Hi all,

It's been a while since my last post so.....

There I was, noodling around, sucking up as much poker info as I could when I chanced upon a pot odds article by Phil Gordon with a quiz at the end. I was glad to note I got every single one right except for the very last question. And it still doesn't make sense and so I'm hoping for vindication

The scenario: The pot has $1,000 in it after the turn. You've got a straight and the best hand possible. You are absolutely certain that your opponent, Howard Lederer, has a flush draw. Only the river card is yet to come and both of you have very deep stacks. How much is the minimum you can bet to give Howard insufficient odds to chase his flush?

I know that with 9 cards to improve his hands, the odds are 19% and that Phil likes to work on an 'outs multiplied by 2' ratio to get 18%. So I round it up to 20% (or 1 in 5) and conclude that a bet of $200 would be enough. The actual answer came out as being any bet greater than $282 and not $180 - $200 that the maths dictated.

On reflection, I realised that my bet of 1/5 actually increased Howard's odds but still, $282 seemed too low a bet. Howard needs better odds than 1 in 5 (which is 4 to 1; which is 20%) in order to call. **Anything numerically higher than 1 in 5 (4 to 1) or less than 20% is providing odds to call. A bet of $282 makes the pot $1282 thus giving Howard odds of 1 in 5.5. Or 4.5 to 1. Or 18%. This should be enough for Howard to call, not fold.

Even a bet of $300 fails to provide insufficient odds as it provides odds of 1 in 5.3 (4.3 to 1) or 23%. As Howard needs to get less than 1 in 5 - which is less than 4 to 1 but greater than 20% - the required bet would need to be nearer $400 as this equates to 1 in 4.5 = 3.5 to 1 = 22%.

And even then, it's still close enough for Howard to call so I don't see how the supplied answer of $282 can possibly be correct.

I know it's not real life. I just like to make sure my calculations tally.

Thx

** I now 1 in 5 is higher than 1 in 7 and that 4 to 1 is higher than 9 to 1. That is why I mentioned "numerically higher" as inthis respect, 1 in 7 is higher than 1 in 5 and 9 to 1 is higher than 4 to 1.