Cash Game Proofread my explanation of Pot Limit (1 Viewer)

Is it "Pot Limit" or "Pot-Limit"

  • Pot Limit

    Votes: 15 40.5%
  • Pot-Limit

    Votes: 13 35.1%
  • How would I know? You're the english guy, I'm a math guy!

    Votes: 9 24.3%

  • Total voters
    37

Poker Zombie

Royal Flush
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,652
Reaction score
38,586
Location
Nashville-ish
I will be teaching my group of NLHE tournament players how to play a Pot Limit (Pot-Limit?) cash game. Blinds of 25¢-25¢ (specifically to avoid the question of "is the Small Blind counted as complete)". Buy-ins will be $20-$50. Our regular events are $30 with max one rebuy, so I anticipate $30 buy-ins from most.

I will put out a newsletter so people can learn while they eat, which will give a basic overview. However, I am far from a Pot-Limit specialist. Yeah, I'm the ass that declares "POT!" when I really mean "all-In", and let someone else do the math. I will have help as a few of my players are experienced, but with one key assistant instructor playing boring old golf instead of FUN poker (I'm looking at you @Jonesey07 ) on the night in question, I just want to make sure I am neither over complicating the rules, nor over simplifying.

I'm interested in feedback from PL heroes, as well as from members that have never played a single hand of PL.

The poll is just to determine the use of the hyphen in Pot-Limit. :tup::tdown:?

Here is the article. Forgive the formatting, it'll look better printed in a 3-column newsletter. I have not proofed it for spelling/grammar - that comes later after I complete formatting.


“Pot!”

No, this isn’t an article arguing for the legalization of marijuana. I support it, but this month’s article is about Pot-Limit poker.

Pot-Limit is a lesser known version of the game. It’s goal is to fill the gap between (Fixed) Limit poker and No-Limit. It’s aim is to restrict the largest bet you can make, which can minimize potential losses and make it harder for deep-pocketed players to intimidate players on a budget.

Much like No-Limit is the king at Hold’em tables, Pot-Limit is the most common version of Omaha.

This is because Omaha is a higher-variance game, where more starting hands are playable. Pot-Limit makes it much tougher to steal the pot after 6 players have called.

As the term implies, the maximum bet or raise in a pot-limit game matches the pot's size. However, accurately calculating this "pot limit" proves more challenging than it initially seems.

Suppose you are first to act on the flop, and there is $2 in the pot. This case is simple – the most you can bet is $2.

It’s more complicated though if you are already facing a bet, because you have to include the cost of your call into the pot size.

This sounds very strange at first, and it is. In other words, the pot size is defined as:

· Your opponent’s bet PLUS

· The amount in the pot before your opponent’s bet PLUS

· The amount you would have to put in to call.

Once you come up with that number, that is the amount you’re allowed to RAISE on top of the cost to call.

In our 25¢-25¢ game, there is 50¢ in the pot (because of the blinds). If you are the first person to add to the pot (i.e. the first person that did not fold), the most you can raise is 75¢, making the bet $1.

The Big Blind is the first bet (25¢). The Small Blind is already in the pot (+25¢). The amount you would have to pay if you were to just call is also a quarter (+25¢). That raise is added to the cost to call (+25¢), and all that adds up to $1.

Confused? There is a shortcut, called the rule of 3.

If there is a bet in front of you, triple that bet, and add it to whatever else is in the pot.

Here’s an example: 25¢-25¢ game. Before the flop, 4 players limp into the pot by calling. The blinds check, so there is $1.50 in the pot. Flop comes out and 3 players check. The Player Four calls “pot”. Since he is the first to bet this round the math is simple, it is the $1.50 in the pot, which he puts in front of him. The fifth player also like the flop, and also declares “pot”. $1.50 x3 = $4.50, plus the amount in the pot not counting the last bet ($1.50 in the middle), so the raise is $6 more, and Player Five puts out $7.50 ($6 raise over the $1.50).

Pot-Limit can escalate very quickly. Thankfully, Pot-Limit only limits the maximum raise. The smallest raise still remains the amount of the Big Blind or the amount of the last legal raise, just like No-Limit.
 
I tell newbies when declaring “pot” - first say it “Pot”
1. Then make the call if there are bets in front of you
2.then add up all the chips in the pot, which includes all bets in front of all players, including theirs
3. Then put that amount in the pot on top of their original call.

I think they understand it better that way, rather than just saying “it’s mathemagic, pot is $xxx “
 
So for you 3xers, if blinds are .25/.50 and there are three callers and when it gets to the small blind he says “Pot” how much does he owe? Would be nice if you showed your math.
 
The Big Blind is the first bet (25¢). The Small Blind is already in the pot (+25¢).

This is not quite right. Yes the big blind is the bet faced by utg, but the SB is part of the tail, not part of the pot. This is a subtle distinction. It doesn't change the utg max open. However on SB's action, his 25¢ is live and doesn't get counted if he wants to bet pot.

Here’s an example: 25¢-25¢ game. Before the flop, 4 players limp into the pot by calling. The blinds check, so there is $1.50 in the pot. Flop comes out and 3 players check. The Player Four calls “pot”. Since he is the first to bet this round the math is simple, it is the $1.50 in the pot, which he puts in front of him. The fifth player also like the flop, and also declares “pot”. $1.50 x3 = $4.50, plus the amount in the pot not counting the last bet ($1.50 in the middle), so the raise is $6 more, and Player Five puts out $7.50 ($6 raise over the $1.50).

This is not right. Player five repots it to $6.

When using the 3x plus the rest shortcut, the key thing to remember is that calculates the total bet when making a pot size bet or raise, regardless what the bettor has out already (if anything).

I always tell people to make the 3x + the rest calculation, then "make it look like" that number. Meaning their bet should equal the result of the calculation.

So if you calculate: 3 x $1.50 + $1.50 = $6. Make it look like $6.

If SB calls and BB wants to repot, he calculates 3 x $6 (SB) + $6 (p5) + $1.50 (p4) + $1.50 (pot) = $27. Make it look like $27.

Now if Utg folds and player 4 wants to repot, he ignores his own bet and calculates: 3 x $27 (BB) + $6 (SB) + $6 (p5) + $1.50 (pot) = $94.50. Player 4 makes his bet look like $94.50.
 
This is not quite right. Yes the big blind is the bet faced by utg, but the SB is part of the tail, not part of the pot. This is a subtle distinction. It doesn't change the utg max open. However on SB's action, his 25¢ is live and doesn't get counted if he wants to bet pot.



This is not right. Player five repots it to $6.

When using the 3x plus the rest shortcut, the key thing to remember is that calculates the total bet when making a pot size bet or raise, regardless what the bettor has out already (if anything).

I always tell people to make the 3x + the rest calculation, then "make it look like" that number. Meaning their bet should equal the result of the calculation.

So if you calculate: 3 x $1.50 + $1.50 = $6. Make it look like $6.

If SB calls and BB wants to repot, he calculates 3 x $6 (SB) + $6 (p5) + $1.50 (p4) + $1.50 (pot) = $27. Make it look like $27.

Now if Utg folds and player 4 wants to repot, he ignores his own bet and calculates: 3 x $27 (BB) + $6 (SB) + $6 (p5) + $1.50 (pot) = $94.50. Player 4 makes his bet look like $94.50.

Of course new players that have never calculated “Pot” will intuitively grasp what you are saying. Hahahahahaha

“Remember, it’s like this unless that happens then you have to forget about that other thing and remember to add the first thing. Easy peasy”.

Just make the call, add up what’s in the pot and add that amount too. You have to count the pot anyway, why make it more complicated?
 
So for you 3xers, if blinds are .25/.50 and there are three callers and when it gets to the small blind he says “Pot” how much does he owe? Would be nice if you showed your math.

SB .25
BB .50
UTG calls .50
CO calls .50
BTN calls .50
SB pots to ... 3.00

Take BTN's .50 x3 = 1.50 + CO's .50 + UTG .50 + BB .50 = 3.00 total bet that SB can make it.

Since the 3X shortcut calculates the total amount that the better/raiser can make the bet (rather than the raise amount), I don't count whatever amount that person has previously put in that betting round (as a blind or prior bet).
 
So for you 3xers, if blinds are .25/.50 and there are three callers and when it gets to the small blind he says “Pot” how much does he owe? Would be nice if you showed your math.

3 x $0.50 (c3) + $0.50 (c2) + $0.50 (c1) + $0.50 (BB) = $3. SB pots to $3.
 
Incidentally, even though I use the 3X shortcut often, it still trips me up when I think about "why" 3X, because I understand that potting is call-first-then-raise-on-top which I'd instinctually think of as 2X plus the rest. I have to remind myself that the 3rd X is the last bet, and that's why it's 3X (and don't count the last bet too).

Would it be easier to understand if the shortcut was 2X last bet of the betting round (if any), plus all prior bets including the last bet?

On another note, do people always count SB as completing the blind when calculating pot?
 
Of course new players that have never calculated “Pot” will intuitively grasp what you are saying. Hahahahahaha

“Remember, it’s like this unless that happens then you have to forget about that other thing and remember to add the first thing. Easy peasy”.

Just make the call, add up what’s in the pot and add that amount too. You have to count the pot anyway, why make it more complicated?

Lol. It is actually a lot easier to do when you're looking at various neatly stacked piles of chips, believe it or not.
 
Lol. It is actually a lot easier to do when you're looking at various neatly stacked piles of chips, believe it or not.

Just saying look at the confusion here. I think in actual practice a lot of people count everything “in the pot” including the call, which leads to confusion during the game.

In the SB example, the small blind completes to .50, then adds what in the pot -$2.50 - and throws that on top for three dollar bet. No multiplication and no “do we count that or not”
 
Just saying look at the confusion here. I think in actual practice a lot of people count everything “in the pot” including the call, which leads to confusion during the game.

In the SB example, the small blind completes to .50, then adds what in the pot -$2.50 - and throws that on top for three dollar bet. No multiplication and no “do we count that or not”

Yeah there are a few ways to skin the cat. And sometimes the circumstance is such that 3x+rest is slightly more complicated.

But it is easy enough IMO and it always works if you follow the principles. I'd rather not teach people multiple ways of doing it. I feel like that would lead to even more confusion.
 
But it is easy enough IMO and it always works if you follow the principles. I'd rather not teach people multiple ways of doing it. I feel like that would lead to even more confusion.

I agree with not sowing confusion. I think that the 3x does that exactly though, confusion when people don’t add the tail right, confusion from newbies who don’t know what the hells going on except some tricky math. Completing the bet and adding in the total pot is foolproof and easy for anyone to grasp what’s going on.
 
If pot limit is being used as a phrasal adjective (compound modifier) as in “Pot-Limit Omaha” (describing Omaha), you should use a hyphen between the two words to make it a compound word.
 
I agree with not sowing confusion. I think that the 3x does that exactly though, confusion when people don’t add the tail right, confusion from newbies who don’t know what the hells going on except some tricky math. Completing the bet and adding in the total pot is foolproof and easy for anyone to grasp what’s going on.

Brute force can definitely be easier to grasp but harder to execute.

I think it's more streamlined in general to think about total bet amounts vs. call+raise amounts. The latter is necessary only when calculating a min reraise, and for real who even does that?
 
Brute force can definitely be easier to grasp but harder to execute.

I think it's more streamlined in general to think about total bet amounts vs. call+raise amounts. The latter is necessary only when calculating a min reraise, and for real who even does that?

K. For the OP benefit can you maybe describe why this works? I’m asking because people ask. He’s teaching them a new game that they may have the fundamentals for, but he’s got to teach them to think about what and why they are doing more complicated things so they can make rational and confident decisions. The first time he pulls out the 3x rule the game is going to have to stop and he’s going to have to explain what and why is going on. The second time it’s going to stop while they argue if the pot should include the persons call.

And for me I guess explanations like “I dunno but it’s never been wrong yet” or “just trust me, it’s right” don’t feel good when I get them or when I give them. Like a mathematical proof but in words he can use to convey why it works.
 
K. For the OP benefit can you maybe describe why this works? I’m asking because people ask. He’s teaching them a new game that they may have the fundamentals for, but he’s got to teach them to think about what and why they are doing more complicated things so they can make rational and confident decisions. The first time he pulls out the 3x rule the game is going to have to stop and he’s going to have to explain what and why is going on. The second time it’s going to stop while they argue if the pot should include the persons call.

And for me I guess explanations like “I dunno but it’s never been wrong yet” or “just trust me, it’s right” don’t feel good when I get them or when I give them. Like a mathematical proof but in words he can use to convey why it works.

It works like this:

Your opponent made some bet. You match that bet (1x), match the total of that to get his bet and your call (2x), plus the rest (existing pot + any tail).

It's right because you obviously need to include all the existing money (pot + tail). 1x the bet to call, plus an additional 2x that amount and now you've made pot. 3x+rest. You don't include the bet to your immediate right in the tail because that got accounted for in the 3x.

Why is this easier? I don't know, I think because it removes any doubt when there are raises and reraises and some calls in between... what is the amount I'm calling vs. the amount I'm raising? Doesn't matter. Put your hand over your bet (if you must) while you figure out the new amount you are potting to.
 
It works like this:

Your opponent made some bet. You match that bet (1x), match the total of that to get his bet and your call (2x), plus the rest (existing pot + any tail).

It's right because you obviously need to include all the existing money (pot + tail). 1x the bet to call, plus an additional 2x that amount and now you've made pot. 3x+rest. You don't include the bet to your immediate right in the tail because that got accounted for in the 3x.

Why is this easier? I don't know, I think because it removes any doubt when there are raises and reraises and some calls in between... what is the amount I'm calling vs. the amount I'm raising? Doesn't matter. Put your hand over your bet (if you must) while you figure out the new amount you are potting to.

I think we’ll let Mike decide on which explanation he wants to be repeating constantly.
 
3x the bet you are facing plus the tail. after every round of betting, count the chips you bring into the pot.

pot limit games are the toughest to deal by a mile. there is no better feeling than when stack sizes finally dip below the pot, you can shut your brain off and take a break. I dealt a lot of plo at the series, and by the end of a long shift I could barely remember my own name or phone number. as a player, you only think about the correct numbers when its your turn and you want to bet pot. As a dealer, you need to keep the number for every player, every action, every street, because you never know when a player will scream out POT! its a mind F$%K
 
I think we’ll let Mike decide on which explanation he wants to be repeating constantly.

Fair enough!

Honestly I think we both know either method is correct. It's a matter of preference at the end of the day. And your point is well made that people new to PL are already confused enough...why confuse them more?

But it is a useful tool. Knowing the 3x method, I would never even attempt to do it brute force. Too messy for me. Then again I'm also pretty strict with pot management and bet etiquette. Don't scoop the bets early, don't snag your neighbor's blind, etc.

I'm curious. Suppose you're dealing some no limit Holdem. Player bets $3. Next player raises to $15. Third player reraises to $45 with a couple greens. Back to first player who asks, "what's it to me?"

Do you say:

- $45 to you
- $42 to you
- $42 to call
 
If pot limit is being used as a phrasal adjective (compound modifier) as in “Pot-Limit Omaha” (describing Omaha), you should use a hyphen between the two words to make it a compound word.
^^ This.

I always use a hyphen when referring to No-Limit, Pot-Limit, or Fixed-Limit variations.

Same with buy-in, re-buy, and pre-buy, fwiw.

I'm less consistent with ass-wipe and asshat.
 
Someone here said "implement the rule - you can't say POT." Educate the players on how to calculate it (what @detroitdad suggested is easiest IMO), but instead of pot, players have to say an amount, which can be challenged.
 
Someone here said "implement the rule - you can't say POT." Educate the players on how to calculate it (what @detroitdad suggested is easiest IMO), but instead of pot, players have to say an amount, which can be challenged.

People would just say “all-in” instead or some ridiculous over-amount and make the dealer calculate pot. But I agree this would be best. I’m not a “pot” guy, I prefer about 3/4 of the pot. Does the same thing, I try to never bet any more than necessary, gains you a few more chances somewhere else. So I’m in the number camp, and since it’s not the “norm” sometimes it works better than “pot”.
 
Once all action is finished, it's good to put the pot into stacks so you can see the total, or even announce it.
While it would make it easier to calculate it is improper to stack the pot in a non-split game. Also, it's a crutch that isn't good to teach, better imo to make them hold the figure in their head.

I’m not a “pot” guy
You can't lie to us, we know the truth!

I don't count whatever amount that person has previously put in that betting round (as a blind or prior bet).
Yeah, you shouldn't ever calculate the money in front of the player making action. So, straddles you just don't include, or blinds.

do people always count SB as completing the blind when calculating pot?
(Yes) If you're play .25/.5 you should count the SB as a whole bet, unless it is the SB's action.

To make the math easier you should round up.

For clarity, you're planning on playing Pot-Limit Hold'em, correct?

"implement the rule - you can't say POT."
The kewl kids say 'C A N A B U S!' instead of Pot, just say'n ;)
 
While it would make it easier to calculate it is improper to stack the pot in a non-split game. Also, it's a crutch that isn't good to teach, better imo to make them hold the figure in their head.

I'm not sure that it's improper, but the professional dealers we hire at some home games do it this way.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom