# Shortcut to change percentages above 50% to odds?

Roy
Red Chipper Posts:

**48**✭✭
Working through Doug's Poker Work Book for Math Geeks and there have been a few exercises where I am calculating for odds that are greater than 1:1 (50%). Whereas I have a good grasp on how to convert back and forth between percentages lesser than 50% (e.g. 33% = 2:1) my brain seems to be running into a wall on anything that is higher than this 1:1 speed bump (i.e. .8:1). Maybe someone out there who is a lot better at math can provide a handy way to do this quickly?

Specific example would be from pg.88 having 72% equity and converting to x:1?

Specific example would be from pg.88 having 72% equity and converting to x:1?

## Leave a Comment

#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

## Quick Links

#### Categories

- 10.9K All Categories
- 501 Come Say Hello
- 3.7K Live Poker Hands
- 493 Coaching & Commercial
- 2.1K Online Poker Hands
- 869 Tournament Poker Hands
- 41 Omaha Variants
- 66 Local Poker Groups
- 2.4K General Concepts
- 293 New To Poker Questions
- 173 Podcast, Articles, Freebies
- 50 CORE
- 297 PRO Product Discussion
- 766 Off Topic Chat
- 23 Nutrition & Fitness
- 98 Challenge Forum
- 274 Hand Reading
- 139 Live Workbook (Vol 1)
- 62 6max Workbook (Vol 1)
- 32 Final Tables Workbook
- 65 Poker Software

## Comments

2,241✭✭✭✭✭there's a video, I think, where Doug or one of the coaches talks about figuring out this... I will try to look around and see if I can find it.

But one of the quickest methods is just going to the nearest "whole percentage" that's easy for you to figure out... for example, for 72% equity - I'd round it up to 75% which is

3 to 4 (¾ is 75%). If it was 83% - I'd go to 80 which is 4 to 5 (4/5 is 80%).

I think I'm doing it right... lol!

I'll try to dig up that video and you can view it for yourself...

EDIT:

check out "Bracketing" video

278✭✭✭72/28 = 2.57

So it's 2.57 to 1.

986✭✭✭✭so its 8/9 * 100 or 89% as a formula (i hate formulas but if one must)

(times you win/(times you win+times you loose)) * 100

going the other way its just 89% means you win 89 times out of 100 witch means you loose (100-89) 11 times....so itl's 88/11 which reduces down to 8/1 or 8 to 1

Using Matt example (and he confused me a little)....

2.57 to 1 means you win 2.57 for every 1 time you loose

so it 2.57/(2.57+1) * 100 = 2.57/3.57 * 100 = 72%

starting from 72% means you win 72 out of 100 or you loose 100-72 =28

so its 72/28 which reduces down to 2.57 to 1

48✭✭/Users/roy/Desktop/Screen Shot 2016-09-26 at 12.43.26 PM.png

48✭✭48✭✭48✭✭48✭✭forinstead?It seems the 0.37 is calculated by dividing the remainder of of 100-73 (27) by the 73 and then putting this number :1.

Definitely confuses me. It seems simpler to say that anything above 50% equity would just be

foras opposed to a dog.....But please fill me in if Im going about this all wrong

986✭✭✭✭3 to 1 or 4 for 1...these two are the same....

In the to format you get your original bet back and 3 more...by in the for format you don't get your original bet back.

If you ever looked at a crap table...some list the 66 (12) Payout as 30 for 1 while others list it at 29 to 1.....

Honestly when calculating poker I only look at the %...and compare it to the % I need....I never bother with odds....

Given the above example I would calculate the % total pot after I call 310....have to call 80, that about 27%.....have 32 outs (how we have 32 outs no idea but then I did not read the book assume 1 card to come) rule of 2 need 64% equityish....easy call...

If I was then pressed to calculate the odds....(because of the bonus you get when you do this right)...I would just use the 27%.. (100-27/27) or a bit less then 3 to 1..but if you prefer....100/27 for a bit less then 4 for 1.....

278✭✭✭http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/math/is-there-a-difference-between-odds-and-probability

48✭✭I am comfortable with the content of the link that you posted. My question still remains though in regards to why @Doug Hull is presenting the equity of 73% (probability) as 0.37:1 (odds) vs simply stating 2.7:1 for.

I now understand how to come up these numbers in both ways but it seems counterintuitive to be thinking in these <1:1 numbers when dealing specifically with odds. I would think that as soon as a specific situation's equity is above the 50% probability threshold it is easier to start saying X:1 for instead of <1:1.

Should I comfortable with both?

238✭✭Not sure if that explanation makes sense. But this is what I did in my head: 4:1 is 25% so 8:1 is 12.5%

48✭✭4:1 is not 25% but rather 3:1

Same with 8:1

Probably worth checking out the link that Matt posted above.

238✭✭278✭✭✭Because bookmaker odds are read as x to 1 against. Since we are examining the case of the favorite we instead look at the inverse odds which are 27/73 = .3698 thus .37 to 1, or in other words we'd have to Lay 2.7 to 1 in order to give our opponent the correct price-- which is simply a conversion to the dog's price (1/.37 in simplified fractional form or 73/27). Are you following how this applies?

48✭✭