In chapter 7 of Small Stakes Hold’em, the authors explain how to evaluate drawing hands by counting outs correctly, adjusting for uncertainty, and avoiding the common small-stakes habit of “guessing” at draw strength.
Why Counting Outs Matters
They start with a common postflop situation: you often suspect you’re behind, and when you are, your decision to call, fold, or raise depends heavily on how likely you are to improve to the best hand. “Counting outs” means identifying the cards that can realistically turn your hand into a winner.
Full Outs vs. Partial Outs
Sometimes outs are straightforward: a card either gives you the nuts or it doesn’t. More often, a card improves you but doesn’t guarantee you’ll end up best. The authors call these partial outs—cards that help only some of the time because:
-
the improved hand can still be beaten (e.g., making top pair in a multiway pot),
-
the improving card also completes a flush/straight for someone else,
-
or you may be drawing to a hand that could be shared (split pot).
The practical lesson: treating every “improving card” as a full out makes you over-call; ignoring them entirely makes you fold too much. You need to discount them based on how often they truly win.
Outs Can Be Worth Fractions
They show that sometimes each “out” should be counted as a fraction because it only works against part of the opponent’s likely range. If a card wins against one likely holding but loses against another, and both holdings are plausible, the card’s value should be reduced accordingly. This turns “how many outs do I have?” into “how many effective outs do I have?”
Backdoor Draws: Small Alone, Useful as Add-ons
With two cards to come (on the flop), you may have backdoor draws that require help on both turn and river. Alone, these are usually too unlikely to justify continuing unless the pot is huge and/or you can see cards very cheaply. But they can meaningfully add value when combined with other chances to win (like overcards or a weak direct draw).
They give rough “outs-equivalents”:
-
a backdoor flush draw is roughly worth about one out, often treated as more because you can sometimes fold when you miss the turn and because opponents may pay you off when the backdoor draw comes in unexpectedly,
-
backdoor straight draws vary: the fewer gaps, the more valuable; more gaps mean sharply reduced value.
They also note that several weak chances together can add up to a playable hand, even if none of them is strong on its own.
Redraws: When Improving Still Isn’t Safe
A crucial postflop complication is redraws. Even if you improve on the turn, opponents often still have ways to outdraw you on the river. This reduces the true value of your outs on the flop. Some improvements are “safer” (harder to outdraw), while others create a hand that is vulnerable to many river cards, especially in multiway pots.
The authors advise extra caution with draws and pair-improvements that are highly exposed to being overtaken on the final card.
Relative Position: Will You Have to Pay More Than One Bet?
They emphasize that the value of a weak draw depends not just on the pot and outs, but also on whether you can reliably see the next card for one bet. If players behind you might raise, a draw that is barely profitable for one bet can become unprofitable because you may be forced to call extra bets or fold after investing.
This “relative position” factor matters most for very weak draws (few outs or only backdoor value). Stronger draws are less sensitive because they can better afford extra action.
The Chapter’s Step-by-Step Method
They summarize a repeatable process for draw evaluation:
-
List every card that could make you best (be thorough).
-
Decide which are full outs and which are partial, and discount partial outs realistically.
-
Add backdoor value when relevant.
-
Reduce your draw’s value when redraw risk is high.
-
Account for the chance of raises behind you, especially with weak draws.
Big Takeaway
Many small-stakes players misplay draws by calling too much with weak ones, playing strong ones too passively, or folding profitable draws because they “feel unlucky.” The authors argue that consistently applying this structured outs-based approach leads to calmer decisions and better long-run results, regardless of short-term variance.