Tony, You’re right about the fact I was forgetting to add villain’s $10 bet into the existing $40 pot – creating a pot of $50 and thus odds of 1 in 5 or 4:1 as you said. This indicates that my maths was correct, which you mentioned.

However, with Spoon’s original situation of facing a $10 bet into a $15 pot and in this example I DID include villain’s bet as I commented that you are having to call $10 to win $25.

And so the plot thickens. My workings out are detailed so hopefully the breakdown in my thinking can be pinpointed. As you will see A & B work within themselves. C & D work within themselves but when I try to cross reference, the maths behind A & B do not work with C & D!


A) With your $10 pot bet example, it would appear that rather than calling 10 to win 20 being 1 IN 2 it is actually reverses, 2 TO 1. So 1/2 is not 1 IN 2 but 2 TO 1. Out of 3 attempts you win 1 and lose 2. Which equals 1 in 3.


B) This would also hold true for Spoon’s example & explanation that calling $10 to win $25 is not 1 IN 2.5 but 2.5 to 1. So again, 1/2.5 says you win 1 and lose 2.5 and so have odds of 1 in 3.5.

In these examples, the fractions indicate “TO”.
1/2 is 2 TO 1 (1 in 3)
1/2.5 is 2.5 TO 1 (1 in 3.5).

If this is so then the mystery is solved.


However…………


C) Let’s go back to the $40 pot and villain bets $10 – which you already mention is 1 in 5 (4 to 1).
Villain is betting 10 into 40 thus making a pot of 50. You are then being required to call 10 to win 50 or 1/5. In this instance, the fraction indicates “IN”. You have a 1 in 5 chance and so equals 4 to 1.

This is the way I learnt, the way I illustrated in my "recap" and the way I described in my other post. However, how can this be correct when in A) & B), the fraction indicates “TO” - meaning that 1/5 here should be 5 TO 1 (which is 1 in 6).

See the problem? Either a fraction indicates “IN” or “TO”.

D) Another way of looking at villain betting $10 into a $40 pot is to see his bet as 10 into 40 (10/40). This shows he is giving odds of 4 TO 1. Which is 1 in 5. And this is vindicated by the maths in C). You just don’t add them his bet to the pot as you did in C) but the maths still works out the same.

If we look at A) and B) in the same manner we get the same answers as I gave in my other post –contrary to what everyone else is saying and contrary to what has been worked out in this post.

In A) villain is betting 10 into a pot of 10. Thus odds of 1:1 or 1 in 2.In B) villain is betting 10 into 15, thus odds of 1.5 to 1 or 1 in 2.5.

So using the maths of C) and D) gives me the answers I came to in my above post which you say is wrong yet when I use them for facing a $10 bet into a $40 pot I am told that the maths is correct!

So which is true?