, you'll lose 1

Your second question is a lot more involved. In the most simplest sense, if you are making the final decision to call in a hand, i.e. if you will be functionally all in, or you're calling on the river, then you can call if pot odds < equity. In other circumstances it is not so simple.

(also, I moved this from Poker Theory)

In the simplest case of a villain all-in bet on the river and you have to either call or fold, your EV equation is

EV = eq*Pot –(1-eq)*Bet,

where Pot is the pot amount after villain makes a bet of Bet and eq is your win probability

Set EV>0 and this reduces to

Call if Pot/Bet > (1-eq)/eq,

which is the same as

Call if Pot Odds > Bet(=Hand) Odds

Note that statmanhal and I have opposite conclusions but that's because his final equation is in odds format and mine is in percentage.

4:1 is the same as 20%
2:1 is the same as 50%

As the pot odds in X:1 format gets larger, the equivalent percentage gets smaller.

yep. but just so no ones confused 2:1 is 33% not 50.

A fairly common spot occurs when villain bets pot (especially common in PLO). A pot-sized bet lays odds of 2:1, and it means you need 33.33% equity to continue. If the pot-sized bet is on the river, you need to win the hand a third of the time to break even.
If villain bets half pot, then the pot lays odds of 3:1, meaning you only need to win 25% of the time.
Intuitively you know this without doing any maths. Versus big bets, you need to be right more often than against small bets.

A pot-sized bet lays 2:1 odds => 33.3% equity required.
A half-pot bet lays 3:1 odds => 25% equity needed.
A third of pot bet lays 4:1 odds => 20% equity reqd.

Hah, yeah, sorry. 1:1 is 50%

We really don't have opposite conclusions. We're just using different metrics to lead to the same conclusion.

Just to make sure I am making sense of this,
We have 6s5s

flop: 4A7r Villain bets 100 into a pot of 300 making the pot 400.
So we are getting 4:1 pot odds and our hand odds are 2.1:1 with 32% equity.
So calling here is the correct play......right?

Turn: K Villain bets 250 into pot of 400 making the pot 650
So we are getting 2.6:1 pot odds and our hand odds are 5.25:1 with maybe 16% equity
So folding here is the correct play......right?

You have the right idea and your Pott odds are correct.

Two points on your hands equity though. First unless you know your opponents 2 cards the equity calculation will be based on assuming a range of hands for your opponent. At the tables counting outs typically involves discounting them to allow for likely opponent redraws or blockers. Example being you have a flush draw against a set. The board pairing flush outs make your opponent a full house. But assuming the equity you've calculated is correct the only other point I'd mention is that equity is based on the number of cards to come.

If you use equity based on having 8 outs with a turn and river to come but you aren't calling all in the calculation isn't really correct. In reality there is a good chance there will be another bet on the turn.

So in your example, you've assumed 8 outs on the flop. This would be roughly 32% if dealt to the river but if you know you will be facing a turn bet you have to calculate your chances of hitting your straight on the turn which are roughly 16%. Getting 4:1 direct odds on the flop means you need 20% to profitably call.

This is why someone up thread used the example of calling all in.

But yes you have the concept correct.

The next concept to look at is implied odds as they will sometimes justify that call where we are getting less than correct direct or immediate odds.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your arithmetic is correct and the call decisions are correct with this proviso. The comparison of pot odds to hand odds is best made when the bet is all-in. In your examples, that is not the case. Since there will likely be future betting, a pot odds/hand odds decision rule should be considered as a first cut assessment.

Also because of other factors such as fold equity, villain characteristics, equity realization and stack sizes, a raise or check may have better EV. Also, if the pot odds are less than the hand odds, by considering implied odds (the EV equation includes a future bet you could win if you hit your outs), a call decision may be justifiable




Edit: This supports cAmmAndo's post which I hadn't seen before I posted