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

king11682 said:

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.

Click to expand...

hanio75 said:

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!

Click to expand...

gabrielcsgo93 said:

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

Click to expand...

fundiver199 said:

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.

Click to expand...

nwhitney118 said:

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?

Click to expand...

Collin Moshman said:

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!

Click to expand...

nwhitney118 said:

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

Click to expand...

Geyomobama said:

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.

Click to expand...

userme4321 said:

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.

Click to expand...

CMack3 said:

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!

Click to expand...

Katie Dozier said:

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

Click to expand...

jg_flush said:

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.

Click to expand...