This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

Feedback thread for the quiz 'Implied Odds and Reverse Implied Odds'

  • 2 replies
    • Ectoz
      Joined: 07.04.2010 Posts: 135
      In the evaluation,on the first question,the author says you are out of position and that is incorrect.You sit in the BU,which gives absolute position.

      On question 3,altough i agree it's for educational purpose,i value a 3bet much higher.The reason for this is that with so much dead money in the pot,a squeeze here will have enormous fold equity.UTG will see that he already has 2 callers and thus giving a squeeze much more credit than he would have if we squeezed only vs 1 player.With a 20BB raise,i think UTG will see himself ahead only with 1% of his OR range.CO is so aggressive that you have to give a particularly weak range for over-calling.Either that or he is trapping,which i doubt.If MP1 calls,we will still be ahead of his range.

      A 3-bet would be a bluff.

      And rightfully so.What i'm trying to say here is that our hand will look like QQ+,AK here,maybe TT-JJ too and villain will fold 95% of his range.Table image would have the final say if we 3bet or not.

      Questions 6 and 7 : raise flop,we have 6 high.Besides,look who raised,he is going to have a king and AA here less than 16% of the time and even then i think he will only continue with KQ/AK type of kings.

      Also on question 7
      Assumptions need to be made: you only have eight outs remaining, although they are clean (Villain isn't holding a flush draw).

      wat? since when villain isn't EVER EVER NEVER EVER going to hold a flush draw there?
    • tolari
      Joined: 02.11.2010 Posts: 761
      In question 7 the author calculates pot odds wrong.

      "Actual odds: (1.75 + 1.20) / 1.20 = approx. 2.5 to 1"

      our odds are (1.75+2*1.20)/1.2=approx. 3.5 to 1.

      correct me if im wrong but thats the way that hm calculated pot odds, dont confuse people like that.

      also question 5 lacks word without, it states:
      "Can you call implied odds correctly here?"