I'm on my second read through Small Stakes Holdem and it's making much more sense this time. But one thing that confused me on my first read is still confusing me after reading that section a second time.

I understand how Pot Odds compared to Hand Odds are used to determine whether or not you should fold a drawing hand or call a bet.

I think I understand the strategy of protecting a made hand by betting and/or raising to drive people with weak draws out.

What confuses me is that the two seem to be in opposition. If I have a hand I'm protecting and I bet or raise to drive out weak draws, wouldn't that bet or raise increase the pot odds for a player with a weak draw, making it more likely he would call?

Let's say the pot is sitting at 6 bets. One of my opponents has a weak draw that gives him 7:1 odds of making it. He should fold. But if I bet on the turn, I make the pot 8:1 to call and now the player with the weak draw should stay in.

What am I missing?

You don't want weak draws to fold. You want them to call BUT only when they don't have the correct odds to do so.

If they have 8 outs, with one card to come (roughly 5:1 against hitting) you're very happy for them to call when they're only getting 4:1 (or at least, you should be). Their loss is your gain.

To answer your question, you're right, of course, that in a Limit game you're often going to find it impossible to destroy their odds. But if it's 7:1 against them hitting their draw, ask yourself which is better: forcing them to put a bet in, getting 8:1, or giving them a free card?

Yes, by betting you're offering them 8:1
By checking and letting them take a free card you're offering them infinity to 1. That's way too generous on your part.

I think somewhere (can't remember if it's in SSHE or in some article somewhere) Ed Miller talks about 'taxing' your opponent's winnings. ie. making them pay something to see the next card, rather than letting them help themself to a free card. Even though they're absolutely correct to call, you're putting them in a worse position (and therefore putting yourself in a better position) than if you simply give them a free look at the river.

Usually in limit theyre not getting off of that for anything =\

If you have the best hand (meaning you have the highest equity in the hand), and know you are going to get called, you want to bet.

If I have 60% equity, then for each dollar I put in that my opponent matches, I am earning 20c - I take out $1.20, villain takes $0.80. So when you are ahead you always want the money in - as long as villain will call. This is true even when it is correct for villain to call due to pot odds. You are still making EV!

It is even more beneficial if you can manipulate them to call when they are not getting pot odds, and hence making a mistake. But that doesn't mean it is bad to bet when you are ahead but can't deny them pot odds due to SPR (stack-to-pot ratio).

The LUKE= THE NUKE!