What do we think about a no run it twice rule? Run it three times or run it once! (2 Viewers)

[upNdown]

I like the concept of run it twice especially in home games because its really more interesting for everybody. Except for the third player who folded to the al-in. It sucks for him when there's a boring chop - no winner, no loser, just two guys chopping up his money. And even without dead money, it still stinks when its a chop, because nobody likes ties. I don't care if you're the jammer or the caller, you shouldn't walk out of that situation even steven unless you both have the same hand. So I'm thinking about making up this new rule for my game - no running it an even about of times. We want a winner and a loser.
What do you think? Does anybody do this?

 

[KHarp1]

855-2CALLGA Thats the gamblers anonymous hotline for Massachusetts.

 

[KHarp1]

If that's what is wanted in a game, do it. Two or of three scoops, no split?

 

[upNdown]

If that's what is wanted in a game, do it. Two or of three scoops, no split?

Oh are you suggesting a condition? You can run it twice, but if it's split, you have to run it a third? Thats even more interesting. It feels like another choice.

 

[timinater]

I don't mind the thinking here, and I typically prefer someone feels pain in a pot. I do also tend to think it's more fun to run it 3x than it is 2x.

However, running it twice is already a bit of chore/delay with the chopping etc. Three times is worse still. I usually just put on my big boy pants and run it once and once only like a true degen.

If that won't fly, how about making a pot size minimum to run it 2x or 3x? IE it needs to be a monster pot to allow it. 400bb's? More?

EDIT: I realize I didn't really answer the question, but gave my thoughts in general on running it 2x+. We have no rules about running it 2x or more. It hasn't gotten to that point. I'd be hesitant to make a rule that you HAVE to run it three times.

 

[Eriks]

Definitely prefer 3 times

 

[Coyote]

But the deal should be made with still closed cards, before players know who is ahead.
Otherwise, just twice.

 

[Eriks]

But the deal should be made with still closed cards, before players know who is ahead.
Otherwise, just twice.

Doesn’t make a difference though. Unless someone is drawing dead, and then it’s obv pointless

 

[Coyote]

Existentially, we are all drawing dead

 

[jpietrella]

Max pain, baby. Run it once.

Anyway - I don't mind twice, but I also like the idea of there being a defined winner and loser. In that 43mm set I'm putting together, I'm using a barrel of chips I intend to relabel as "run it twice" chips to be given out, 1 per player, at the start of the night. Now I'm thinking I change those to "Run it thrice" or "Run it again" and leaving that number open.

 

[KHarp1]

Yeah, I'm not for letting others off the hook. If I'm in with the best best hand and someone asks to run it twice, I'll usually say "ok" just to not be the ass, but, I'm good with taking my chances, and, if I get donked then that's just part of it.

 

[upNdown]

Max pain, baby. Run it once.

Ha! See, you're worse than me. I don't demand max pain, but I want to see at least some pain,

 

[jpietrella]

Ha! See, you're worse than me. I don't demand max pain, but I want to see at least some pain,

I think given the choice I always choose once but I'd never deny anyone the ability to run it multiples.

 

[ssanel54]

I like the concept of run it twice especially in home games because its really more interesting for everybody. Except for the third player who folded to the al-in. It sucks for him when there's a boring chop - no winner, no loser, just two guys chopping up his money. And even without dead money, it still stinks when its a chop, because nobody likes ties. I don't care if you're the jammer or the caller, you shouldn't walk out of that situation even steven unless you both have the same hand. So I'm thinking about making up this new rule for my game - no running it an even about of times. We want a winner and a loser.
What do you think? Does anybody do this?

Allow it, or dont. The rest of the decision should be up to the players in the hand

 

[Goldfish]

As many of you know, the only reason to run it twice is to lower variance. Hosts like running it multiple times because lower variance is good for long term sustainability of the game. This applies more so in 4 card and 5 card games where the prospect of big hands coming up against one another is high. If you don’t care about game sustainability (volatile swings) then run it once.

I play in one game where players can only run it twice if the pit is over a certain amount. This is a pain too cause now you have to count the pot, then make a decision. Running it 3 times is a pain in the ass and slows the game way down.

Once or twice - make a decision and move on to the next hand.

 

[Beakertwang]

I don't mind running it any number of times. I get that chopping is annoying sometimes, but I think that's good for a social game. It doesn't really change anything, just reduces variance. I always defer to the villain.

 

[BarrieJ3]

All that matters is that people are upfront and consistent.

Players know my stance - there must be blood. 1/3/5/7/etc. times.

It’s fine running it once and scooping, but it’s way more fun running it 7 times and fourteenthing someone (we chopped one of the 7 runouts).

 

[HaRDHouSeiNC]

Max pain, baby. Run it once.

Anyway - I don't mind twice, but I also like the idea of there being a defined winner and loser. In that 43mm set I'm putting together, I'm using a barrel of chips I intend to relabel as "run it twice" chips to be given out, 1 per player, at the start of the night. Now I'm thinking I change those to "Run it thrice" or "Run it again" and leaving that number open.

Run it twice on side A
Run it trice on side B
Players make their choice and reveal in true survivor fashion

If they don’t match you run it once both players blindfolded XD

 

[ekricket]

What’s the point of many times if it’s never chopped? Just do it once and move on if it isn’t going to even things out.

But if you do allow it, what about using the odds for the divider or not - like if if a hand is a 75% or more underdog it’s a mandatory twice? 90% and it’s three times?
Would require math for sure, so I don’t know.

 

[jja412]

Our normal game we run once or twice. We usually frown on 3 or more because splitting takes more time.

I run it once only. In my opinion, our stakes aren't worth the time to do multiple runouts. And I like max pain (not the stream, that crap is unwatchable.)

 

[B0mbp0t]

I generally don't want to run it twice. But I'm fine with it if the other player wants it so long as it's not a split-pot game anyway. Gets waaaayyy too complicated if you're doing that.

 

[BGinGA]

Never liked running it twice. Three times is fine -- provides the reduced variance, but still defines a winner (with four different available outcomes). Plus a scoop makes the loser feel like a REAL loser, lol.

 

[ChipTalker]

I let people do whatever they want in my game, when people ask me I say 1 or 3 times for same reason people are saying. I like there to be some sort of winner. Nothing more boring than a monster pot getting chopped.

 

[ThrowBack]

Run it once

 

[TheBigTater]

Run it once....... the whole point of playing in the first place.

If someone wants to run it twice I'll go along but they will have to run it twice ever time with me the rest of the night. No selective crap.

Run it 3 times..... wasting time.

 

[MrCatPants]

I don't mind the thinking here, and I typically prefer someone feels pain in a pot. I do also tend to think it's more fun to run it 3x than it is 2x.

However, running it twice is already a bit of chore/delay with the chopping etc. Three times is worse still. I usually just put on my big boy pants and run it once and once only like a true degen.

If that won't fly, how about making a pot size minimum to run it 2x or 3x? IE it needs to be a monster pot to allow it. 400bb's? More?

EDIT: I realize I didn't really answer the question, but gave my thoughts in general on running it 2x+. We have no rules about running it 2x or more. It hasn't gotten to that point. I'd be hesitant to make a rule that you HAVE to run it three times.

In my game, the rule is the pot needs to be at least 200 BB.

Another issue with "opening this up" - we've got some guys who only run it once, and then a couple guys who don't understand the ettiquette of not picking and choosing when and who you go twice vs. once against. (I know it's stupid as it doesn't really matter, but some players get really offended when someone picks and chooses their spots and take it personally.)

Personally, I prefer 3 times logically, but it does slow the game down and makes pot splitting much more tedious.

 

[surfik]

Depends on what other gentelman has but most often 3 times than 2 (given you have that option)

 

[MeridianFC]

I get mitigating variance when playing for significant stakes, but if the game is social (yet serious) there can be only one.

 

[shorticus]

Once or three times for me. Never twice. It’s why I don’t use the feature when I play online.

Running it twice online is actually a completely different conversation, but whatevs lol

 

[Roslindale]

We've never run it more than once at my games... probably because the stakes are not so crazy, but also because it's not on our mind.

I think that running a big hand more than once might add a bit of entertainment to the affair. With that said, I think 3 sounds like more fun than twice... simply to have a winner of the hand.