Running it twice 3 handed question (2 Viewers)

Kyle

Full House
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
3,589
Reaction score
4,487
Location
Centennial CO
First Question: Is running it twice 3 handed allowed in casinos? (Whatever the short answer is, yes or no is what I would want to follow in this poker club.)

Scenario below. 2-5 no limit hold em. (Not in casino but a poker club)

Example: UTG straddles to $10.
3-4 players just call and limp in.

  • The BB makes it 50 to go.

  • The Straddler makes it $120 and is now all in.

  • All limpers fold except for the button.
  • The Button decides to re-raise and goes all in for $400.

  • The Big Blind calls the $400.

Can the 2 players who have more money in the side pot run it twice? Or does having 3 players in the pot void this? How would the casino handle this?

Thanks,
Kyle
 
Short answer, yes, most casinos will let you run it twice 3 handed (if they normally allow running it twice) as long as everybody agrees. If one player doesn't, I believe they can play for as much of the pot as they're entitled to on the first run, and the other two players can either: run it twice for all of the pot or have the running it twice just count for the side pot depending on who has whom covered etc.

Bart Hanson covered this recently in a PLO spot where he lost the first run and won the second, but would have lost both times had the one guy opposed to running it twice agreed to... if that makes sense
 
So would the casino let you do the following in this scenario.

The 1st run is for the main pot. In this case the board ran out as a push 34567 on the board.

The 2nd run would be between the two players in the side pot.

Or is it just run twice for all players?
 
Also when is the appropriate time to agree to run it twice or not?

When cards are not exposed or exposed?

I like to agree to run it twice before cards are exposed.
 
The 1st run is for the main pot. In this case the board ran out as a push 34567 on the board.

The 2nd run would be between the two players in the side pot.

Yes, this would be the technically correct way to do it, assuming the person who is all-in on the main pot does not agree to running it multiple times.

It's not preferred, procedurally, because awarding the main pot first (which tends to be larger) tends to slow the game and increase the chance of confusion; the side pot is the only one capable of being awarded to an inferior hand on the showdown, so it's best to address that and then clear the dead hand.

But that's all procedure designed to minimize errors - there's no logical reason you can't figure out everyone's winning share and pay out in any order.

Also when is the appropriate time to agree to run it twice or not?

When cards are not exposed or exposed?

Not exposed.

With an all-in, as soon as the cards are exposed, the hand is done. If it's not an all-in, and there is still betting to be done, I wouldn't allow agreements to run it multiple times. Even if the players agreed to check it down, it's not an all-in and I wouldn't allow it. Allowing it in too many circumstance will slow the game down too much - the other eight players want to get to the next hand, you know?

With an all-in, the hand ends immediately when the last board card is exposed, and deciding to run it multiple times after that is effectively just making a side bet on what the next card(s) would have been, and probably opens the door for some forms of angle-shooting, but I suppose if you want to allow it, you can. I don't think it would be allowed in any formal room.

Frankly, if you really want, you can allow people to run it extra times after the board cards are exposed AND people show down their hands. If the winner wants to give the other player a shot to draw out to their straight flush, or whatever, there's no reason you can't make a house rule to allow that sort of thing... But it's really just a side bet, and it's slowing down the game for everyone. Most houses won't allow it because it slows the game... even when it isn't run twice, it slows the game, because just allowing the rule means you'll get people holding up the awarding of the pot to try to talk each other into running it again.
 
With an all-in, as soon as the cards are exposed, the hand is done.

In a cash game, I had two players agree to chop a pot after his flop based on win equities after cards were exposed (high pair v straight/flush draw). Like you said, however the host want to do it, but you make good suggestions about keeping the game moving.
 
Can the 2 side players agree to a run-it-twice for the side pot, regardless of the all-in player?
If not, could the all-in player agree with a stipulation, that he can with the main pot with either run, vs 1st run for him ......?
Hmm...
 
From the casino's standpoint, its quicker to allow a brief negotiation and then run two boards (raking twice) then it is to deal a new hand to the whole table... if the negotiations are protracted, I would hope the dealer or floor would take control of the situation.
 

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