Short person doesn't want to go twice

Enough money in side pot other two players run it twice, if the short person loses the main, does the main also get split between the two side players?

Or are they just running the side pot separately? I'm assuming all together, but some confusion came up last week in this instance

Maybe some house rules say otherwise, but you should not be allowed to run if twice for the main pot if one of the all-in players objects to that.

My .02

main is 1 pot.

Side is split.

They are separate pots and should be treated separately.

I'd avoid allowing any RIT options which use conditionals, because they can change the EV. In this situation allowing the two larger stacks the option of running a second board for the main in the case that the short stack loses the first board, the short stack's EV is not affected but the EV of the larger stacks can change.

Let's denote the larger stacks multiway equity as B_1 and C_1, and their heads up equity as B_2 and C_2. The overall equity of B for the procedure being suggested is:

B_1*(1/2+1/2*B_2)+C_1*1/2*B_2

If both procedures have the same equity for all players, by definition the above equation should always be equal to B_1. Clearly it's possible to have inputs which result in a contradiction. Test an example.

Has to be for side only. For example if big stack A has bottom set and big stack B has a straight flush draw. And shorty has top set. A is drawing almost dead for main but B could win first and bring him back into a flip for half

In 100% of the home games I've been to the main and side will be split if the shorty loses the first Board and the other 2 end up in a chop spot. It can be a little awkward since the shorty normally is asked to show 'first' in order to establish how the main pot is going to go .. with this sometimes happening before the 2nd Board is run out. (Dealer dependent)

The vast majority of casinos don't even allow RIT if a 3rd Player is in the pot .. problem solved.

Before the casinos adopted the 'no 3rd man' rule it was really Dealer dependent but I believe the house rules were generally no deals allowed for the side pot if the shorty only wanted one runout. GL

Home games are different but it's amazing how many people in casinos don't understand the concept of two separate pots and a shorter stack losing the main has no bearing on the side pot

This is totally dependent on the venue. I've seen it ruled both ways. If you don't know the rule for your room, ask. You might be surprised.

Yes, and this mainly because it's sprung on them at the worst possible time .. when they're all-in! You'd think that they would've seen it previous to the one hand that they're involved in, but they certainly don't act like it .. and thus put a big target on their head IMO. GL