+Implied Odds Bluff
Let’s talk frankly about implied odds. Call this an implied odds intervention if you will because many of you out there (and you know who you are) are addicted to the concept of implied odds. Addicted because the concept allows you, gives you permission, to play more hands, make looser calls, in general give more action. You are an action junkie and implied odds is like the syringe that delivers your drug to you. So let’s start at the beginning by defining the concept of implied odds.
Implied odds is odds on your money that will occur in the future. Basically, the idea is that when we make some calls in poker we can also think about money our opponent will pay us on future betting rounds when we make our hand. So when calculating whether or not a call is correct in terms of the money in the pot compared to the money we must pay we can consider in the pot size money our opponent(s) will pay off later. Imagine we are in a situation where we are drawing to a flush and we know we will only get to see one card. To break even on the call the pot needs to be laying us about 4 to 1. For every $1 we call there needs to be $4 in the pot. Let’s suppose we are only getting 3 to 1 on the call, that there is $300 in the pot and we have to call $100. If time stopped right there the call would be a losing call. In fact, we would lose 20 cents of every dollar we put in the pot under those conditions for a total of $20 of the $100 call. But what if we are sure that when we make the flush our opponent will be willing to pay off $200? Then we could add the $200 into consideration when calling the initial $100. We know we are losing $20 on the call. But we also know that 20% of the time we will make our hand and our opponent will pay us $200. That means the future equity on the pay off would be $40 (20% of $200). Obviously, $40 is greater than $20 so the implied call pays for the equity loss we take on the immediate call.
Okay. So, implied odds is a concept that allows us to take a poor mathematical proposition right now because of future suspected earnings. We can lose a little money now because we will make a more money on a later street. Great. But the problem is that players overuse this concept to justify bad play. They excuse calls that they know are bad by an over reliance on the implied odds concept. An over reliance on the implied odds concept will cause you to play much too loose.
The greatest example of this comes from small suited connectors. I suspect that almost everyone who plays these hands regularly is bandying about the implied odds term. “I love baby suited connectors because when you make your hand you can get paid off big.” I am sure you have heard people say that. I suspect you may have said that yourself. But here is what I don’t understand, how can there be implied odds if you are rooting for your opponents to fold? Let me explain.
You are playing a hand like 67s and the board comes KsTs2d. You are in a multiway pot. The action is you check and there is a bet, call, and call back to you. Let me ask you this. You are probably overcalling here but are you really happy about it? I mean the texture is pretty damn obvious. At this moment in time does it cross you mind that someone else might have a flush draw? Even if it goes bet and one call in front of you, doesn’t this concern you with such obvious texture on the board?
Okay, so you call and now the turn is the 3s. Yippie! You made your hand. So you bet out (you have to since a free card isn’t an option). Stop and think for a moment. Are you really rooting for action here? If someone moves in on you, are you happy? Even if someone just raises you, are you happy? I suspect not because that creates a very difficult decision for you. You are in a multiway pot with obviously completed texture on the board and you just got your ass raised. That is ugly. Even if you just get called you are not thrilled. You may very well be beat (especially if called by more than one guy) and even if you are not the board will come another spade 20% of the time and will pair over 20% of the time as well. All of those cards create very ugly decisions for your 7 high flush. If you do get called and no disaster cards hit the river it is almost always correct to check and hope you are just inducing a bluff. It is unlikely a worse hand will pay you so you check and cross your fingers. You will call a bet but it is not a happy day when an opponent is willing to bet the river on a completed board.
Do you see the problem here? When you bet that turn you are actually rooting for either a fold or just one caller. The nightmare is more than one caller or getting raised. And even the one caller is not the happiest of events. The problem for the hand is that in a multiway pot where texture completes like that hands like top pair will be reluctant to pay off. If the action comes right, sets can even get away. So one pair becomes a somewhat easy fold in these kinds of pots. So now I can ask you the important question: How can there be implied odds if you are rooting against action? Isn’t the very definition of the concept that you are hoping for action on future streets. So you justify your ridiculous call with the 7 high flush draw by saying you might be getting the wrong math now but the implied odds are huge. Except now you hit your hand on the turn (and the turn is the only street you can hit it on because there is always a bet on that street when you miss) and now you are rooting for everyone to fold and for you just to take the pot right there. I mean you can use the implied odds line to rationalize the overly loose play but I don’t know how when you actually don’t want any action on later streets. That becomes absurd.
Chew on that one a while.
Looking from another angle, I would rather be making that bet on the turn with the ace of spades and a rag, or a pure bluff.
I do so love your writing and you are dead on I see even top pros making obvious plays based on implied odds that just are not there. Also I very seldom read or hear discussion of NEGATIVE implied odds. You are going to have to bet or call on the later street (turn) if you play on the flop. If you miss that means you are paying more than the flop price automatically and its pretty well in the toilet. Example u have flush draw not to the nuts u call on flop getting 2:1 (another discussion I know but not now). U need 4:1 on the turn if u miss and u will have to pay to play obviously so now u almost certainly are NOT going to be getting the right price. I believe u do explain this in one of your vids. In fact I dont play “two card draw” odds EVER in no limit for this reason. I need 4 to 1 on the FLOP to play the flush draw and 5 to 1 for the open str. This may be conservative I don’t know but so often I put myself in the above described trap using the two card odds I concluded it had to be a losing play.
Great job on CA I have watched all your instruction vids u do a great, great job.
Bob “johnnydabone” Varns
+1 to the article. Very well written.
I myself play suited connectors (or hands like that), once in a lifetime, jst for variation.
On your other blog, “Hold em has become a fold em game”….I completely agree with your assessment. I see it a lot online these days.
Great articles, Per the no fold em game, I see that so often: people hold on for that 1 or 2 cards to make a hand; however it never materializes, and usually you waste a chunk of your stack. Also for the implied odds notion, I always run things thru the filter of cutting my losses if I don’t get a piece of the flop; that is my main aim. If I miss the flop completely and I’m not holding pocket pairs 7-8 or better, I’m ready to bail since nothing good comes out of chasing a straight/flush draw 99% of the time