This is a discussion on Do you use the all-in cash out function? within the online poker forums, in the Cash Games section; There is such a proverb - a penny saved is a penny earned.
All-in Cash Out helps when you or your opponent goes all-in during
There is such a proverb - a penny saved is a penny earned.
All-in Cash Out helps when you or your opponent goes all-in during a hand, but the river is not yet open. Especially if you have an 80-90% chance of winning. I think this is a very good feature to avoid bad beats. But if you have 2-10% to win, then it makes no sense to use all-in cash out and you can only hope for a miracle. As for example in the topic that I published about the hand with two kings. https://www.cardschat.com/forum/bad-...ars-kk-490592/
I also believe that all-in cash out helps to avoid a tilt.
I've been closing the bets when I hit you with the best hand. and I explain that in 7 out of 10 times that I have closed having a better hand I would have lost it on the river. TT vs KK on the river he got a flush, a set vs connectors and a straight came, a flush vs pocket pocket they sent him a full house. When I show the cards and I have the best hand, I prefer to close and let out a few $ to lose the whole pot. Besides that after closing I double my stack, I don't understand how people see it counterproductive.
Of course, if you have the worst hand, it is better to continue and wait for a badbeat for your opponent.
Since this feature was introduced, a lot of people have bitched about it and said, its just another rake machine for PokerStars, and of course they are right. For me though there is a bit more to it than that, and I think, it can be reasonable to use it, if you are prone to tilting, when you get felted for say 3-4 buyins in a short period of time. In that way you can either play longer sessions or avoid making tilted mistakes.
I also think, it can be a reasonable option, if you are severely limited by your bankroll. Lets say you are a proven winner at 50NL, but due to some sort of emergency you had to withdraw your poker money and take a break from poker. Now you are able to redeposit 200$ and grind it up again. Then conventional wisdom would be to start at 5NL, but maybe its actually a more reasonable choise to start at 10NL and then use the all-in cash out to reduce your risk of going broke, and to continue doing so, until you have 2.000$ and can once again afford to absorb some swings at 50NL.
Needless to say it only makes sense to cash out, if the cash out amount is significant. If you can only cash out 30BB, because you are way behind, or you got it in against someone, who only started the hand with 23BB, then the reduction in variance is not really important. And its also not a good deal to pay for "insurance", if you are very unlikely to lose, like if you have the higher set against a lower set on the flop or turn. But in those situations, where you can cash out a significant amount and also have significant risk of losing, then it can make sense to end the hand right there by cashing out.
Good example of a hand, where the all-in cash out function can protect us from tilt. Few players are so cool headed, that a hand like this wont upset them at all. But when you cashed out, you can truly laugh about it and be happy for the guy, that he sucked out on PokerStars