100 To 1 Odds
Wagers made between individuals, peer-to-peer, are older than money, back when barter was the method of trade and gambling. Betting involving go-betweens called “bookmakers” is less than 200 years old. But it is only in the past decade or so that true “betting exchanges” have made their appearance, allowing individuals to go back to one-on-one wagering, primarily via the Internet.
In 2000, a U.K. web site called Flutter.com began matching up punters. It was soon followed by betfair, who initially called their version “open market” betting, but soon changed it to “betting exchange” and eventually swallowed up Flutter.com to become the dominant force in the fledgling industry.
A betting exchange is similar to a bookmaker or sports book in that it allows bettors to wager on various events. However, there are some significant differences, not the least of which is that the exchange sets no odds. Nor does it assume any risk. Instead, betting exchanges make their income off commissions, which they take as a small percentage of net winnings from every customer on every event or market.
When you are given bookmaker odds, the ratio tells the multiplier of your bet if you win. You win 50 times your bet if you win - $5,000 You relinquish your $100 bet otherwise. Lotto Texas with Extra!® overall odds: 1 in 7.9 (including break-even prizes). Daily 4™ odds: 1 in 100 to 1 in 10,000. For example, if you have a placed a bet on the horse having 100 to 1 odds that it means that the establishment opine that the horse has very less.
SO i have heard, but want to know from all of you experts. When playing slot machines you should play the highest level of slot you can afford because the.
In return for this commission, the betting exchange acts as a matchmaker and a clearing house. It pairs up bettors on either side of a wager, hold their stakes until the results are known, and issues the winning payouts. It also maintains records, not only of the wagers but also of the events that are bet on. It contains a massive archive of information that savvy punters can use to their advantage.
What is especially beneficial to experienced handicappers is the ability to set their own lines. The betting exchange takes no position on odds, spreads, or even what markets are available. It is entirely up to the subscribers to make all of the offers.
For example, if a bettor wants to offer 100-to-1 odds on England winning the 2014 FIFA World Cup for up to £100 in wagers, the exchange will post it exactly that way. If another bettor offers the same market at 120-to-1 odds, the exchange will post that, too. Other subscribers can take their pick of the two, obviously going with the higher payout. This breeds competition and a completely free market for wagering.
Some betting exchanges, such as betfair, have used European decimal odds rather than traditional U.K. fractional odds to list the markets. This practice differentiates them somewhat from bookmakers. Others have introduced a toggle that allows the subscriber to move back and forth between formats, and some have American-style plus/minus three-digit odds available, too.
Another aspect of betting exchanges that attracts wagers in large numbers is the ability to “lay” odds. In traditional wagering, bettors can only wager on an event happening, such as a team winning a game or an individual winning a tournament. Laying odds allows them to offer a wager on something not occurring, such as a certain golfer not making the first round cut, an underdog failing to cover the spread, or a football club not being relegated. All it requires is another subscriber willing to be the “backer” of the bet and take the other side.
In-running betting or “live” betting is also a special strength of betting exchanges. Virtually every aspect of a game or event can be wagered on as play occurs—which side will score the next goal, whether a golfer will sink a long putt, who will win the next point in a tennis match—and the bigger the audience the more opportunity to find backers or takers for any offer.
One might wonder if there are enough individuals using betting exchanges to support such a system, no matter how easy or flexible it might be to use. However, private punters are just one source of the action at a betting exchange. Another major source of action are “traders” who use the exchanges to balance the action for bookmakers, hedge large bets, and take advantage of discrepancies between the odds offered at traditional sports books. There are no limits set on wagers, other than how many bettors are willing to risk going one-on-one.
In poker, pot odds are the ratio of the current size of the pot to the cost of a contemplated call.[1] Pot odds are often compared to the probability of winning a hand with a future card in order to estimate the call's expected value.
Converting odds ratios to and from percentages[edit]
Odds are most commonly expressed as ratios, but converting them to percentages often make them easier to work with. The ratio has two numbers: the size of the pot and the cost of the call. To convert this ratio to the equivalent percentage, these two numbers are added together and the cost of the call is divided by this sum. For example, the pot is $30, and the cost of the call is $10. The pot odds in this situation are 30:10, or 3:1 when simplified. To get the percentage, 30 and 10 are added to get a sum of 40 and then 10 is divided by 40, giving 0.25, or 25%.
To convert any percentage or fraction to the equivalent odds, the numerator is subtracted from the denominator and then this difference is divided by the numerator. For example, to convert 25%, or 1/4, 1 is subtracted from 4 to get 3 (or 25 from 100 to get 75) and then 3 is divided by 1 (or 75 by 25), giving 3, or 3:1.
Using pot odds to determine expected value[edit]
When a player holds a drawing hand (a hand that is behind now but is likely to win if a certain card is drawn) pot odds are used to determine the expected value of that hand when the player is faced with a bet.
The expected value of a call is determined by comparing the pot odds to the odds of drawing a card that wins the pot. When the odds of drawing a card that wins the pot are numerically higher than the pot odds, the call has a positive expectation; on average, a portion of the pot that is greater than the cost of the call is won. Conversely, if the odds of drawing a winning card are numerically lower than the pot odds, the call has a negative expectation, and the expectation is to win less money on average than it costs to call the bet.
Implied pot odds[edit]
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)[edit]
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 4/47 (8.5%), which when converted to odds is 10.75:1. Since the pot lays 10:1 (9.1%), Alice will on average lose money by calling if there is no future betting. However, Alice expects her opponent to call her additional $1 bet on the final betting round if she makes her draw. Alice will fold if she misses her draw and thus lose no additional bets. Alice's 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.
Reverse implied pot odds[edit]
Reverse implied pot odds, or simply reverse implied odds, apply to situations where a player will win the minimum if holding the best hand but lose the maximum if not having the best hand. Aggressive actions (bets and raises) are subject to reverse implied odds, because they win the minimum if they win immediately (the current pot), but may lose the maximum if called (the current pot plus the called bet or raise). These situations may also occur when a player has a made hand with little chance of improving what is believed to be currently the best hand, but an opponent continues to bet. An opponent with a weak hand will be likely to give up after the player calls and not call any bets the player makes. An opponent with a superior hand, will, on the other hand, continue, (extracting additional bets or calls from the player).
Limit Texas hold'em example[edit]
With one card to come, Alice holds a made hand with little chance of improving and faces a $10 call to win a $30 pot. If her opponent has a weak hand or is bluffing, Alice expects no further bets or calls from her opponent. If her opponent has a superior hand, Alice expects the opponent to bet another $10 on the end. Therefore, if Alice wins, she only expects to win the $30 currently in the pot, but if she loses, she expects to lose $20 ($10 call on the turn plus $10 call on the river). Because she is risking $20 to win $30, Alice's reverse implied pot odds are 1.5-to-1 ($30/$20) or 40 percent (1/(1.5+1)). For calling to have a positive expectation, Alice must believe the probability of her opponent having a weak hand is over 40 percent.
Manipulating pot odds[edit]
Often a player will bet to manipulate the pot odds offered to other players. A common example of manipulating pot odds is to make a bet to protect a made hand that discourages opponents from chasing a drawing hand.
No-limit Texas hold 'em example[edit]
With one card to come, Bob has a made hand, but the board shows a potential flush draw. Bob wants to bet enough to make it wrong for an opponent with a flush draw to call, but Bob does not want to bet more than he has to in the event the opponent already has him beat.
Assuming a $20 pot and one opponent, if Bob bets $10 (half the pot), when his opponent acts, the pot will be $30 and it will cost $10 to call. The opponent's pot odds will be 3-to-1, or 25 percent. If the opponent is on a flush draw (9/46, approximately 19.565 percent or 4.11-to-1 odds against with one card to come), the pot is not offering adequate pot odds for the opponent to call unless the opponent thinks they can induce additional final round betting from Bob if the opponent completes their flush draw (see implied pot odds).
A bet of $6.43, resulting in pot odds of 4.11-to-1, would make his opponent mathematically indifferent to calling if implied odds are disregarded.
Bluffing frequency[edit]
According to David Sklansky, game theory shows that a player should bluff a percentage of the time equal to his opponent's pot odds to call the bluff. For example, in the final betting round, if the pot is $30 and a player is contemplating a $30 bet (which will give his opponent 2-to-1 pot odds for the call), the player should bluff half as often as he would bet for value (one out of three times).
Slanksy notes that this conclusion does not take into account some of the context of specific situations. A player's bluffing frequency often accounts for many different factors, particularly the tightness or looseness of their opponents. Bluffing against a tight player is more likely to induce a fold than bluffing against a loose player, who is more likely to call the bluff. His strategy is an equilibrium strategy in the sense that it is optimal against someone playing an optimal strategy against it, though no lesser strategy can beat it (another strategy may beat the lesser strategy by more).
See also[edit]
Notes[edit]
100 To 1 Odds Payout
References[edit]
100 To 1 Odds
- David Sklansky (1987). The Theory of Poker. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-00-0.
- David Sklansky (2001). Tournament Poker for Advanced Players. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-28-0.
- David Sklansky and Mason Malmuth (1988). Hold 'em Poker for Advanced Players. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-22-1.
- Dan Harrington and Bill Robertie (2004). Harrington on Hold'em: Expert Strategy For No-Limit Tournaments; Volume I: Strategic Play. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-33-7.
- Dan Harrington and Bill Robertie (2005). Harrington on Hold'em: Expert Strategy For No-Limit Tournaments; Volume II: The Endgame. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-35-3.
- David Sklansky and Ed Miller (2006). No Limit Hold 'Em Theory and Practice. Two Plus Two Publications. ISBN1-880685-37-X.