Confession: Lost $4,400 in about 7 minutes

[thadchr]

Rough go man. Truly feel sorry.
We've all had shit like that happen to us... just sucks when you're playing for money that means a ton to your bankroll.

[sapidoc]

I apologize for I am not a die hard card player I do not care to waste my life sitting at a card table 8 hours a day I prefer sports and horse wagering. the odds of him catching his flush on the turn card are actually 19% I apologize for not getting my calculator out before posting. None the less he still made a -EV play. flush-19% trip 6's- 4% 2 pair- 6.5% combined- 29.5% So when he gave himself 2-1 after the flop by re-raising his opponent he still at best only had a 29.5% chance of winning a bet that he needs to win 33.33%. A -EV of 11.5% and this is not assuming the possibility of his opponent improving his hand on the turn. Please show me your math on how this is a +EV play re-raising on the flop with a pair of 6's and a flush draw with a king on the board????????????

I guess you were serious.

There's a ton of fail still going on in those %'s and you can't just sum them like that not to mention that its way more complicated than what you are making it out to be.

OP = The original poster
retard = guy with 99

Preflop there's $200 in the pot. If OP has 0% equity then you could say he's lost -$40 so far, but he's obviously got some equity preflop and 5-handed I absolutely love 6h5h, especially if I'm at a particularly passive table and can see a lot of flops.

On the flop his raise gets called making it $800 total in there and yea that's a full $300 put into the pot at just over 20% equity by the OP, but let's face it with retard holding 99 and getting raised on a K-high flop 5-handed you have at least some fold equity. Obviously since the guy peeled we know he's uber-bad and I'm gunna assume that OP can value-town him when he hits, but if not OP has position and can get a free river.

Turn: OP Still has $1560 behind and then hits probably his best card. I say this because if a heart hits then he might not get retard to shove, and even a 6 looks scarier than a 5 since now any K or any 6 beats him. In order to calculate the EV before the turn you'd need to properly estimate how much $ retard pays you when each of the different river-types hit, as well as the likeihood of each. You would need to estimate this implied probability for the river as well.

We already know that OP loses $220 in EV on the flop, so all he would need to make is $220 on during the rest of the hand to breakeven in this exact spot. If the flush hits can we extract > $220 from the OP? What about a 6? What about a 5? What about anything else?

The end result is that OP gets all that money in with about 80% equity (the suits of the other cards like the 9s matter here, but 80% is close enough to prove my point).

So now on the turn OP ens up establishing 80% equity in a pot well over $3000, so well over $2,400 in EV.

Its really hard to do an exact EV calculation as you can see, but I hope that I've described at least some of the elements you need to consider. In my experience and after reading the very minimal post of the hand I would definitely lean to +EV plays on every street. (Even the flop! --Implied Probability remember!)

Hope that helps.

[boneheaded1]

Sapidoc, I agree with what you are saying but how often do you do you walk away with 3x your buy-in? Almost everyone gets there during game, but few walk away with it. They generally don't walk until they've had a losing hand or two that brings them under the 3x buy-in. No matter how good you are the bad beats are always waiting around the corner. The worse the table the more apt I am to walk away at that point, those are the tables where you get brutal beats. If it's a table of solid players, I might keep playing but tighten up.

[thadchr]

How well you do usually depends a little on the people at the table. If you're winning you should probably stay around, if you're losing then leave. As long as you are not tired and playing your best then stick around at a game you can beat. Winning 3x should not be a cue to leave unless you are sitting down with too much $ to start with and playing above your bankroll. I wouldn't want to risk losing more than 10% at a given table session, but if 3x takes you to over 10% then maybe try a smaller game.

Agree to some extent though. If you're playing your best and have a great feel for the table, you're in a fine spot unless you start tossing your money around. That said, I would definitely have cashed that out, and start right back up with your $1000 bankroll. You lose that, you know you're no longer playing as well, you leave, and you're still up a bunch.

[rm18]

[QUOTE=sharpcat;7968475]I apologize for I am not a die hard card player I do not care to waste my life sitting at a card table 8 hours a day I prefer sports and horse wagering. the odds of him catching his flush on the turn card are actually 19% I apologize for not getting my calculator out before posting. None the less he still made a -EV play.

flush-19%
trip 6's- 4%
2 pair- 6.5%
combined- 29.5%

So when he gave himself 2-1 after the flop by re-raising his opponent he still at best only had a 29.5% chance of winning a bet that he needs to win 33.33%. A -EV of 11.5% and this is not assuming the possibility of his opponent improving his hand on the turn.




dude the hand he flopped would be a slight favorite over AK on that board

[OmgUrMom]

He had a 6h5h (not a very great starting hand) limps into the flop. Flop comes pairing is little 6 with a weak kicker and gives him a flush draw. Roughly $175 in the pot his opponent raises him $130 offering him 2.3-1 odds (break even % 30%) he has a 10% chance of catching another heart and his little 66 is likely already beaten and if not will likely get beat on the next two cards. OP now decides to re-raise to $300 now decreasing his odds to 2-1 (break even % 33.33%) and giving his opponent 3.5-1 odds (22%).

I am sorry but with a K showing on the board and only a 10% chance of catching his flush the OP had nowhere near having a 34% chance of winning his hand. More importantly his opponents 99 had him beat from the start outside of his 10% chance of catching his flush.

I read his post very correctly

If your odds of winning your hand are less than the break even point of the odds you or your opponent are offering yourself it is a bad bet.

he raised the flop, this does a couple things. 1. he may fold now 2. sets up a double barrel semi bluff if BJ doesnt catch his card on the turn. (by betting on the turn when his hand misses he should often be able to fold out 77-QQ).

after the turn comes he makes a standard bet and gets shoved. hard to put his opponent on a hand here because how he played the hand doesnt make too much sense. so the all-in call is fine. (im guessing his opponent thought he was tilted and thought he had nothing/flush draw.

he didnt play the hand wrong at any spot really. i'd usually fold that hand pre-flop but he is not making a monumental error by calling. id usually raise more on the flop as well. something like $400

[sharpcat]

I guess you were serious.

There's a ton of fail still going on in those %'s and you can't just sum them like that not to mention that its way more complicated than what you are making it out to be.

OP = The original poster
retard = guy with 99

Preflop there's $200 in the pot. If OP has 0% equity then you could say he's lost -$40 so far, but he's obviously got some equity preflop and 5-handed I absolutely love 6h5h, especially if I'm at a particularly passive table and can see a lot of flops.

On the flop his raise gets called making it $800 total in there and yea that's a full $300 put into the pot at just over 20% equity by the OP, but let's face it with retard holding 99 and getting raised on a K-high flop 5-handed you have at least some fold equity. Obviously since the guy peeled we know he's uber-bad and I'm gunna assume that OP can value-town him when he hits, but if not OP has position and can get a free river.

Turn: OP Still has $1560 behind and then hits probably his best card. I say this because if a heart hits then he might not get retard to shove, and even a 6 looks scarier than a 5 since now any K or any 6 beats him. In order to calculate the EV before the turn you'd need to properly estimate how much $ retard pays you when each of the different river-types hit, as well as the likeihood of each. You would need to estimate this implied probability for the river as well.

We already know that OP loses $220 in EV on the flop, so all he would need to make is $220 on during the rest of the hand to breakeven in this exact spot. If the flush hits can we extract > $220 from the OP? What about a 6? What about a 5? What about anything else?

The end result is that OP gets all that money in with about 80% equity (the suits of the other cards like the 9s matter here, but 80% is close enough to prove my point).

So now on the turn OP ens up establishing 80% equity in a pot well over $3000, so well over $2,400 in EV.

Its really hard to do an exact EV calculation as you can see, but I hope that I've described at least some of the elements you need to consider. In my experience and after reading the very minimal post of the hand I would definitely lean to +EV plays on every street. (Even the flop! --Implied Probability remember!)

Hope that helps.

Actually you have proven absolutely nothing with this post.

This is the equivalent to saying that the Colts are a good team and the Titans have not scored a TD in 13 quarters. Your theory involves nothing more than elementary level math and your silly idea that reading your opponent is going to make your -EV play a +EV play. Ignoring mathematical probabilities has proven time and time again to be a long term losing style of play.

First off your EV is easy to calculate because what you fail to realize is that because there is another round of betting after the turn card you are only wagering on the out come of the turn and the river is a round of betting completely independent of itself. This is why I say that you have a 19% chance of improving your hand and making a flush because we are not including the river since after the turn we will be faced with a entirely new betting situation.

Secondly we are not evaluating that the player has 99 after the flop because in real life we do not know this yet. It does not matter if his opponent made a bad call we are not evaluating his opponent here. Ironically the OP made an equally bad play and his opponent actually did have the better hand before the OP got lucky on the turn. My point is that the OP should have never even made it to see the turn card he was not getting good enough odds to justify making the call let alone re-raising on the flop.

Maybe your style of intuitive play works for you as a poker player but I know in sports wagering I have never witnessed an intuitive player be profitable long term. If you are making -EV plays more often than you are making +EV plays you are going to lose long term no matter how good you are at reading your opponent.

[dlweaver]

ouch. hope things get better. terrible beat with the 88 that was tough

[Soxsfan9]

Tough beat, sucks when guys are willing to just give you their money and you get outdrawn on!

[nyed1010]

why is this a confession?

[dise-pa]

bad luck should have gone out and smoked an other cig....

[sharpcat]

he raised the flop, this does a couple things. 1. he may fold now 2. sets up a double barrel semi bluff if BJ doesnt catch his card on the turn. (by betting on the turn when his hand misses he should often be able to fold out 77-QQ).

after the turn comes he makes a standard bet and gets shoved. hard to put his opponent on a hand here because how he played the hand doesnt make too much sense. so the all-in call is fine. (im guessing his opponent thought he was tilted and thought he had nothing/flush draw.

he didnt play the hand wrong at any spot really. i'd usually fold that hand pre-flop but he is not making a monumental error by calling. id usually raise more on the flop as well. something like $400

This aggressive style play is meant for when your bankroll is 10 times what the table buy in is

If you are sitting with a $1900 chip stack it is not a very bright idea too make a bluff using 16% of your bankroll.

The fact that you can not figure out how to profit from a bookie offering you +290 on a parlay is enough to show that you are an amateur gambler. Every body thinks they are a great poker player this day and age but ironically very few have made a comfortable living doing so.

[OmgUrMom]

Actually you have proven absolutely nothing with this post.

This is the equivalent to saying that the Colts are a good team and the Titans have not scored a TD in 13 quarters. Your theory involves nothing more than elementary level math and your silly idea that reading your opponent is going to make your -EV play a +EV play. Ignoring mathematical probabilities has proven time and time again to be a long term losing style of play.

First off your EV is easy to calculate because what you fail to realize is that because there is another round of betting after the turn card you are only wagering on the out come of the turn and the river is a round of betting completely independent of itself. This is why I say that you have a 19% chance of improving your hand and making a flush because we are not including the river since after the turn we will be faced with a entirely new betting situation.

Secondly we are not evaluating that the player has 99 after the flop because in real life we do not know this yet. It does not matter if his opponent made a bad call we are not evaluating his opponent here. Ironically the OP made an equally bad play and his opponent actually did have the better hand before the OP got lucky on the turn. My point is that the OP should have never even made it to see the turn card he was not getting good enough odds to justify making the call let alone re-raising on the flop.

Maybe your style of intuitive play works for you as a poker player but I know in sports wagering I have never witnessed an intuitive player be profitable long term. If you are making -EV plays more often than you are making +EV plays you are going to lose long term no matter how good you are at reading your opponent.

if his opponent had AK here, he has 52.83% to win by the river

and you are trying to justify a fold on the flop?

[OmgUrMom]

This aggressive style play is meant for when your bankroll is 10 times what the table buy in is

If you are sitting with a $1900 chip stack it is not a very bright idea too make a bluff using 16% of your bankroll.

The fact that you can not figure out how to profit from a bookie offering you +290 on a parlay is enough to show that you are an amateur gambler. Every body thinks they are a great poker player this day and age but ironically very few have made a comfortable living doing so.

you may or may not be a good sports bettor. but you sure as fukk don't know poker so I'd advise you stop the self burial.

[sharpcat]

if his opponent had AK here, he has 52.83% to win by the river

and you are trying to justify a fold on the flop?

Thats great that you were able to find an online poker hand calculator you sure are a good gambler

This would be great information if we were betting on the river, but since we are betting on the turn and the river is a completely independent round of betting that number is pretty much useless.

Your thought process is the same reason why millions of players who have a hand calculator on their computers still suck at poker, because you do not know how to use it.

[OmgUrMom]

Thats great that you were able to find an online poker hand calculator you sure are a good gambler

This would be great information if we were betting on the river, but since we are betting on the turn and the river is a completely independent round of betting that number is pretty much useless.

Your thought process is the same reason why millions of players who have a hand calculator on their computers still suck at poker, because you do not know how to use it.

i was trying to simplify the truth for someone as dull in the head as yourself but it didn't seem to work

hu4rollz? (please god say yes)

[sharpcat]

you may or may not be a good sports bettor. but you sure as fukk don't know poker so I'd advise you stop the self burial.

The math involved in poker is no different than that of what is used for sports, roulette, black jack, and any other game.

Keep playing poker on feel and ignore math and keep betting on the colts because their QB is better than the other teams I am sure you will come out ahead in the long run.

[manny24]

The math involved in poker is no different than that of what is used for sports, roulette, black jack, and any other game.

Keep playing poker on feel and ignore math and keep betting on the colts because their QB is better than the other teams I am sure you will come out ahead in the long run.

[OmgUrMom]

The math involved in poker is no different than that of what is used for sports, roulette, black jack, and any other game.

Keep playing poker on feel and ignore math and keep betting on the colts because their QB is better than the other teams I am sure you will come out ahead in the long run.

your right phil ivey/tom dwan/patrick antonious (any thinking pro poker player) ect. ect. is folding on this flop (sarcasm)

[sapidoc]

Sapidoc, I agree with what you are saying but how often do you do you walk away with 3x your buy-in? Almost everyone gets there during game, but few walk away with it. They generally don't walk until they've had a losing hand or two that brings them under the 3x buy-in. No matter how good you are the bad beats are always waiting around the corner. The worse the table the more apt I am to walk away at that point, those are the tables where you get brutal beats. If it's a table of solid players, I might keep playing but tighten up.

Almost everyone gets there during game -- I have to disagree with this.

I see what you are saying with your other points. It really depends on stack sizes, table dynamics and other factors. If the only reason you leave after 3x is because you hit 3x and you're worried you will drop below that then its probably the fact you are adjusting how you play because there's more money at risk. Play deep-stacked is definitely different than playing 100BB, so if you don't feel comfortable playing deep then it could definitely be the correct decision to leave once you hit your 'goal'.

Good luck at the tables.

[sapidoc]

Actually you have proven absolutely nothing with this post....

Dude I tried to take your post seriously and help you out, but if you are going to not take what I'm putting down seriously then you must be delusional. Not a single person that has posted as agreed with anything you have written and you are continuing to embarrass your self with each argument you try to make.

This is the equivalent to saying that the Colts are a good team and the Titans have not scored a TD in 13 quarters. Your theory involves nothing more than elementary level math and your silly idea that reading your opponent is going to make your -EV play a +EV play. Ignoring mathematical probabilities has proven time and time again to be a long term losing style of play.

No idea what the Colts and Titans comment means here so I can't even comment.

I'm not ignoring math though. You are. If you think everyone plays the same when the turn brings a 3-flush on the board then you got to be kidding yourself.

And ffs of course a particular play can be +EV against one player and -EV against another. This is an absolutely incorrect statement.

First off your EV is easy to calculate because what you fail to realize is that because there is another round of betting after the turn card you are only wagering on the out come of the turn and the river is a round of betting completely independent of itself. This is why I say that you have a 19% chance of improving your hand and making a flush because we are not including the river since after the turn we will be faced with a entirely new betting situation.

Except for the fact that they are not independent. I mean ffs the stack sizes are not even necessarily the same size.

Secondly we are not evaluating that the player has 99 after the flop because in real life we do not know this yet. It does not matter if his opponent made a bad call we are not evaluating his opponent here. Ironically the OP made an equally bad play and his opponent actually did have the better hand before the OP got lucky on the turn. My point is that the OP should have never even made it to see the turn card he was not getting good enough odds to justify making the call let alone re-raising on the flop.

This is actually the first point where you say something true. I used 99 in my example since we knew his cards, but of course you would have the calculate the opponents range and apply a probability to that range and the possible holdings to come up with a completely probability. Again, this is why it is NOT simple to calculate the EV.

Maybe your style of intuitive play works for you as a poker player but I know in sports wagering I have never witnessed an intuitive player be profitable long term. If you are making -EV plays more often than you are making +EV plays you are going to lose long term no matter how good you are at reading your opponent.

Yea, you're right if you're making -EV plays you will lose long term. I'm proving that his plays were not this crazy -EV % that you applied to them. You have proved nothing.

Oh and in sports, you are wagering on a single event and applying odds to that outcome. This doesn't even apply to the poker hands posted.

[sapidoc]

The math involved in poker is no different than that of what is used for sports, roulette, black jack, and any other game. Keep playing poker on feel and ignore math and keep betting on the colts because their QB is better than the other teams I am sure you will come out ahead in the long run.

How the fk do I apply fold equity when I'm sports betting. Cause I could probably win a lot more bets if I could get the books to fold.

[GiveMeaBJ]

OMG---

Reason I don't check river there is because you that is a very loose game. Lots of guys with long money trying to just entertain themselves and play tons of hands. The only reason I took the chance at the game is because I knew I would be surrounded by fishies. I thought about checking the river to him. But, I had to bet it. I don't want it to go check-check when I have the 2nd nuts. I don't want to have to show my hand. So I bet in hopes he would call with a good 8. When he pushed I was positive he had a boat. Never thought about quads. Plus even if I did put him on quads I wouldn't fold there.

The 2nd hand I was on tilt a little bit which is why I re popped with 56. But I do reraise pretty often with suited connectors if the original raiser is a weak player. Not only because it makes me nearly impossible to put on a hand when I reraise and gets me action when I do have big hands. Not to mention I can isolate them against two high cards and I will pretty much know where I am at the whole hand. I pick up a lot of pots doing that. Not something I am proud of but I am a looser player.

[sapidoc]

OMG--- Reason I don't check river there is because you that is a very loose game. Lots of guys with long money trying to just entertain themselves and play tons of hands. The only reason I took the chance at the game is because I knew I would be surrounded by fishies. I thought about checking the river to him. But, I had to bet it. I don't want it to go check-check when I have the 2nd nuts. I don't want to have to show my hand. So I bet in hopes he would call with a good 8. When he pushed I was positive he had a boat. Never thought about quads. Plus even if I did put him on quads I wouldn't fold there. The 2nd hand I was on tilt a little bit which is why I re popped with 56. But I do reraise pretty often with suited connectors if the original raiser is a weak player. Not only because it makes me nearly impossible to put on a hand when I reraise and gets me action when I do have big hands. Not to mention I can isolate them against two high cards and I will pretty much know where I am at the whole hand. I pick up a lot of pots doing that. Not something I am proud of but I am a looser player.

You played both hands fine. 1st hand is a cooler. 2nd hand would be a sick spot if he shoved on your flop raise. But as played you got the $ in good and got unlucky.

[GAB]

lol that guy with 99 is a dam donk and sickbeat with AA so shitty

[sharpcat]

Dude I tried to take your post seriously and help you out, but if you are going to not take what I'm putting down seriously then you must be delusional. Not a single person that has posted as agreed with anything you have written and you are continuing to embarrass your self with each argument you try to make.



No idea what the Colts and Titans comment means here so I can't even comment.

I'm not ignoring math though. You are. If you think everyone plays the same when the turn brings a 3-flush on the board then you got to be kidding yourself.

And ffs of course a particular play can be +EV against one player and -EV against another. This is an absolutely incorrect statement.



Except for the fact that they are not independent. I mean ffs the stack sizes are not even necessarily the same size.



This is actually the first point where you say something true. I used 99 in my example since we knew his cards, but of course you would have the calculate the opponents range and apply a probability to that range and the possible holdings to come up with a completely probability. Again, this is why it is NOT simple to calculate the EV.



Yea, you're right if you're making -EV plays you will lose long term. I'm proving that his plays were not this crazy -EV % that you applied to them. You have proved nothing.

Oh and in sports, you are wagering on a single event and applying odds to that outcome. This doesn't even apply to the poker hands posted.

Not a single person who has posted here is a proven long term winner either.

Lots of mumbo-jumbo here you sound like J.R. Miller writing a book on playing poker. I have yet to see you support any of your mumbo-jumbo with numbers or any type of educated argument. Name calling and insults do nothing to support your argument.

[OmgUrMom]

the "sharp" in his name is quite comical when you think about it really

[Resler]

That first hand with AA was a terrible beat, absolutely heart breaking. You totally overplayed 65 suited though, very weak two pair and if he was chasing a flush as well you were most certainly beat. I guess you could blame it on being tilty from the first hand, but damn. I hate playing live poker, because the competition is so bad, bluffs and aggressive play doesn't pay off.

[Kaabee]

flopping a pair and a flush draw makes you a favorite over an overpair (52%-48%). if he as a set, so be it, it's just a cooler, but you still have outs. going all in with two pair and a flush draw is of course correct. i can't believe anyone would think about folding the flop or turn.

[alka07]

ouch the last hand the river have to hurt

[BRAVES1985]

ya thats poker

[sharpcat]

the "sharp" in his name is quite comical when you think about it really

I love how the guy who does not even have $200 measly dollars to post up with a sponsor book for the forum that he lives at and has "0" SBR points to his name is giving advice on how a professional would play the hand.

[sapidoc]

Not a single person who has posted here is a proven long term winner either. Lots of mumbo-jumbo here you sound like J.R. Miller writing a book on playing poker. I have yet to see you support any of your mumbo-jumbo with numbers or any type of educated argument. Name calling and insults do nothing to support your argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_odds

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fold_equity

There's some examples of the basics.

"The Theory of Poker" by David Sklansky is pretty good and I'd recommend it to you since it focuses on the math aspects of poker which I think you tend towards.

"Super System I & II" You've probably read since its the book on poker by Doyle himself, but good never the less.

Both the wiki articles and books support all of my arguments.

Check out "Caro's book of Poker Tells" by Mike Caro. I think you would learn the most from this one. It uses the tells and reads on players at the table and applies their weaknesses into actual mathematical profit that you would make given these tells as well as their estimated accuracy at the table.

[sharpcat]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_odds

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fold_equity

There's some examples of the basics.

"The Theory of Poker" by David Sklansky is pretty good and I'd recommend it to you since it focuses on the math aspects of poker which I think you tend towards.

"Super System I & II" You've probably read since its the book on poker by Doyle himself, but good never the less.

Both the wiki articles and books support all of my arguments.

Check out "Caro's book of Poker Tells" by Mike Caro. I think you would learn the most from this one. It uses the tells and reads on players at the table and applies their weaknesses into actual mathematical profit that you would make given these tells as well as their estimated accuracy at the table.

There are many ways to play any poker hand and all though I have never read "The theory of poker" I have read the first 2 editions of "Harrington on poker" and "Super systems I & II" many players will play hands differently.

In my original post I should have mentioned that this was my opinion and I still would say that the re-raise after the flop was uncalled for with nothing more than a pair of 6's and a draw for a player on tilt. At best he should have just called the raise, I would have leaned towards folding unless I had strong reason to believe that my opponent did not have a king or a larger pocket pair. He was beat pre-turn and caught a lucky card his opponent was beat pre-river and caught a lucky card, they both overplayed their hands if you ask me.

Players have a tendency to not let themselves get pushed around by a player who is on tilt and the OP had a short stack to play with, raising served no purpose here all he did was reduce his odds on his money.

Reading players is an important part of playing poker as is bluffing but betting for value is the most important part if you continue to make wagers at 2-1 odds and your hand is only likely to win 30% of the time you will continue to slowly lose your money. Too many guys get carried away bluffing and trying to read their opponent, bet for value and than pick your spots to bluff and make in depth reads.

[sapidoc]

if you continue to make wagers at 2-1 odds and your hand is only likely to win 30% of the time you will continue to slowly lose your money.

That's true statement, but no one is disagreeing with that. That's not the entire example from the OP.

He's not raising with the pair of sixes because he thinks he's ahead he's raising because (1) The guy could fold and he wins the pot immediately. This would then have positive expectation. (2) He could hit his draw raising with -EV odds on the flop, but implied odds on the turn or river which are greater. This action would also have positive expectation.




From:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_odds

Implied pot odds

Implied pot odds, or simply implied odds, are calculated the same way as pot odds, but take into consideration estimated future betting. Implied odds are calculated in situations where the player expects to fold in the following round if the draw is missed, thereby losing no additional bets, but expects to gain additional bets when the draw is made. Since the player expects to always gain additional bets in later rounds when the draw is made, and never lose any additional bets when the draw is missed, the extra bets that the player expects to gain, excluding his own, can fairly be added to the current size of the pot. This adjusted pot value is known as the implied pot.
Example (Texas Hold'em)

On the turn, Alice's hand is certainly behind, and she faces a $1 call to win a $10 pot against a single opponent. There are four cards remaining in the deck that make her hand a certain winner. Her probability of drawing one of those cards is therefore 4/46 (8.7%), which when converted to odds is 10.5:1. Since the pot lays 10:1 (9.1%), Alice will on average lose money by calling if there is no future betting. However, she expects her opponent to call her additional $1 bet on the last betting round if she makes her draw. She will fold if she misses her draw and thus lose no additional bets. Her implied pot is therefore $11 ($10 plus the expected $1 call to her additional $1 bet), so her implied pot odds are 11:1 (8.3%). Her call now has a positive expectation.