Running it twice etiquette (1 Viewer)

[200 Motels]

I'm wondering if there's etiquette regarding running it twice.

The believe of a few at our home game is that you should NOT base how many times you run it (once or multiple) on what you think your equity in the hand is. They claim it's bad etiquette to want to run it once when you know you're crushing, and to want to run it multi times when you're flipping or behind.

Thoughts?

 

[jbutler]

This came up the other night in a game here. The majority clearly believes you should not know the other player's hand before deciding whether to run it twice, but there was a minority who said they felt the opposite.

I am of the opinion you should not know your equity before you decide. I've seen too many attempts at angling the other way.

 

[courage]

Yes, there's etiquette involved. Running it 2x based on EV or being inconsistent with same players will not make you a respected player imo. Generally I like to run it 2x if possible no matter what, unless it's a split pot game where chopping up side pots is going to be a giant pain after the hand. Some players want to run it only once and that's perfectly fine too, just be consistent. What most players don't realize is that even in a non-split-pot game when they have the "nuts for now" they're marginally better off just running it 2x to slightly reduce variance.

 

[jbutler]

Oh one more thought: I'm a recent convert to preferring three runs to two.

 

[courage]

Oh one more thought: I'm a recent convert to preferring three runs to two.

Yeah, this is nice if there are enough cards lol. I'd prefer that also but it does add another element of confusion after every all in. "How many times we running it?" Somebody decide."

 

[Craig D]

Ahead or behind I am always willing to run it 3 times for big pots

However once a player refuses to run it 3 times when I request it, I will never run it more than once again with that player

Running it twice doesn't feel right

Multiple runs does lower the bankroll swings a little so I think it is good idea (In a game with friends)

Have Fun

 

[bergs]

I like running it three times where enough cards exist without having to shuffle in the stub.

I always run it twice - only time I didn't I announced it at the beginning of that session because I was stuck 3k+ for the weekend and was playing the last of my roll to go big or go home.

If someone only wants to run it once, that's cool, but I'm not going to agree to run it more than once with them in the future.

 

[abby99]

My favorite run-it-more-than-once hand.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I like running it twice. Never run it 3x or 4x, but I'm certainly not opposed. I believe that the agreement to run it multiple times should be made before hands are revealed, and should be consistent - always yes, or always no.

Like chopping. Always yes, or always no.

 

[AWenger]

They claim it's bad etiquette to want to run it once when you know you're crushing, and to want to run it multi times when you're flipping or behind.

I agree this is bad etiquette.

Its ok with me if people want to run it once for smaller pots or multiple times for larger pots, though, but not based on the strength of their hands.

 

[200 Motels]

I agree this is bad etiquette.

Its ok with me if people want to run it once for smaller pots or multiple times for larger pots, though, but not based on the strength of their hands.

I should clarify that when I say "when I know I'm crushing" it's not that they've declared their hand or that I've seen it. I'm just happy with my hand and think I have them crushed. Would it still be bad etiquette to only want to run it once because of what I think my equity in the hand is?

If I think it's a big flip for a big pot, I like running it multiple times, but if it's for a big pot and I think they're drawing thin, I feel that I'm sacrificing some of my equity by running it multiple times.

 

[jbutler]

I should clarify that when I say "when I know I'm crushing" it's not that they've declared their hand or that I've seen it. I'm just happy with my hand and think I have them crushed. Would it still be bad etiquette to only want to run it once because of what I think my equity in the hand is?

IMO yes very bad etiquette. A minority of players feel differently.

 

[courage]

I should clarify that when I say "when I know I'm crushing" it's not that they've declared their hand or that I've seen it. I'm just happy with my hand and think I have them crushed. Would it still be bad etiquette to only want to run it once because of what I think my equity in the hand is?

Yessir, if under other circumstances vs same player (s) you want to run it more than once. Put another way, when would you want to run it more than once, and wouldn't that be inconsistent? Tbh if you kept changing your mind with me I'd just run it once vs you every time.

 

[200 Motels]

Yessir, if under other circumstances vs same player (s) you want to run it more than once. Put another way, when would you want to run it more than once, and wouldn't that be inconsistent? Tbh if you kept changing your mind with me I'd just run it once vs you every time.

Once it was pointed out to me, I declared that I was a "run it once" guy. but the next week the same players were still asking me "wanna run it twice?" and because I felt the spots were high variance, I agreed to. No one complained. I never ask to run it multiple times but if someone asks I'll usually comply unless it's a small-medium pot and not a high variance situation.

Running it multiple times is designed to lower variance and I don't find there's a need for it in pots under 200bb. It's one buyin each. Someone should be able to deal with the variance of +/- one buyin.

 

[moose]

Simple answer never ask and always accept and you're good.

 

[ChipTalker]

Agree with some others on not a big fan of twice, I prefer 1 or 3 that way someone is a winner.
I always agree to run it multiple times at others request and offer when I am ahead.
If i am not mistaken it really only smooths out the variance so moral of the story is get your money in good.

 

[abby99]

Running it out multiple times increases your chances of realizing your equity, but it does not affect your actual equity in the hand. As mentioned above, it does reduce variance.

In a home game setting, I think RIT is useful to add to the comfort level of weaker players. It's also good for the game if the all-in player would have to quit the game if he loses that hand. It's not like a casino where if you bust somebody, there is always another player to take the empty seat.

I laugh (not out loud) when the way-ahead player insists on running it once, and the all-in player catches his miracle card on the river. This is especially the case when that player is trying to gain a psychological edge by intimidating the other player.

My personal position is that I don't care. Never in a split-pot game, but otherwise, 1-3 times is just fine, whatever the other player wants to do.

 

[200 Motels]

Running it out multiple times increases your chances of realizing your equity, but it does not affect your actual equity in the hand. As mentioned above, it does reduce variance.

When I was typing my prev post I actually started to type that "I don't want to give up my equity in the hand" but then realized that this doesn't make sense and it does to exactly ^^ this. Well put. I think I should be more open to running it multiple times, even when I feel I'm far ahead.

 

[BGinGA]

Running it out multiple times increases your chances of realizing your equity, but it does not affect your actual equity in the hand.

I'm not sure this is correct. Suppose all the money goes in on the turn...... If a player has exactly one out on the river, running it just once gives them the best chance of winning 100% of the pot. Running it twice, the best they can do is win 50% of the pot (they can win only one of the two run-outs). And running it three times, the best they can do is win 1/3 of the pot.

 

[200 Motels]

I'm not sure this is correct. Suppose all the money goes in on the turn...... If a player has exactly one out on the river, running it just once gives them the best chance of winning 100% of the pot. Running it twice, the best they can do is win 50% of the pot (they can win only one of the two run-outs). And running it three times, the best they can do is win 1/3 of the pot.

This makes sense. Can anyone show how the math would work in this scenario?

 

[MegaTon44]

Running it out multiple times increases your chances of realizing your equity, but it does not affect your actual equity in the hand. As mentioned above, it does reduce variance.

In a home game setting, I think RIT is useful to add to the comfort level of weaker players. It's also good for the game if the all-in player would have to quit the game if he loses that hand. It's not like a casino where if you bust somebody, there is always another player to take the empty seat.

I laugh (not out loud) when the way-ahead player insists on running it once, and the all-in player catches his miracle card on the river. This is especially the case when that player is trying to gain a psychological edge by intimidating the other player.

My personal position is that I don't care. Never in a split-pot game, but otherwise, 1-3 times is just fine, whatever the other player wants to do.

@abby99 and @BGinGA are both correct. I think it's a question of semantics. Running it multiple times does increase the likelihood of realizing equity at the point in time before any other cards are dealt. Once another card is put on the table, equity changes.

For example, two pair vs a 4 flush on the flop, all-in/call. About 33% equity for the 4 flush. If we ran this once, the flush may or may not hit. If we ran this infinite times in a simulator, the flush should connect 33% of the time (without boating up the opponent). More trials mean smoothed out variance, hence greater opportunity to realize the equity at the time of the jam.

 

[Poker Zombie]

In a $1000 pot:
Run it once,
1 out, 46 cards = 2.1%, $21.74 equity

Run it twice,
$21 on the first hand
1 out, 45 cards = 2.2%, $22.22 equity

Equity increases with each card, but the amount of the windfall (variance) is reduced.

 

[abby99]

I found a simple explanation of the math here, toward the bottom of the page.

 

[AWenger]

In a $1000 pot:
Run it once,
1 out, 46 cards = 2.1%, $21.74 equity

If you know a hand only has one out after the turn; inherently, you know both hands, or 8 total cards, including the board.

So this would yield 1 out of 44 (cards unknown) for 1st run, and 1of 43 for the 2nd run.

 

[BGinGA]

And the second run is not the full %, either.

The first run is 1/44. If it misses, then second run is 1/43 (but total hand equity is 1/44 + (43/44*1/43). If it hits, then second run is 0 (0/43).

 

[Poker Zombie]

Right, with a 1 outer, you are guaranteed to never pull the pot. You're more likely to pull 1/2 the pot. Abby's link spells it out pretty well, and I don't think there's any increase in equity. My first post was cut short (because I saw someone else had beaten me to the punch), but it made sence in my head.

Each card gives you a better chance to win less. This applies whether you are the 98% favorite or the 2% underdog, because poker is a zero sum game (unless there is a rake).

By bad for hitting "Post" when I didn't have a fully fleshed-out post.

 

[jbutler]

Running it out multiple times increases your chances of realizing your equity, but it does not affect your actual equity in the hand. As mentioned above, it does reduce variance.

Right, with a 1 outer, you are guaranteed to never pull the pot. You're more likely to pull 1/2 the pot. Abby's link spells it out pretty well, and I don't think there's any increase in equity. My first post was cut short (because I saw someone else had beaten me to the punch), but it made sence in my head.

Each card gives you a better chance to win less. This applies whether you are the 98% favorite or the 2% underdog, because poker is a zero sum game (unless there is a rake).

By bad for hitting "Post" when I didn't have a fully fleshed-out post.

It's really not that complicated. No, you will never realize your precise equity running it twice because of dead cards gone for the second run. And if we want to get super picky about @abby99's statement, we could edit it to read: "Running it multiple times increases your chances of realizing a portion of your equity." But obviously the point is reducing variance and the vehicle for that variance reduction is multiple runs.

Certainly the case of a one-outer starkly illustrates how equities change on the second run by virtue of dead cards burned up in the first run, but it's very rare to get it in drawing to one out and if you do, you're obviously going to benefit from the multiple runs.

 

[viet rounder]

I believe that you need to decide prior to seeing the other persons hand.

That said, I am AGAINST running it twice. It is not forbidden in my game but I don't encourage it. I find it slows down the game and creates a lot of drama. Whether you are playing for low or high stakes you should be financially comfortable when felted. For this reason, it is my personal opinion that running it twice for the purpose of reducing variance could be an indication that one is not comfortable when felted and possibly be playing beyond his means. This is just my personal opinion and by no means am I directing it to anyone here.

 

[H|Q]

I'm wondering if there's etiquette regarding running it twice.

The believe of a few at our home game is that you should NOT base how many times you run it (once or multiple) on what you think your equity in the hand is. They claim it's bad etiquette to want to run it once when you know you're crushing, and to want to run it multi times when you're flipping or behind.

Thoughts?

I'm in this boat too. I don't thinks its an etiquette situation though, since there aren't hard and fast rules. I like to determine running it once or twice before we show hole cards. That way it's unbiased.

 

[jbutler]

I believe that you need to decide prior to seeing the other persons hand.

That said, I am AGAINST running it twice. It is not forbidden in my game but I don't encourage it. I find it slows down the game and creates a lot of drama. Whether you are playing for low or high stakes you should be financially comfortable when felted. For this reason, it is my personal opinion that running it twice for the purpose of reducing variance could be an indication that one is not comfortable when felted and possibly be playing beyond his means. This is just my personal opinion and by no means am I directing it to anyone here.

I agree with all of this except the recommendation. Running it multiple times is definitely sometimes an indication that someone is underrolled for the game and that is definitely true for some of the regulars in the games I play.

But recognizing that they should be exercising greater financial discipline, I think it's actually more generous to allow someone in their circumstances to have a better shot at getting some money back from the pot. Not surprisingly, these are the people who typically get their money in bad, so I don't mind giving them a chance to stay in the game.

Of course, another option is not playing in a game in which people are underrolled, but frankly I don't think such a game would be available here or anyplace else.