A little background. I'm semi-new to PLO been playing about 6 months and read a few books. I was playing 2/5 at the casino and I bought in for $500 and everyone else had about $700-$1000

I was down to about $350 and these 2 hands came up.....

I called a preflop raise in the SB with A567

3 other people called. About $100 in the pot

Flop is A54

I bet out, preflop raiser pots and all the money is in and we decide to run it twice..... we split.... I make a straight on one and he has a higher flush on the other.....


A couple hands later I pot with AA77 and get 3 callers...

Flop is K93

I pot, he repots and I am all in. We decide to run it twice and split again.... He had QQJX and made a straight flush on the second board


I was ahead both times, if you suspect you are ahead is it a bad idea to run it twice? Looking for some thoughts about running it once or twice or three times

Also - Why is it bad protocol to ask what your opponent has before you decide to run it twice? Why is that frowned up???

There are a lot of factors that go into running it two or three times IMO:

1. Ability to withstand variance. Does the money mean a lot to you? If so you should be more inclined to run it multiple times.
2. Identity of opponent. Does a fish want to run it multiple times? If so, I always say yes. Keep the fish happy.
3. Whether you want calls or folds. Generally, if you're game relies mainly on getting called by a worse hand, you'll want to be someone who is known as running it multiple times as it makes people more likely to gii with you. On the other hand, if you're trying to get a scared money reg to fold to your semi-bluff, better for him to know you'll only run it once with him.
4. Time. Running it two times takes more time, and running it three times takes a lot more time because you have to split the chips up three-ways. I've generally stopped running it three times in live games because it takes so long, particularly if someone wins 2 boards and the third is chopped, which requires a 5/6-1/6 split and I find extra tilting.
5. Tilt equity. Will your opponent tilt if you suck out on him and buy back more and spew? If so run it once. If the positions were reversed would you go on tilt? If so run it multiple times.
6. Pot size and game. Obviously more likely to run it multiple times in bigger pots. I'm much more likely to run it multiple times in PLO rather than NLHE because the former has more all ins and the equities are closer so there is more variance.

I generally don't base the decision on whether I'm ahead or behind thus I don't care what my opponent has.

There are only 3 scenarios where I'm not willing to run it more than once

1) Pot is too small (less than 60 BB's generally)
2) If I know my opponent only runs it once when ahead, but try's to run it twice when he thinks he's behind.
3) If a player tries to figure out what I've got prior to determining if he/she wants to run it once or twice.

Those 3 scenario's are instant run it once spots for me.

All other scenarios we can run it as many times as allowed by the floor, regardless of whether I'm ahead or behind. The results of the run out have no impact on my future decisions to run it multiple boards.

It doesn't actually matter if you run it once, twice or 10 times, your equity when you GII is still the same either way. Sure it seems like a beat when you GII & run twice as a favourite and end up chopping when you could have won the whole pot but that's results oriented thinking.

You either stick with running it once and swallow whatever the result is or run it twice and expect to chop a high percentage of the time, in a game where most flop all ins are close to flips so the result is the same anyway. Also if you GII as a *huge favourite (60%+) more often than not you will still be winning 2 runs more often than your opponent does in the long run even though from all in to all in you will still encounter variance where they beat you two runs or you chop a lot. Hope this was helpful

Yeah thanks that helps a bit.

Can you explain why almost nobody asks what the opponent has before deciding to run it twice?

What is bad about that?

Certain people will only run it twice when they are behind, vs. insisting on running it once when they are ahead. Like Solar said it doesn't matter from EV, but people feel that they're being angleshot in those situations - where they are forced to take on higher variance when behind and lower variance when ahead. Again, it doesn't matter in terms of EV, but some people see that as a fairness issue.

In an ideal world you would both table your hands, look at how many outs were present and discuss how much variance you each are willing to take on those outs and come to a mutually agreeable conclusion, and if not that, then just run it once and be done with it. Like mentioned above, when this happens in practice, some people will only run it more than once when they are behind, which reeks of 'unfairness', when again from an EV standpoint it doesn't matter.

Upthread there was discussion on how your style of play may dictate your policy on RIO or RIT (or more), and that's a valid point made by MIB211 for metagame purposes.

Hopefully this helps.

It's poor etiquette and a form of angling in my eyes. Most of the time, the person is trying to conceal their hand strength while finding out their opponent's hand strength to determine if they are ahead or not. There are people that if you tell them they are ahead they will only run it once and if you tell them they are behind they will want to run it twice. If you won't run it twice when I'm behind, I'm not trying to let you run it twice when you're behind.

I always thought the fairest approach was for all players involved in the Allin to come to an agreement before the cards are dealt and hands tabled (given that players who are all in but didn't make the last aggressive action still have the option of seeing the run out(s) and mucking without showing cards)

Lol this thread hurts my head. Who cares if a guy wants to RIT when he's behind and not ahead or any other nonsensical superstitious ****, just let him.

Don't run it more than once in a casino, rake will kill you.

I am the same as this.

Running more than once just reduces variance - so it really depends on you

My local casino banned RIT to avoid all the drama

Nothing to do with superstition.

Oh? You're going to have to explain further than that. Your equity is your equity no matter how many times you run it, and whether you are a monster favorite or its 50/50 the variance is the same for the same number of runouts. There is no strategic reason to care how many times you run it or with any sort of hand.

Never dumb to run it multiple times unless you're over rolled for the game. Don't show before you decide

I don't disagree with any of this, but it's bad etiquette. Consider the scenario from the perspective of a rec. With the exception of a few non equity considerations, I'll always offer to run it twice, but I'll confirm that with the other player prior to tabling my hand.

I think you misunderstood my prior post. The one you quoted I basically said "let the rec players run it as many times as they want". These guys earlier in this thread were claiming they were being taken advantage of by guys running it twice when "behind"' and not when "ahead" and I rejected that ridiculousness

I'm not sure that your delivery alluded to this particular description, but I don't doubt that this is what you may have meant. Fwiw, in isolation, you're not wrong. But beyond that, strategic decisions absolutely do exist when deciding how many times to run a board. I played in a $2k max buy in game recently where the spot on the table was >$10k deep. If I were selectively choosing when to run it once or twice, I'd always opt for the one board on this occasion.

Pretty sure we can both be right on this. There are times that risking a drastic change to your stack size can affect your decision on how many times to run it. There is no angle being shot by a rec player wanting to run it Twice with a draw and once with a set. He's just dumb and you should let him be dumb. Cool?

Trying to get some thoughts on RIT when Villain and I both have nut straights on turn, but villain picked up flush draw to free roll.

Other players in game insist that I should always run it once in this spot, whereas my position was simply to reduce variance by RIT as Villain already has ~ 20% more equity on the turn.

Other players insist RIT (or more) in this spot is "terrible" and just giving Villain "more chances to win money".

Reread this thread from the very beginning. Again, your equity in both situations the same. The real question is: Are you willing to take a higher chance of getting quartered to minimize your chances of getting scooped?

I know this sounds stupid but I like running it once when behind when I’m below a certain amount of money on the table.

My logic is I want to scoop the pot when I don’t yet have a big stack and if I’m behind there’s only so many cards that can make that happen, especially if GAI on flop. Someone also mentioned tilt equity, I’d been keeping that concept to myself for years but apparently others have thought of it too. There are certain people I know will blast off 5k after they lose a 500 in a pot on a suck out. I played holdem with a guy like that this weekend who would have probably dusted off 20k if the room would have stayed open after I hit a 4 outter on him.

Running it Twice doesn't matter really. There are a few exceptions:

1) A really bad player will leave if he gets up a lot. Run it twice so it's harder for him to scoop, thus leave.

2) There's a cap on the buyin and a really bad player has a big stack and your stack is not too big. Run it once so you can scoop and get a big stack or rebuy.

3) There's a cap on the buyin and you have a big stack and a bad player has a big stack. Run it twice so you don't run the risk of getting down to a lower stack and can't hurt the bad player.

4) Players like to run it twice and if you get a reputation of not running it twice they are less likely to call you with proper equity to call. Run it once to put the most pressure and fear on opponents.

5) You are insufficiently rolled in a game. Run it twice always.

6) Your opponent is likely to tilt if he gets scooped running it twice. Run it twice.

7) Your opponent is tough and won't rebuy if he loses. Run it once.

8) Your opponent is weak and won't rebuy if he loses. Run it twice.

9) Your opponent is likely to tilt if he loses the hand. Run it once.

This is the logic they were using, but I don't understand if the equity is the same, isn't the chance of getting quartered directly proportional to the risk of getting scooped if I run it once?

Overall good post but:

#8 - This is the only one I'm not sure I agree with. Why would you run it twice to likely chop so he can lose his chips to someone else at the table and then leave? Wouldn't you want to just scoop his chips right there or he wins and you rebuy and have a good chance to get your chips and his chips back?

Running it twice doesn't affect my equity so I always let my opponents choose because I really don't care, but using your above rules #8 is the only one I thought might need to be rethought.