Long time no see, hello again everyone. Has this argument already been had here? Please link me if it has.

I have been arguing to people that running it twice is seldomly a good deal in our local card room because they rake an extra $2 at the $1/$2 table to run it twice now.

To really beat this up and get the right answer, I think you would need to know how many people are playing, what the current high hand is, how much time is left before payout, how much is the payout etc. However, if you have an open-ended straight flush raw it certainly seems that the math is there to justify running it twice and that would be a profitable decision in most scenarios.

Is it common for the second board to qualify for HH?? I can't even name any rooms that allow for running it twice at $1/2.

In South Florida I believe this is the norm now. I only play in two rooms here but Im certain the majority of others are similar down here or else the players would shift quickly... lots of retired folks just sit here for high hands and play horribly because they just want to make a high hand.

So you are paying $2 for an extra shot at promotion money? That sounds odd to me and I am not sure if that should even be legal.

Besides that, not everyone in the card room plays to maximize their EV. If I am on my last buy-in and have another hour til my ride wants to home, maybe it would be worth $5 to me to RIT?

insurance in life costs money

pretty funny that people who want to waste everyone's time with this run it twice nonsense would complain about the negligible charge to RIT

I respect your posts and this isn't meant confrontationally, but you're crazy not to like RIT or more. It makes so many people more likely GII bad, you have no idea. It also keeps people interested in how it turns out.

Charging extra seems absurd to me, but I'd still want it in my game to keep the fish splashy and happy. (and to shave off some variance, if I'm honest)

RIT is time consuming and lowers your win rate.

You know what my personal version of poker hell is?

Playing 1 2 NL after 2 5 NL breaks late at night and you are stuck $800 and having 2 nits with $90 between the two of them take 5 minutes discussing how many times they want to run it for that giant pot...

Charging because it makes the 2nd runout promo eligible seems like a bargain.

Charging for the added time isn’t worth it on a player level, unless they are really sticking it in bad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'd say this reasoning is far over blown. With a bad dealer it MIGHT delay the game by 1-2 min, but RIT situations don't come up that frequently for it to adversely affect your winrate in a concrete manner. I'm indifferent to whether games should/shouldn't offer it, but i've played on enough RIT games to have the belief that enough players are willing to GII with you lite that the added EV more than offsets the couple minutes here and there spent by the dealer going through the process.

As for the fee mentioned, perfectly reasonable, and if you're that tight that you're unwilling to pay the $2 then just RIO. A lot of people look at RIT as a type of insurance (not me personally), and $2 is a small premium to pay IMO. If you're in a room where the second board counts towards promo money then it may actually be +EV to always pay the $2 and RIT.

I play almost all plo
While there are some people who gamble more when they can run it twice tons of people make absolutely atriosious folds to me bc I don't RIT

Most of the players in my pool who lose a lot of money prefer once or just don't care

People can't handle losing or negative variance
I want people stuck and tilted
I want them scared in games they can't afford
I want to stomp out young players who could be good pros before they reach that point while they don't have a lot of 💰

I handle losing way better than almost everyone

I've seen way to many dealer errors with People running it twice wasting a ton of time

I've seen people pull angles RIT

I'd be insane to run it twice

Sorry, maybe I said that incorrectly. What I meant was:

1. RIT slows down the game. The discussions in my experience are painful. Then yes the dealer runs two boards and very often also has to chop the the pot. So longer.

2. RIT reduces your win rate. It by no means eliminates variance, only reduces it. But if you are getting it in good you would be better off excepting variance for the entire pot, rather than the lower variance for the times you split the pot. I guess if you can’t fold a draw with bad pot odds perhaps RIT is good for you, but the math does not support it otherwise.

It takes time and it gives another chance at a HH promo? And it should be free?

So, what is your question? Did I miss it? Are you just asking if it's fair to charge $2 extra?

IMO the original question (somewhat hidden) concerned whether or not the 'value' of RIT changes significantly if you take the $2 charge into account? Is it better, worse or minimally changed with the fee attached, charging for the opportunity to have lower variance and a second shot at promos?

I assume OP is talking from the Player's side, but there's also house side points that have already been made as well. I have been in favor of extra rake for extra cards.

Where does the $2 go? Split into rake and promo or only one side?

In our room since RIT voids all promos, the $2 'would be' drop is returned to the middle. GL

To answer OP's (or as I've posed it) question ... There's been plenty of debate about RIT in this forum. Adding the extra fee to the discussion will complicate and probably widen the gap between 'camps'.

There's way too much personal, and business, preference/influence to ever get to a solid conclusion on this matter. It will always be an 'If ... then ... ' driven discussion. GL

i mean if you would rather run it twice to reduce variance it would be silly to not be willing to pay the 2 dollars to do so if that was the only way to RIT.

When, if ever, is it a profitable decision to run it twice?

At a 1/2 table? I'd say never. Just get on with the next hand and quit wasting time.

RIT at 1/2NL is a bad idea to begin with. That game must crawl.

I'd agree with never at a 1/2 table. Otherwise IDK, I'll leave that to the pros and I think it has been discussed at length in other threads. Does the extra $2 rake make it not worth it? I would say yes since it was probably borderline at no extra charge.

I can disagree with that with the scenario I presented: open ended SF draw on flop, lets say 1 minute left in the HH period, current HH is quads, HH is $400. Two outs, twice, is about $30 of positive expectation in running it twice.

Why only run it twice? Why not 10 times?

So shouldn’t we run out the full deck every time we have trips+ on the turn? Unless the missing card is already dead, we’ll get quads every single time!

Yeah baby. $2 for every river until you hit your bonus.

I think the 20+ burn cards would thwart your theory. Even without that, lets say heads up (theoretically) you would still have 44 cards to run out = up to $88 dollars just to get on the board, maybe fair to say an avg of $44 to hit it. Now figure out the likelihood of your quads holding up against a poker room of 15 tables for another 20 minutes... main point being, the math here is probably more interesting and complicated than any of these "it doesn't matter" guys have ever considered.