Roulette | Poker | Blackjack | Tips & Strategy
Learn Texas Holdem Video Source & Info:
In the first #short of our Poker Math series, we will discuss how to calculate pot odds and what to do with them.
POKER COACHING:
To take your game to the next level – JOIN FOR FREE HERE: http://www.pokercoaching.com/free
Take ADVANTAGE of my Black Friday Sale! https://pokercoaching.com/blackfriday
*Sale Ends: 28th November 2021*
Source: YouTube
Comments are closed.
roulette win | roulette strategy | roulette tips | roulette | roulette strategies | roulette casino
Baccarat Strategy Example 168
NEW BUFFET, NEW STADIUM LOCATION AT TROPICANA, TRAFFIC, BLACKJACK AT DTG, LAS VEGAS ADVISOR EP:93
✨ Finally 100% Low Risk Strategy to Roulette Win || Roulette Strategy to Win
Best Blackjack Strategy- My 4 BIGGEST Secrets To Win At Blackjack Everytime: By Christopher MitchellAll information on this page should be seen as pure entertainment and not pure facts. We disclaims all responsibility for the information from the videos, information and comments.
I thought it would be 3:1 because your $100 is dead money. No?
It would be helpful to show the calculation of the win rate needed to make the bet worth it. This is barely half an explanation lol.
Nice save at the end haha
It's 3:1becayse the 100 you put in you win back
Yes more of this. Lots more of this.
Lmao I love how you're speaking so slowly like we're all guys
Robot voice: LoOz
Super basic and short, but better if it went a few seconds further than just a ratio and perhaps brought up a hand range chart, but I suppose this is more of a next step and includes some guesswork on villain perceived range etc when the goal of this short was just pot odds.
I always found this confusing, describing pot odds as net:bet instead of winnings:bet.
In the net:bet structure, 2:1 pot odds means you have to win >1/3 of the time. 4:1 pot odds means you have to win >1/5 of the time.
Why describe pot odds this way if you are always ‘adding 1’ when calculating the required equity to continue profitably?
Why not just call the $100pot facing $100 bet 3:1 so you can easily see you need to win 1/3 of the time?
What further calculations use that 2 in the net:bet structure, that don’t immediately change it to a 3 to add in your bet to the winnings pool?
It also goes contrary to how you would calculate other winnings, for example. Entering a tournament for $100 that has a $1000 prize, you clearly would describe this as being a 10:1, or 10x, payout, even though technically you are paying $100 for a chance to net $900. What would ever be the benefit of calling this 9:1? You need to win 1/10 times, so why not just make things easy and include your entry fee in the winnings pool, and do the same with individual pots, to easily understand the relationship to equity%?
If someone bets pot, you pay 1 pot to win 3 pots, so it’s profitable with 1/3 or 33% equity.
If someone bets .5pot, you pay .5pot to win 2pots, so it’s profitable with .5/2 or 25% equity.
If someone bets 12x pot, you pay 12 pots to win 25 pots, so it’s profitable with 12/25 or 48% equity.
Why would I ever describe that as being 12:13? What math uses that net-winnings of 13?