run it twice

hi all
just curious
been watching high stakes poker on utube
when players shove, you see quite a bit of
running it twice or even three or four times.
if you have the best hand why would you agree to this.
it seems to me you are just giving extra chances
for your opponent to draw out on you.
or am i missing something ?

Running it more times decreases variance. Imagine you shove allin with top set only to have pocket aces catch their 2 outer on the river and you just shoved for 500k. You are going to be mad as hell. Well running it 2 times will let you win half that pot back if the other guy gets lucky.

I think the other side of it is this, if you agree to run it x times with someone when you have the best of it, then they would be more likely to do the same when they have the best of it over you.

Bottom line is, variance decreases the more times you run it.

I have seen it on the highstakes (online poker). The pot was 80K and they run it twice and mostly both player get the half (40K). I don' agree to this run it twice play. Just want it the old way.

It really just depends on your attitude towards risk.

Some players like to run the board multiple times because they want to maximise their chances of at least winning some of the pot. Some are scared that they'll lose everything to a draw.

Some players will run it multiple times just because it's what the other player wants and they figure in the long run it all works out the same so why not keep people happy and in the game? Daniel Negreanu is probably a good example of the latter kind of player.

Other players prefer to only run it once when they're behind because they're OK with the swings and would rather take the chance to win the whole pot - Doyle Brunson has used this logic in televised games a bunch of times.

Basically some people are OK with either winning a big pot or nothing and others would prefer to increase their chances of at least breaking even, even if it decreases their chances of making a really big score.

it is def a gentlemanly approach to it. i held cash games for awhile where we agreed to allow each one of us a run it twice call for the night. it made the game a little heavier on the action and more fun generally to sweat the turn and river twice. i am actually more on the side of run it three times so that the pot can go 2/3.

on ft there is a 'run it twice by default'.
anyone use this ?

There is no difference in running it once or twice or x times except for the variance. You will still win/lose the same amount of time

? how so? if you run it three times and win one then you won once and lost twice......if you run it once you either win once or lose once...i'm kinda slow on the math but ...?

@tcummo i have mine clicked on but i have never had it come into play . I'm having a bday tourney and am going to talk to support about how to get that in effect
@balak running it twice is reallly old

A good reason to NOT RIT @ FT is that FT charges an extra $1 rake for RIT. This extra $1 doesn't really matter at high stakes, but is quite significant at low stakes.

Because if you play the same pot 1,000,000 times and it's 50/50 then you both win 500,000 pots. Running it twice means you get to 1 million pots faster.

Another way to think of it is that if you are flipping, you have a 50% chance of losing the flip (and losing all your money), whereas you only have a 25% chance of losing two 50/50s in a row.

From the tv poker I've seen Doyle seems to go with whatever his opponent wants to do. I've heard ivey say he never runs it more than once. But a lot of them seem to run it twice.

Barry Greenstein is the one who never runs it twice and will tell his opponents "no, just once" if he's asked. Pretty sure I've seen occasionally seen televised hands where Ivey has allowed multiple runs if his opponent asks to but I don't think I can remember him ever asking to do it himself.

not really since running it twice uses a discounted deck. those cards are mucked. if you were on a flush draw and made it twice the third time you have 4 discounted outs. so the second time you run a 50/50 it may not still be 50/50 technically. although of course when calculating your odds you don't discount outs when they are already on board would you then? i do
thanks tardis that is a ridiculous amount of rake, too bad they would benefit from adding features like that cheaply

run it twice to give the best hand a chance to hold up
as propley the best hand has more chances to win so run it twice give you the chance to protectet againest the cooler
if you see hight stakes poker season 4 patric antoinios vs gold in a hand patric floped stright vs 2 pair for jamie on the turn one card to go they decide to run it 3 times jamie gold win the the first 2 times scooping 500k from the 750k in the pot

Seeing as you RIT isn't possible on FTP below $1/$2, $1 of rake isn't that much to those people

agreed pascal i just think in my utopian poker mind that they could benefit more from making things cheaper like that and deep stacks as well as adding prop bets and such to games (27 or the brunson). just as a thanks guys we make millions a day off of you

luck is a part of poker, suckouts happen so be it, I reckon this is pussy play and promotes more agro lose/donk play tbh, people will chase draws more often cause if you ran it twice odds of hitting your draw is quite good isnt it?

i hate run it twice ... first as a spectator it removes some of the bad beat drama that we love

but as a player ... take Hi/Lo poker strategy for example ... you dont want to be involved with hands that you are going to split, at best

so why would you want to create a good chance of splitting the pot in NLH?... i realize cash game, so a little different, but i just don't like it

i don't agree that it is a puzzy play, please tell me you have never sucked out. it really is a gentlemanly way to play. i prefer the odd number of runs thusly giving the better hand odds but have no desire to just crush an opponent. fine i have the better hand...guess what i'm willing to put that to the test three times.

running it 3 times is more interesting ... b/c you will have a winner no matter what, but then the time factor comes into play ... but i guess for a big enough pot ... the time is worth it

If it's essentially the same % outcome, whoever the "winner" is in the short run really doesn't matter - it's probably more interesting to watch, e.g. on TV, but other than that it is irrelevant.

Sounds interesting, but im sure Id enjoy it.

if i had a royal flush
i would run it till the deck ran out of cards.

The expected values are the same whether you run the hand once, twice or ten times. If there are people that don't understand this and make mistakes that they otherwise wouldn't as a result surely it's a good thing?

I understand the idea about reducing variance. However, if the cards are not reshuffled, then that "second run" is not independent of the first. Are the cards reshuffled between each run? I can't seem to find a definitive answer online.

the biggest reason is probably for the variance, but i think more often than not its just as a courtesy to the person who's behind so that he doesnt lose too much (especially in the high stakes games where the pot can b upwards of like 750k)...they know that the discarded cards are taken out of the equation, so they know the odds arent exactly 50/50 if they run it twice, depending on the outcome of course, but i think like someone else said earlier its generally just to be able to run it twice if you're ever behind urself

No, the cards aren't reshuffled between runs. In a live game the cards from the first run are left on the table and just moved out of the way so the second run can be dealt.

So yes, this does mean that if someone hits a flush on the first run they've got one less out to hit it again on the second run.

OK, thanks.

Or worse, if you've got a pocket pair and need to hit runner-runner after the flop to make quads or a gut shot straight flush, if you hit one of your cards but not the other during the first run, you lose all successive runs no matter what turns up.

Also, in cases like that, if you run it four times, the most you can possibly win is 25% of the pot no matter what.

I'd have to do the math, but that at least seems to carry the possibility of reducing your expected value in addition to reducing the variance. Granted, it shouldn't be by much, but still.

Does anyone know if this has been worked out mathematically yet or not? I would think so...

You can Run It Twice @ FT but why can't you run it a bigger amount?
3 or 4?

Maybe they could make a check box advanced details and the rake should stay the same.
I don't see why they charge 1$ for a RIT.

все круто

I haven't used the feature but I suspect because it would slow the game down - in a live game it's not a big deal to negotiate how many times you want to run the board because you're already getting bugger all hands per hour. It could slow the game right down though if you had to stop to negotiate how many times you were going to run it online so having just once or twice with checkboxes to automate it makes the most sense.

As for why they're charging an extra dollar, the answer is the obvious one: because they can.

Hum, what was the shortcut to enable it in full tilt?

in 'options'
tick 'run it twice by default'