Do you guys run it twice or not? And why?

I know technically it doesn't matter whether you run it once, twice or 500 times, I'm just curious what's the reasoning behind your choice.

Reasons to RIT:

- Reduces variance.
- Keeps some types of gambly fish happy (live)

Reasons not to RIT:

- Takes longer, therefore less hands per hour (live)
- Puts people to the test, making them fear your all-in move more (mostly live)

As you can see, most arguments for/against apply to live poker.

Not running it twice can be good to get more money on the table, especially on capped buy in tables.

They should have the option of chopping the pot as a fraction of your equity without running the remaining cards out. Obviously this could only work online but it would still be a nice option for those who’d like to speed things up.

Would be very bad for poker if they did that

Running it twice is (or should be) preferred by the house, so that fewer people bust, and the game keeps going longer.

running it three times?

Yes that's the best thing R3MOT3!
I have to put my first post here of course.

I have the option 'always run it twice' on because it reduces variance. If they charge extra rake it'd be a bad thing. There is so much variance in poker, I don't mind a little less myself.

I my games a Player who is willing to RIT gets more action - called down lighter since Players 'know' they will see two boards.

I personally don't like to RIT unless there's 8+ BIs involved, so not that often.

Our casino wont RIT if there are 3 Players in the pot(s).

Some Players wont RIT if there's not enough 'dead money' in the pot. (Define 'enough')

I may RIT if a Player says they are on their last BI ... and is begging.

I don't like to RIT if the pot is under $200 (40 bb)

There are a few RIT threads you can search for with more responses, but a lot of the information here is also shown there, so it will be repeated. GL

Declining a run it twice is bad etiquette imo.

Lol.

Selectively running it twice is considered bad etiquette by some. Not wanting to do it at all is perfectly fine.

Wrong

How is it wrong. With 1 run you’re essentially using high variance/luck as a crutch in a skill based game. Bad etiquette.

Now I think you’re trolling.

You’re denying the person a fairer chance to get a piece of the equity they are entitled to. There is no defence to this.

Whaaaat?

Let’s say I have aks and you have 22. Say the pot is 100 and then I jam my 100 into that pot and you call.

You are mathematically entitled to half of that dead money. This is not rocket science and frankly I don’t understand what you’re challenging me about

I've seen entitlement reach high levels but....

Why not just freeze all betting and run out the boards until you run out of cards? That way everyone gets the equity they are entitled to.

why not open up another pack of cards and run out more boards? Why not just stop the game after the first all in and open up as many packs of cards as possible and let everyone get lap dances by strippers and drink a ton of booze or do hard drugs if your into that sort of thing. Make poker entertaining again.

What players in Beginners Questions are entitled to are serious answers to serious questions.

To an experienced poster you make it pretty obvious just by the language you use, but a new poker player might come in here and believe stuff like that.

Believe stuff like what? I’m not making anything up. I’m legit so confused here. Can you point out the thing I said that you disagree with and explain why it’s wrong?

'Wrong' is a bit strong here. There should be no wrong or right when someone has an option. You can discuss variance, EV and Bankroll management all day .. as well as Player preference.

Should an NFL receiver slow down when they blow by the safety?
Should a MLB pitcher give a batter an extra strike because he swung and missed 'badly'?

I'm trying to play poker in a profitable fashion ... and you're suggesting that I let my opponents 'off the hook' from an etiquette stance? I can actually understand your point if I were sitting around playing for fun and wanted to potentially extend the game.

I'm not sure your concept of 'fair' .. if we were in a room that didn't allow RIT, then by default you're suggesting that 'standard' game play is inherently unfair.

I don't RIT very often .. Here's two spots from last night in PLO ..

1) I have the nut straight on Turn, EP checks, I bet 2/3 pot .. next Player jams in pot with only a King-high flush draw AND has 4 clubs in his hand. Somehow the EP Player tanks for 3 minutes and folds the Ace-high flush draw WITH three clubs in his hand. I call it off ... Player only has 3 outs as I have a club in my hand. BINK, club on the River!! ... 3 outer, Player says he didn't care about the money and was just going for the gutter straight flush part of his holding.

2) I have the nut straight, my opponent has a bottom wrap and can only chop with my straight or go runner runner flush. BINK, BINK .. flush

So you're suggesting that I 'should' be offering these Players 'forgiveness' for their poor decisions or be seen in the light of bad etiquette? Who am I being 'fair' to in these two spots above? My opponent or myself?

I thought the object of the game was to accumulate chips? GL

Your comment was "refusing to run it twice is bad etiquette". Then you say people are entitled to get as close to their all in equity as possible, which is nonsense. Poker is a competitive game and the goal is to win money, not chop it up as much as possible. If both want to run it twice then go ahead and do it, but the norm is running it once and every player should be prepared to take on the variance. Poker is also a gambling game and if you're forced to run it twice because it would be bad etiquette not to, you would be denied an opportunity to gamble. Do you really think a gambler is going to be interested in playing when his opponents shame him into chopping the pot every single time?

If you believe people are entitled to their equity in a pot at some point (when I'm unclear on, when there's an all-in? Pre-flop? Post? Before the river?) why are we putting out any additional cards at all?

I don’t think there’s a single point that I don’t disagree with.

We can argue about luck/skill in poker all we want, but we know that the moment we are all-in there’s no more skill involved. There’s zero skill in watching the dealer run out the board.

We might be entitled to have the dealer run out the board and push the pot to the winner, but we’re certainly not entitled to any part of the pot. Equity in poker is a strictly theoretical thing (unless we do equity chops). There’s only 3 possible outcomes to a hand. 1 (we win), 0 (we lose), 0.5 (we chop) no matter how much equity we have when getting it all in.

Running it twice isn’t part of the game of poker. It’s a gimmick added to some games so a couple of players can have an extra sweat while a couple others want to reduce variance.

Personally I don’t care. If people want to run it twice, we run it twice. Same as with chopping the blinds. But that guilt trip if someone doesn’t want to do it is ridiculous. If you don’t want to sit next to somebody who doesn’t chop, switch seats or tables. If you want to run it twice, don’t play with people who don’t. Easy as that. But that constant complaining is just freaking annoying. When a guy sits down and the table idiot immediately points to a player next to the new guy and says “just to let you know, he won’t chop with you!” I wish I could just 86 him.