What is the "Cash Out" or "Safety" thing when someone goes all in?

[UnderDawg5501]

I've encountered this a few times. How can someone go all in, then decide they made a mistake and cashes out when the cards are rolled over?

Just had one once again and the numbers don't add up.

Start of hand, Villian UTG+1 has $1.59
Hero in UTG+2 With 7s7d have $4.62
Blinds posted $.02, $.05
A couple of raises, we are all in.
Villian shows QdAh
Flop 3s2c5s, turn Td, River Kc
Villian cashes out $1.41, cash out fee $.01
Hero collects $3.12, Rake is $.13

At the start of the next hand, I have $6.15 and the Villian has $1.41???

#1. How can someone be allowed to withdraw a bet first of all?? I can't imagine someone at a live game deciding to take their money back after a bet is made.

#2. Where did the extra money come from? I can't imagine pokerstars is giving money away.

Just pushes buttons when there isn't any integrity. It's a head scratcher for me.

Cheers!
Brian

 

[fundiver199]

Its a function, which allow players to cash out their equity against a 1% fee, after the normal rake has been taken from the pot. In this case the pot was 2 x 1.59 $ + 0.07$ = 3.25$ before rake and 3.12$ after rake. Statistically QdAh will win around 45% of the time, so the equity share of that player is (App. 0.45) x 3.12$ = 1,42$. He cashes this out, and after that he no longer takes part in the hand. The other player (Hero), who did not cash out, is now playing against Pokerstars, and in this case Hero get lucky and win 1,42$ from Pokerstars. If Hero lose, then Pokerstars keep 3.12$ - 1.42$ = 1.70$ from the pot in top of the rake and cashout fee. So to sum it up:

1) The player cashing out is not "withdrawing" their bet. They only avoid the variance, which result from cards yet to be dealt.

2) Yes the extra money comes from Pokerstars, when Hero win. And goes to Pokerstars, when Hero lose.

 

[UnderDawg5501]

Thank you for the explanation. A very well written explanation for something that was puzzling me.

It still seems to me a person should not go all in if they don't mean it...

Cheers!
Brian

 

[Andyreas]

It still seems to me a person should not go all in if they don't mean it...

Yes, usually it's not really a good idea to cash out due to the fees. Variance is simply in place in poker.

In the long run, PokerStars will win due to the fees and that's probably why they implemented such a fee. 😉

 

[G0930]

Yes, usually it's not really a good idea to cash out due to the fees. Variance is simply in place in poker.

In the long run, PokerStars will win due to the fees and that's probably why they implemented such a fee. 😉

It is a good idea when you play PLO xD
Losing with over 80% equity is standard there lol.
I even cash out sometimes with over 90% cause the cash I get at cashout out is marginally lower than the original pot at this equity

 

[fundiver199]

It still seems to me a person should not go all in if they don't mean it...

You are free to not like the feature, but it does not hurt your EV, that other players use it. So my advice is to just accept, its there, and not think to much about it.

In the long run, PokerStars will win due to the fees and that's probably why they implemented such a fee. 😉

Yes of course. Just like airlines offering you the opportunity to select your seat against an extra payment. Or restaurants offering you a drink to go with your coffee at a huge markup. With that being said, if you are being a bit aggressive with your bankroll, then reducing variance is good. Lets say in this example that the Villain only has 20 $ in his account. He got himself into this spot, which might be good or bad. Now he can accept a 0,18$ loss or basically toss a coin for 7% of his bankroll. There is no skill involved in tossing a coin, so why not pay that 1% fee and avoid it?