Its well documented that I keep track of all kinds of dumb stuff. Sue me. Im a stats nerd.......So check this out.

In 2016 I ran -$8410 in All in EV.
In 2017 I ran -$2965 in All in EV.
In 2018 my room started allowing us to run it twice. I figured Ill run everything twice if the other guy wants to which should smooth out my variance on the big hands. Maybe I would eventually get some of the lost All in EV back.

So in 2018, Ive run +$135 in All in EV. That's such a big improvement I'm very happy just running neutral in big pots.

But here's the weird thing.

In 60 pots where Ive run it twice, Ive run +$4106 over EV. But if I had run it once in those same hands Id be +$7956 in All in EV. I seem to win the first board most of the time.

That means in 2018
Run once...-$4241. Well below EV
Run twice...+$4106. Well above EV

When I run once I run horribly. When I run twice I run great. But if I had run once in the pots that I ran twice, I would've run much better. Its like the poker Gods are jacking with me.

PS...most of these guys are clueless about the purpose of running it twice. Its hilarious listening to the discussions they have about it. The guys who pick and choose when to run it twice based on their specific hand mostly choose the wrong option.


Most memorable hands running it twice

1) I got all in 4c5c vs 73offsuit in a raised pot.
Flop was 7c3c7x. I rivered the 6c on the first board.

2) My JJ vs his AA all in preflop

Second board was AxxJJ

Running it twice is for wimps. That's why the poker gods are taking the piss

Based on my hand, I'd either run it once or three times, but never twice.

Run it once. It all evens out in the end so you will smash a solid winning streak if you play well and run better in all in spots. I wouldn’t look at it as you are running bad in AI spots.

Just work on your game, make sure you are playing well, and keep taking your spots. Variance is sick in poker but it all evens out in the long run. Keep playing and hit the long run with solid brm and good play and you will do fine.

notsureifserious.jpg

Why would you think it makes any difference long run?

As for whether to RIT, the answer has everything to do with your Vs. if you are making your money from getting value, encourage calling by letting them RIT. If you are making money from FE, encourage folding by refusing to RIT.

Really Mike? You know about variance. I'd expect to see something like this in 6bet me's thread. As Garick said, it doesn't matter in the long run.

Next time if you have the urge to post something like this, put it in the chat thread.

Since Garick didn't lock it, I won't either.

FWIW, I considered it, but since some people actually think of RIT or not as strat, and we haven't discussed it in a while, I let it go. If it goes further downhill though, feel free to lock if I don't first.

I know the odds dont change at all. Ive had that discussion a number of times with people and they think Im nuts. All it does is get you to the "long term" faster which is the only reason I do it. It smooths the drastic daily ups and downs.

It all evens out in the end, but its possible to run very badly for a very long time and never get to "the end".

Or running really badly gets you to the end really quickly - just it's the rage quitting type of end

OK, but that confirms that there is no "wrong option" based on specific hands. It's all the same, no matter what you're holding.

^ true that.

But if it helps your Villains choose to gambool per Post #7 then RIT is meta-game +EV.

+1, once or three for me too. Usually once, since my main poker room does not allow multiple runs

If we want to make this a strat thread...running it once results in significantly higher ev...assuming hero's tilt control is above the mean.

On hands in the near future maybe, not in the particular hand that is being run once or twice.

What I meant is that most people will quickly say No to running it twice when they think they have the best hand and agree to run it twice when they arent sure or when they are calling with a draw.

Their logic for those choices is backwards. They dont want to run it twice when they are sure they are ahead or think the other guy is on a draw.

Running it once all the time or twice all the time makes the most sense, but if you are going to choose to switch back and forth based on your hand, it makes more sense to choose to run it twice when you are pretty sure you are ahead.

If you have JJ on a Jh5h2c board, and you are the type to switch back and forth between once and twice because you will get upset if you lose the hand, then it makes more sense to run this twice.

It has been a long time since I have played in a game that allowed multiple runs, but the biggest thing I remember is that when people know you won't run it twice they seem to fold more often.

I was always very consistent about never running it twice (and no one ever asked me to run it 3 times). I was always rolled enough to handle losing the whole pot, and I always felt it was good for the game for fish to see money changing hands every hand (as opposed to running it twice where chops were likely).

i vote to close this thread.

Given that logic, shouldn’t we want to run it twice then since people are more likely to be making “bad”/worse calls knowing they can run it twice..? Common mistakes of bad players is to call off too light or just call too much in general, we shouldnt be giving them reasons to fold

Also when we RIT do we get raked more or no? Since it’d be 10% of each pot or 10% total? Im assuming it’s raked more?

Running it twice basically takes (potential) chips off the table. Instead of winners getting deep and losers rebuying or getting replaced you have chops. Great situation for the house, bad situation for winners.

There are exceptions but usually not at low stakes.

First of all, the game was time-raked.

Second of all, I should clarify. The only people in that game who ever wanted to run it twice were players who knew what they were doing. They were not really my customers. The fish were there to gamble; I was never asked to run it twice by anyone I considered a target.

So refusing to run it twice actually had the added benefit of making the other regs underestimate me. In fact, in one hand after I jammed the flop, and a guy asked me while in the tank if I would run it twice, when I refused to answer, another reg said "He doesn't know what that means". How can that be a bad thing?

This is the correct hot take. It’s not close.

That makes sense although I cant see how its a great situation for the house. Most rooms dont like it because the hand takes an extra 30 seconds or so costing them rake. How do they benefit from an extra $400-$500 being on the table when there's already $4000+ on the table and just about every hand is already max raked?

At a $5 rake and 30 hands an hour, it only costs the house $1.25 to run it twice. The ones that allow it figure that the utility of having more people max out the betting (because the potential pain of losing is less) more than make up that loss (otherwise, the pots would be smaller). In addition, having more people in the room means the tables stay fuller, longer. The dealer makes up the difference by getting tipped by two people instead of one in splits.