Implied Odds as an exuse for calling a big pf raise

Washout

Hi guys,

just wonderig about implied odds a bit.

This hand came up yesterday Im playing 6 max .25/.50

Effective Stacks
HERO (SB) : 120
VILLAN (BB): 60 VPIP 45 PFR 7
UTG: 150 VPIP 42 PFR 4
UTG+1: 80 (No reads)

UTG raises to 2,
UTG+1 reraises to 7
I reraised to 23 with AA.
VILLAN (BB) Calls
UTG calls and UTG+1 folds

POT 76

Flop comes QsJs9h

and anyways i get it all in against the Villan and he has a set of 9s.

Villan then apologies stating he had implied odds.
Villan also says he knew I had AA or KK

I inform him that he needs to have a stack greater than 150 and me to have a similar stack in order for implied odds to work after my pf raise of 23.

Am i right in my assumption and am just wondering what the maths behind using implied odds are?

prolly a really lame question this. but just curious

phantom_lord

don't tap the fish tank.

effective stack needs to be 10-15 times the raise.

Mr. Flibble

No way he had odds calling off 1/4 of his stack.

BTW, effective stacks means the smaller of the two stacks in a hand, so 60 in this case.

cardshark202

I don't know which is worse: his call or you trying to teach him to play properly. In fact his call doesn't look so bad in comparison.

opr

cardshark202 wrote:

I don't know which is worse: his call or you trying to teach him to play properly. In fact his call doesn't look so bad in comparison.

lol

Washout - An easy way to do this is to think of something called the 5/10 rule.
You should only call with a pocket pair when you think your behind if its less than 5% of your stack and almost never if its more than 10%. In between this is a judgement call.

Opr

Washout

cardshark202 wrote:

I don't know which is worse: his call or you trying to teach him to play properly. In fact his call doesn't look so bad in comparison.

lol...he was a fellow irishman and when he apologised i did say dont worry i would have called with pocket deuces in his shoes.

but it did irk me when he started going on about implied odds

Ste05

cardshark202 wrote:

I don't know which is worse: his call or you trying to teach him to play properly. In fact his call doesn't look so bad in comparison.

lol, my first thoughts as well...

Marq

opr wrote:

An easy way to do this is to think of something called the 5/10 rule.
You should only call with a pocket pair when you think your behind if its less than 5% of your stack and almost never if its more than 10%. In between this is a judgement call.

What does this actually mean? You should be slightly more prepared to call if it's more than 10% or less than 5% of your stack?

If you're going to call something a rule at least make it clear. I had a pop, it goes like this.

Never call a pre-flop raise with a pocket pair if you believe that you are behind unless the size of the raise is equal to or less than 10% of your stack.

opr

Marq wrote:

What does this actually mean? You should be slightly more prepared to call if it's more than 10% or less than 5% of your stack?

If you're going to call something a rule at least make it clear. I had a pop, it goes like this.

Never call a pre-flop raise with a pocket pair if you believe that you are behind unless the size of the raise is equal to or less than 10% of your stack.

Like this

Less 5% its a call
More 10% its a fold.

In between so from 5% to 10% its a judgement call based on things like position , reads on opponent etc ....

Opr

opr

Oh and i didn't just make it up and call it a rule. Taken from 2+2 FAQ


Q: I've heard other posters mentioning the 5/10 rule. What is it?

A: The 5/10 rule is an important no-limit concept that first appeared in Bob Ciaffone's excellent book, "PL & NL Poker." To quote directly from the book:

"When contemplating calling a raise because your position is good, you have a clear call if the raise is less than 5% of your stack, and a clear fold if it is more than 10%. In between those numbers, use your judgement."

It's a good rule for calling a preflop raise with a pocket pair in hopes of hitting a set. The driving force behind the concept is the implied odds in a given situation. If you get your set, but the opponent only has 5BBs after the initial raise, calling to hit the set in the first place is incorrect.

Opr

Mr. Flibble

This rule is only good if you think the raiser has a strong hand which will pay you off if you hit. No point in calling 5% of your stack with every small PP if you are going to fold to any cbet when the raiser probably has nothing.

Marq

I'm aware of the rule. I just think you explained very badly in your post above.

I disagree with this and all "rules" for poker because despite your attempt to incorporate it into your explanation above, personal judgement must necessarily be removed from the decision.

opr

Marq wrote:

I disagree with this and all "rules" for poker because despite your attempt to incorporate it into your explanation above, personal judgement must necessarily be removed from the decision.

I have no clue what this statement means or if it even makes sense.

So when i am out of position against someone who is a really good tag i should never fold something like 44 for 9.9% of my stack and should just arbitrarily call.

Opr

opr

Anyway the OP obviously has no clue about implied odds so while i do agree things are not set in stone in poker its a good guideline for someone to start from.

Opr

Marq

I'm saying that poker "rules" must never take personal judgement into account, and so they're of no use to us.

It doesn't matter, it's all academic anyway. Neither of us are arguing a specific point here, and we've hijacked this poor lad's thinly veiled BBV thread.

Washout

Marq wrote:

I'm saying that poker "rules" must never take personal judgement into account, and so they're of no use to us.

It doesn't matter, it's all academic anyway. Neither of us are arguing a specific point here, and we've hijacked this poor lad's thinly veiled BBV thread.

My question was on implied odds and the maths behind them as the tpoic came up in conversation during the hand i posted

I oculdnt care less that I lost the hand and if this is the kind of sarky talk im going to get from trying to learn somethng new about the game then whats the point in posting here when ppl make comments like this.

Marq

Washout wrote:

I inform him that he needs to have a stack greater than 150 and me to have a similar stack in order for implied odds to work after my pf raise of 23.
Am i right in my assumption?

Pretty much.
ul. bb. gg.

phantom_lord

lol

Goodluck2me

you could be a bit nicer , if i didnt meet you before i read boards i doubt we`d have the great tea-making laugh-a-minute-friendship we are both so fond of now.

DeVore

If you are looking for independant validation, I called a preflop raise to 25 in position with 99 against a guy I was sure had me beat (ie: 10-10+ and likely QQ-AA). I had 225 and he had me covered. I wouldn't have called with 150 and thought seriously about folding pf except I had position on him, 5 euro in already, last to fold/call and felt I had a high chance of getting his tank <--- this bit people dont take into account, you not only have to hit but you have to stack the guy too!

Odds are frequently used to cover bad play though not as commonly (or nearly as annoyingly to me!) as "the value" in a pot.

DeV.

ps: In the end I flopped 9-high and got his tank only for him to turn an ace for a 2-outer. I mention this because he seemed miffed at the gutshot sounds from the other players and defended himself with "well, I was ahead preflop!"

Marq

goodluck2me wrote:

you could be a bit nicer...

I don't think I could actually, it would give off the wrong impression.

Goodluck2me

Marq wrote:

I don't think I could actually, it would give off the wrong impression.

i said nicer, not cleaner.

Marq

A good discussion of this concept here, under point number 3.