How many outs should I have givn myself ?

[Muahahahaha]

How best to avoid tilt, we can worry about all that later.

Let's get down to fundamentals.

so the question is how should we play the odds, and how does a dumbster like me start to learn & understand them.
 

I want you to ask yourself a question that may help you....

Yesterday, with the AA hand, why did you want to have only one opponent call?

Don't worry, there is no wrong answer here. I ain't going to mock you if you say something that appears silly.

AA pre flop is the best hand against any number of opponents.  But it performs best against one opponent.  The more hands you are up against, the greater chance of one of them hitting something that beats you.  So you might beat 3 or 4 hands, but the 5th or 6th is more likely to get lucky.

BTW I don't mind about looking stupid.  If I did, do you think I'd post this stupid bloody question.  But I want to improve, & I don't understand odds, so who better to ask than you lot.  I wanted to be honest about the way I think at the moment about odds, so hopefully you can nudge me in the right direction ( maybe a slap 'round the head with a crowbar might be required  )

[matt674]

I ain't going to mock you if you say something that appears silly.

No comment to make now and i know it wasnt aimed at me - but quoting it for future to re-use at suitable time

[tantrum]

Ok, so look at your flop and how many outs you have to on the flop?

your straight outs are compromised out of 8 outs you have to deduct 2 outs if your drawing to the idiot end str8, substract 1 out if you won't get nuts, substract another 1 if only 1 card is being used to make your str8, so out of 8 outs you have only really 4 outs for your str8.

now for your low pair you have further 5 outs but they are compromised as well as 3 of those (8's) will make someone's str8.
so on the flop realistically you have around 6-7 outs which will make you a winner 14-15% of the time.  6.7/1 against


When you decide to call 520 you have 2/1 odds to call.  It is not very profitable situation to be in IMO.

Also there is some other way of modifying odds accordingly to the number of opponents you are against.  But i haven't got that far in my education.

disclaimer: If i made any mistake in my calculations feel free to correct it.  I am just learning the odds thing .

[thetank]

AA pre flop is the best hand against any number of opponents.  But it performs best against one opponent.  The more hands you are up against, the greater chance of one of them hitting something that beats you.  So you might beat 3 or 4 hands, but the 5th or 6th is more likely to get lucky.

BTW I don't mind about looking stupid.  If I did, do you think I'd post this stupid bloody question.  But I want to improve, & I don't understand odds, so who better to ask than you lot.  I wanted to be honest about the way I think at the moment about odds, so hopefully you can nudge me in the right direction ( maybe a slap 'round the head with a crowbar might be required  )

I think a crowbar might be just the thing we need, and I have some time to kill before I have to get ready to go out. Don't want to play any poker before I do so here we go......

Why do you think is AA best against only one opponent? ie, what do you mean when you say "performs best"

Say you gamble 1000 chips, against your opponents 1000 chips. Say they have a range of hands that includes any two 10 or above, or any pair.

You will be just over 84% for a net win of 1000 chips in the pot.


Say you gamble 1000 chips again, but against 2 opponents with the same range of cards. You will be less likely to win the pot (just over 72%) but will have a net win of twice as much.

So would you prefer 1000 chips 84% of the time, or 2000 chips 72% of the time. (No helping folks, again no right/wrong answers)

[matt674]

depends whether i can get the same odds of 84% to double up with 2000 chips later in the tourney................

[SupaMonkey]

Any chance of 1000 chips and a battered sausage 78% of the time.

[thetank]

Oi, Monkey

Click to see full-size image.

Is your name Muahahahaha? I said no helping, whatever happened to the chimp on the left? 

Any chance of 1000 chips and a battered sausage 78% of the time.

Disruptive pupil, go count the rulers and bring me the largest when you're done. 

[Muahahahaha]

your straight outs are compromised out of 8 outs you have to deduct 2 outs if your drawing to the idiot end str8, substract 1 out if you won't get nuts, substract another 1 if only 1 card is being used to make your str8, so out of 8 outs you have only really 4 outs for your str8.

now for your low pair you have further 5 outs but they are compromised as well as 3 of those (8's) will make someone's str8.
so on the flop realistically you have around 6-7 outs which will make you a winner 14-15% of the time.  6.7/1 against


When you decide to call 520 you have 2/1 odds to call.  It is not very profitable situation to be in IMO.

Right.

So I was saying that an up & down straight flush needs 2/1 odds & by having a pair as well, I assumed that with chances for 2 pair/ trips, which might also win,  the extra outs would reduce my calling requirements.

You're saying that my outs are immediately compromised.  I can see the reduction for the 1 card straight & the non nut straight. But to ALWAYS reduce an up & down to 6 outs is a new one on me.

For simplicity's sake, if I start thinking about an up & down straight as being similar to pairs improving to trips, I'll be nearer the mark.  Unless it's a minimum ( ish ) bet, I'm better off getting rid ?

So now the initial call of 120 with someone still to play IS mathematically crap, let alone all the dross afterwards. 

So where I started in prime position, by having the initial guy check, now puts me in a poor relative position, with poor odds to call.

Am I getting there ?

( Cheers btw )

[Muahahahaha]

I think a crowbar might be just the thing we need, and I have some time to kill before I have to get ready to go out. Don't want to play any poker before I do so here we go......

Why do you think is AA best against only one opponent? ie, what do you mean when you say "performs best"

Say you gamble 1000 chips, against your opponents 1000 chips. Say they have a range of hands that includes any two 10 or above, or any pair.

You will be just over 84% for a net win of 1000 chips in the pot.


Say you gamble 1000 chips again, but against 2 opponents with the same range of cards. You will be less likely to win the pot (just over 72%) but will have a net win of twice as much.

So would you prefer 1000 chips 84% of the time, or 2000 chips 72% of the time. (No helping folks, again no right/wrong answers)

Given that with the AA situation I felt I was ( relatively ) on top of my game, I want to win as much as possible, as safely as possible.  So although the 2000 chips 72 % of the time gives me more chips when it wins,  I almost bust out when I lose.  Now the greater chance of getting knocked out is less attractive.

So I go with 1000 @ 84% in this case.  I already had a decent stack, so no desperate steps are needed, go for the safer way to win.

[tantrum]

Your outs modification should also depend on what your opponents are holding.  In this scenario I  would have thought that one of them had a Qx/Kx/Jx.  Hence you had no reason to stay in the hand after the flop.

If you are drawing to straight and you are pretty sure no-one is on the flush draw then no reason to compromise your outs, but if you suspect they are trying to get their flush, your outs will be compromised.

[thetank]

Given that with the AA situation I felt I was ( relatively ) on top of my game, I want to win as much as possible, as safely as possible.  So although the 2000 chips 72 % of the time gives me more chips when it wins,  I almost bust out when I lose.  Now the greater chance of getting knocked out is less attractive.

So I go with 1000 @ 84% in this case.  I already had a decent stack, so no desperate steps are needed, go for the safer way to win.

Ok, that's great. The % of time you win the pot is much more important in STTs than how many chips are on offer.*

What you need to do is use that same rationale when it comes to deciding whether to draw or not.

When it looks like you might have the odds, you actually don't. *

This is why working out odds and outs is not as important in STTs. There's no point, to begin with, getting your odds down tight, as they will only mislead you as to the correct move.



*Relative chip values in STTs is something worth asking about. I can't go into it now, have to go.
Someone else may help.

[Muahahahaha]

Thanks for all this stuff.

I gotta go now too. I'll reread it & ask more stupid questions soon

cheers

[SupaMonkey]

Oi, Monkey

Click to see full-size image.

Is your name Muahahahaha? I said no helping, whatever happened to the chimp on the left? 

Any chance of 1000 chips and a battered sausage 78% of the time.

Disruptive pupil, go count the rulers and bring me the largest when you're done. 

  I'm sorry sir, i won't do it again, promise.

Ok, that's great. The % of time you win the pot is much more important in STTs than how many chips are on offer.

What about an MTT? I would generally want to be heads up because really it is only me vs the blinds (a point that Cloutier makes that i tend to agree with, thinking this way helps me play better poker) however, i can see a case for taking slightly more risk in the early-middle stages of the tournament if it would me go deeper. In the late stages of the tourney, i wouldn't want to take anymore risk than i have to. Am i right to think in this way?

[doubleup]

Forget the odds, forget the number of outs you may have, just stop drawing to anything in STTs.

If you win all the chips on the table, you can't cash em in. The biggest prize you can win is 50% of the prize pool. For this reason, keeping chips is more important than winning chips.

Best advice you will ever read.

(There might be equal best but still only equal)

You should post more on this board Tank

[thetank]

What about an MTT? I would generally want to be heads up because really it is only me vs the blinds (a point that Cloutier makes that i tend to agree with, thinking this way helps me play better poker) however, i can see a case for taking slightly more risk in the early-middle stages of the tournament if it would me go deeper. In the late stages of the tourney, i wouldn't want to take anymore risk than i have to. Am i right to think in this way?

In the late stages, I guess this would be very structure and prizepool dependant.

With a slow structure/flat payout, you would lean towards high % STT poker.

With a crapshoot structure/top heavy payout, you'd take gambles for a stack. Oftentimes twenty, 5th-9th place finishes arn't worth one 1st.