Could this article be summarized the statement. "Provided you are not pushing people out of the pot you can raise for value if 1/(equity in the hand) > number of players in the hand.
The article seems to overcomplicate the issue.

No.

"You can raise for value when 1/(equity in the hand against the number of opponents who will call > number of opponents who will call)" looks correct to me. That's another way to think about it.

But that doesn't address "fresh money odds." I wanted to explain "fresh money odds" as they pertain to split pot games.

When you’re playing to win the whole pot, your fresh money odds are the number of opponents who will contribute to the pot... to one.
Thus when you have five opponents who will call your bet or raise, your fresh money whole pot odds are 5 to 1.

When you’re playing to win half of the pot, your fresh money odds are the number of opponents who will contribute to the pot minus one, all divided by two... to one.
Thus when you have five opponents who will call your bet or raise, your fresh money half pot odds are (5-1)/2=2 to 1.

Notice that your fresh money half pot odds are not half of your fresh money whole pot odds. (That's because your opponent who will win the other half of the pot will win half of the money you, yourself, will contribute).

When you're drawing, if fold equity is a separate consideration, then in order to have favorable odds to initiate fresh money into the pot (bet or raise rather than check or call), your fresh money odds have to be greater than the odds against making your draw.

Thanks for your feedback.

Frank Jerome
(Buzz)

I guess I don't get why we need to think of it in terms of fresh money odds in order to decide to raise. This method involves a lot of calculation. First you have to calculate your fresh money odds, which involves two separate cases then you have to compare this to the odds against making your hand. Given that you can find the odds of making your hand, you might have to do some minor division problem which is not so quick for everyone.

At least for me, taking a guess at my equity is easier ( and not so hard with a little practice ), especially in the early rounds where calculating the odds against making your hand is relatively hard to do in real time. Then all you have to do is ask if you have more than your fair share of equity (33% w/ 3 callers, 25% w/ 4 callers).


Are there other uses for this concept of fresh money pot odds?

We don't "need to think of it in terms of fresh money odds in order to decide to raise." There are other considerations and other ways to think. Do whatever works for you.

Casinos stay in business (and thrive) by having the odds on their side.

Years ago, before I played poker in casinos, my wife and I traveled to Tahoe every year to ski. We mostly skied Heavenly. During the day we'd ski and then at night we'd visit a casino on the Nevada side and gamble.

The casino had the edge in every game we played. That is, the odds were on the side of the casino. Although we always ended up with a net loss in gambling, we had a lot of fun.

I reasoned that gambling would be even more fun if I could somehow get the odds on my side. And that's how I have approached poker. Poker is a casino game where you can get the odds on your side, enormously so at times.

Poker involves deceit. To be very successful, I think more is involved than merely having favorable odds, but I think knowing whether or not you have favorable odds can help you make correct decisions. That's just my opinion.

I follow what you're saying. Seems like an interesting approach and seems like it should work. There's just one little hitch.

I mostly play Omaha-8. Can you explain to me what the equities of the various different starting hands I play are against the various different starting hands my various opponents will play?

I only use the concept when I want to know whether or not I have favorable odds to initiate fresh money into the pot (bet, raise, or jam). And it's not my only consideration in deciding how best to proceed.

Buzz

Nope! Just play a bunch with sims and you get a feel. Also, the same difficulty with calculating equity arise when calculating the odds against making your hand.

I can see how your equity approach could have merit. My problem would be estimating or remembering equities in Omaha-8 (my favorite poker game) at various stages.

Remembering new stuff is what is tough for me.

For example, remembering the cards that have been been shown and then folded is what makes seven stud high/low a more difficult game for me than Omaha-8.

In order to use your equity approach, I think I'd have to remember probable equities of many starting hands, and then remember probable equities at various stages of play. For me that's a lot of remembering.

I see Omaha-8 as a drawing game. For me, counting outs is fairly straightforward... not too much to remember. And estimating the pot size at showdown and what my investment would be to get to showdown (or the penultimate betting round if I planned to fold when I missed my draw), is also fairly straightforward, especially for the fixed-limit Omaha-8 games regularly encountered in USA casinos... not too hard to remember. Then it's just a matter of comparing odds against making my draw with implied pot odds.

But you're right... one does have to do the math.

And then there's still no way around knowing one's opponents.

You seem to be suggesting there's an easier approach... but I don't, at this point in time, see quite how to make your easier approach work (without remembering a whole lot, which doesn't sound like much fun to me).

To show my approach works in seven stud high/low, I posted an in-depth response to an odds question (about a half pot draw in seven stud high/low) in the last thread in which you had responded in your forum.

Buzz

The original article leaves out the divided by 2 which screws it up.

Yes. It does.

I tried to get that corrected, but was too late. (Once an article is published, it's evidently too late to get errata corrected).

The main idea is to realize your half pot odds are not simply your whole pot odds divided by two. That's because you, yourself contribute money to the pot.

When you win the whole pot, your fresh money odds are simply the number of opponents who contribute to one. Thus if four opponents will be contributing, your fresh money whole pot odds are simply 4:1. You are awarded the five bets that are in the pot, but one of those bets was your own money. Getting your own money back is a "push," not a "win."

When you will only win half of the pot, you "push" with one of your opponents. If all the chips are stacked together, although you are awarded half of the pot, half of the money you, yourself, contribute is awarded to someone else.

Another way to look at it is you and the opponent with whom you split the pot each "push" your own bets and split the bets contributed by the losing opponents. Thus if four opponents will be contributing, your half pot money odds are not 2:1, but rather are only 1.5:1.

I hope you're clear on it now. Sorry for the snafu in the article.

Frank Jerome
Buzz

Buzz did request this correction to his article. Somehow, it slipped through our process.

We'll get it fixed.

Thank you.

Buzz

Thanks for all your thoughtful responses, they are appreciated.

There are clearly too many situations to remember. I am just suggesting that if you run a large amount of simulations you develop an unconscious feel for the amount of equity you have. I'm not sure how this is different from "remembering" but it is . You can also use deductive reasoning to get a more accurate guess. If you know if when you have TP+ nut low, you have 55% equity, and with the the bare nut low draw you have 40% then if I have middle pair + nut low, then I have around 47%. Examples abound.
You can also remember in terms of hand strength. If I have TP + flush draw + strong low draw I don't have to calculate anything.

The real issue I have with all these calculations is that it is near impossible to do in real time. On the turn it's quite a bit easier... but with multiple streets to go it's quite complicated. I think this technique is useful for away from the table calculations. When done many times this can lead to a feel for when you have "more than your fair share" of equity.

Just thinking: maybe there is a way to fuse the two methods together. Count your half and whole pot outs, say you have m. Each full out counts for x% of equity, is m*x% more than your fair share? Yes? Then raise (provided your not pushing people out). I know there are some complications, like outs not being worth the same on turn as flop. But then it's just two numbers you have to remember!

This method also lends itself to partial outs, like when you think your flush draw will be good 80% of the time you hit it or when you are drawing to the second nut low etc.

You're welcome.

If that method is working well for you, I suggest you stick to it.

I've run a lot of simulations, probably tens of thousands, but I haven't always focused on equities. My Wilson simulator does not include "equities." It's only when I use ProPokerTools that I sometimes am interested in "equities."

I suppose I could have focused more on equities. Interesting idea, actually. But that's not the approach I used.

I'm old school... went through college and grad school using a K&E slide rule. You have to be able to quickly approximate in order to know where to put the decimal point. Maybe making quick approximations is becoming a lost art. (However, I know some younger poker experts who can do the necessary math in their heads better than I can).

From going through many repeated calculations, I do naturally remember some numbers that come up repeatedly. That makes the calculations easier and more familiar.

I think that's true. I simply haven't focused on equity.

Like I say, I can count and apportion outs rather quickly under game conditions, and I can approximate implied pot odds or implied half pot odds rather quickly... but it honestly would be difficult for me to calculate equities in my head while sitting at the table and trying to outplay my opponents. I'd have to have a very good idea of the equity of my hand, considering the board cards and the action... and I don't. I simply haven't been thinking that way.

But that shouldn't matter if you have been thinking that way and if you do have a good idea of the equity of your hand, considering the board cards and the action. Do whatever works well for you.

Maybe. Or if I happen to get into a situation where I'm pretty sure I know the equity, I'll use that as a short cut. I haven't tried that yet, but I think it's a worthwhile suggestion.

I think having favorable equity is equivalent to having favorable odds.

I see more to it... a lot more. What to do falls into the broad category of "playing poker" for me.

I like to know when the odds are favorable. But I'm not always going to raise when the odds are favorable. Rightly or wrongly, I'm trying to outplay my opponent(s)... and there's more involved than whether one has favorable odds or favorable equity.

I see.

What I don't see is how to know your equity when your chance of winning includes, among other things, a flush draw you think will be good 80% of the time. (But then I also don't see how to know whether or not you have favorable odds to bet such a hand).

Buzz

Mee too I like to know when the odds are favorable. But I'm not always going to raise or call when the odds are favorable. Rightly or wrongly, my reason is my stack size. what is our opinion?

I presume you meant to write "What is your opinion?"

Stack size is more important to me in tournaments than in cash games.

In fact, in cash games stack size doesn't matter at all to me in terms of whether or not to initiate fresh money into the pot.

But in tournaments, even when I feel I have favorable odds, I may prefer not to take on an opponent with a bigger stack and thus risk getting knocked out of the tournament.... Meh... Depends on the situation, I suppose.

Buzz

yes is: What is your opinion ( rush)
ty for answer

Everything depends of the situation!

Good point.

I'll rephrase my answer to boby05.

In cash games stack size doesn't matter at all to me.

In tournaments I prefer not to take on an opponent with a bigger stack when doing so risks getting knocked out of the tournament.

Buzz