Run it Once, Twice, or Three Times? (1 Viewer)

[Taghkanic]

Imo, collusion (aka a form of stealing) only occurs if an agreement was made to first include and then force others out before chopping the collective proceeds.

If it happens to eventually get to heads-up naturally, and then two players subsequently agree to minimize potential losses by chopping or running it X times, that's not 'stealing'.

A theoretical “chop” option would (a) make it harder to detect the difference between planned collusion and a “natural” deal, and (b) give colluders an easy method of doing so—one that makes the collusion look more legit.

But again, I have *never* seen chop included as an option in any home or casino game where the players have already gotten it in.

If there are multiple players involved either as the hand develops or after they get it in, this option would create all kinds of potential for mischief, imho.

Example:

Villain 1 raises
The Mark reraises
Villain 2 shoves
Villain 1 reshoves
The Mark tank/folds
Villains agree to chop

If this happens more than once in a blue moon under normal circumstances, it starts to look pretty fishy (collusion by ganging up/isolating).

Colluders can always try to hide their plan by dividing up winnings privately post-game. But if you openly allow for a chop option, you effectively legalize the squeeze.

 

[upNdown]

But again, I have *never* seen chop included as an option in any home or casino game where the players have already gotten it in.

I’m pretty sure I saw it done on old school high stakes poker. Or at least I remember it being proposed a few times. Probably by Sammy Farha? I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.

 

[Taghkanic]

I’m pretty sure I saw it done on old school high stakes poker. Or at least I remember it being proposed a few times. Probably by Sammy Farha? I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.

Yeah, it sounds like maybe a relic of ancient poker to me, too. Like people frowning on check-raises.

 

[Frogzilla]

The level of ignorant statements still surprises me on here...because I don't want to say "no" to running it once from the angler that's trying to not go bust after going all in, I'm an even bigger angler? That's the most stupid thing I've heard today, but, there's still a lot of day left.

Well, the day was early, I just read the parts about quicker to run two boards than one, and, about how it's not fair to the other money that was in the pot...

Do you make this offer of “best of 3 takes all” whenever you are behind?

 

[KHarp1]

I don't make the "offer," I counter offer. How would I know if I'm behind? Once the cards are exposed I'm not going to ask anyone to run it more than once. If the other person is behind (usually the case) I may consider it, but, that is my standard counter-offer. I think running it more than once just goes against everything about playing NL. I realize some guys like to run out more than once, probably because they saw it on TV. If that's what they're use to, then, I'll offer to run it 3 times, best 2 of 3 takes the pot. Run it twice is like training wheels on a Harley!

 

[KHarp1]

View attachment 1143945

Not going to let it go. It's scummy to offer it. Even more so in a friendly game.

Ok, I'll take the fight. I've made it clear that I'm a run it once person, wasn't there just another thread a week ago with this same argument? I'm all in, then that's all in. Better or worse. I've NEVER asked anyone if they want to run it twice. If some donk ask me, instead of telling them to go screw themselves, then I counter with run it 3 times, 2 of 3 takes the pot. Honestly, sometimes they won't do that, often times the rest of the table is more concerned/involved with the outcome then I am.

And you can go screw yourself for saying I'm scummy in the first place. I'm not afraid of my play, once is how it's supposed to be ran. I'm not the POS that asks for the lifeline in the first place. You are a total idiot.

 

[Legend5555]

Ok, I'll take the fight. I've made it clear that I'm a run it once person, wasn't there just another thread a week ago with this same argument? I'm all in, then that's all in. Better or worse. I've NEVER asked anyone if they want to run it twice. If some donk ask me, instead of telling them to go screw themselves, then I counter with run it 3 times, 2 of 3 takes the pot. Honestly, sometimes they won't do that, often times the rest of the table is more concerned/involved with the outcome then I am.

And you can go screw yourself for saying I'm scummy in the first place. I'm not afraid of my play, once is how it's supposed to be ran. I'm not the POS that asks for the lifeline in the first place. You are a total idiot.

Did you even read what I said about my thoughts on running it more than once easier in the thread?

 

[ChipFinderSK]

I’m pretty sure I saw it done on old school high stakes poker. Or at least I remember it being proposed a few times. Probably by Sammy Farha? I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.

Farha and Sean Sheikhan actually agreed to it once on HSP.

Farha made the offer multiple times to different people (with a smile on his face, as if he was joking - usually after he called a preflop bet with rags).

I miss Farha.

 

[Taghkanic]

Farha and Sean Sheikhan actually agreed to it once on HSP.

Farha made the offer multiple times to different people (with a smile on his face, as if he was joking - usually after he called a preflop bet with rags).

I miss Farha.

Clever angle, I guess. All I know is I wouldn’t allow it, if I were running the game.

 

[Frogzilla]

I don't make the "offer," I counter offer. How would I know if I'm behind? Once the cards are exposed I'm not going to ask anyone to run it more than once. If the other person is behind (usually the case) I may consider it, but, that is my standard counter-offer. I think running it more than once just goes against everything about playing NL. I realize some guys like to run out more than once, probably because they saw it on TV. If that's what they're use to, then, I'll offer to run it 3 times, best 2 of 3 takes the pot. Run it twice is like training wheels on a Harley!

Let’s say you bluff raise turn with a 7 high flush draw. You get snap called. Let’s say your opponent asks to run it twice. Do you consider making your counteroffer of best of three, winner takes all?

 

[allforcharity]

If Lionel is holding QQ, he runs it three times

 

[ArielVer18]

Splitting three ways:
1) Both stacks counted down to see who covers whom and how much short stack is
2) entire short stack pulled into pot
3) bet counted out of large stack and pulled into pot
4) larger pot split into three

There's a shortcut:

1. Both stacks counted down to see who covers whom and how much short stack is
2. If the shorter stack won 1/3, he keeps 2/3 of his remaining stack. If he won 2/3, he gets 1/3 of his remaining stack from the other player.
3. The pot in the middle is split into threes as usual

 

[m700ltr]

I prefer being consistent on run outs. Don't ask for 2 or 3 when you're weak and only once when you're strong. Bad table image. Either be one or the other.

Completely agree. Have had multiple Villians run it once only when AA preflop, then wanting 2x when drawing etc. Thus my rule is once only, unless Villian has been reciprocal to me in the past (then he can choose).

Also, I will add that I prefer not showing cards. Invites the ahead player to pick spots. If you are going to show, I've always "felt" player that shows first should be allowed to choose.

 

[trigs]

Running it twice recently came up at a home game and there was a little discussion about it.

Personally, I prefer to run it once. Max pain. Just rip the band-aid off and move on.* However, if the other player wants to run it twice, I'm fine with it. During this discussion, I did mention that if you are going to ask me to run it twice, I'm expecting you to run it twice every time from now on. None of this "Well, I have a strong/weak hand this time so I want to run it once/twice this time".

The way I see it is that if someone is asking their opponent to run it twice, they are basically asking for a favor, and I'm willing to be kind and accommodating especially in home games. However, once you start choosing between running it once or twice based on the strength of your hand, then it feels like you are taking advantage of my kindness simply to better your situation and not to just lower the variance. Hence, I'll agree to run it twice with the added agreement that that's what I'm expecting to happen from now on (at least for the rest of that session). Obviously, I can't force them to do that though, so if they do start switching back and forth, I'm sticking to running it once.

*On a side note: I was always annoyed watching tournaments (I think WPT would do this a while back) where on an all-in and call the dealer would deal the flop and then wait a bit, deal the turn and then wait some more. WTF are we waiting for? Aren't the blinds still running? Just deal the friggin' hand lol. I'm assuming it was for TV viewing or something, but was still annoying.

 

[ChipTalker]

While I agree with your sentiment of consistency for good etiquette the math remains that running it 1,2,3 ... however many times does not take advantage of your kindness and only smooths out the variance. If you are a 70/30 fav then you will always be that and over 100 times you will win around 70 times. It never gives anyone any advantage. You may push that 1 time agenda and be the one who lost cause the 30% hit but again it really does not matter in the long run. I prefer to do whatever is better for the game as far as keeping people engaged and wanting to play more often and longer. If you are a winning player than that is where the real advantage comes into play. If your not a winning player then you probably don't care about anything I am saying and just like to have fun so do whatever is fun for you.

 

[Taghkanic]

While I agree with your sentiment of consistency for good etiquette the math remains that running it 1,2,3 ... however many times does not take advantage of your kindness and only smooths out the variance. If you are a 70/30 fav then you will always be that and over 100 times you will win around 70 times. It never gives anyone any advantage. You may push that 1 time agenda and be the one who lost cause the 30% hit but again it really does not matter in the long run. I prefer to do whatever is better for the game as far as keeping people engaged and wanting to play more often and longer. If you are a winning player than that is where the real advantage comes into play. If your not a winning player then you probably don't care about anything I am saying and just like to have fun so do whatever is fun for you.

Smoothing out the variance in the short term (rather than waiting for your true equity to get realized over your lifetime) may be desirable in some situations.

For example, if someone is playing a bit over their head and not properly rolled, I could see where they might prefer to get closer to realizing their actual equity right then and there… rather than trusting that it will come back to them later, if the villain happens to catch their 3-outer.

Put it this way: If you could just do an equity chop on every all-in, wouldn’t that make poker less painful (if also less fun)?

(We get it in. You’re a 70% favorite to win. You get 70% of the pot.)

 

[ChipTalker]

"Smoothing out the variance in the short term (rather than waiting for your true equity to get realized over your lifetime) may be desirable in some situation"

I don't disagree and put it in the whatever is best for the game category. If running it multiple times keeps a player in vs losing a player and breaking the game then by all means ... it really all depends on the crowd you have. I think the important thing to remember based on some other comments above is that multiple times vs one has no advantages in equity for either player but could aid or hurt the overall health of the game by keeping players happy and engaged or by pissing them off and ending early.

 

[shorticus]

One or three for me. I’ll typically announce it when I sit if the option is available.

Never more than 1 in split pot games. Thats just complicated.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Usually once.

However if it’s an action player and he’s down, or if it’s a pot so big even I’m uncomfortable I’ll consider running it twice.

 

[davesilver88]

I run it once

 

[ChipTalker]

"Never more than 1 in split pot games. Thats just complicated."

Yeah agreed and if we play 2 board games we keep typically keep it High only for same reason. Chopping up a PLO8 2 board with a high and low winner on each board is too annoying and slows the game down.

 

[allforcharity]

For one of our local games, it can be announced when it's heads up all in, and the player who is called can decide to run it once or twice. There can be other players in the hand if there are multiple pots.

 

[Taghkanic]

"Smoothing out the variance in the short term (rather than waiting for your true equity to get realized over your lifetime) may be desirable in some situation"

I don't disagree and put it in the whatever is best for the game category. If running it multiple times keeps a player in vs losing a player and breaking the game then by all means ... it really all depends on the crowd you have. I think the important thing to remember based on some other comments above is that multiple times vs one has no advantages in equity for either player but could aid or hurt the overall health of the game by keeping players happy and engaged or by pissing them off and ending early.

Agreed. What drives me nuts is when people try to get an edge (real or imagined) by running it once when they have a very strong hand, and twice when they have draws.

 

[shorticus]

Agreed. What drives me nuts is when people try to get an edge (real or imagined) by running it once when they have a very strong hand, and twice when they have draws.

This irks the hell out of me!

 

[seyff45]

IMO one or three...

ties are lame.

 

[trigs]

"Smoothing out the variance in the short term (rather than waiting for your true equity to get realized over your lifetime) may be desirable in some situation"

I don't disagree and put it in the whatever is best for the game category. If running it multiple times keeps a player in vs losing a player and breaking the game then by all means ... it really all depends on the crowd you have. I think the important thing to remember based on some other comments above is that multiple times vs one has no advantages in equity for either player but could aid or hurt the overall health of the game by keeping players happy and engaged or by pissing them off and ending early.

I do understand that running it multiple times simply changes the variance and not the equity. That's why I'm annoyed when my opponent changes between running it once or twice because they think it alters the equity.

Edit: Also, I am obviously only referring to hands that warrant running it more than once: biggish+ heads up all-in pots in non-split pot games. Everything else I'm running once.

Agreed. What drives me nuts is when people try to get an edge (real or imagined) by running it once when they have a very strong hand, and twice when they have draws.

^This.

 

[Coyote]

A fundamental detail is whether the players have opened up their hole cards and know who is ahead (NOT compulsory in cash poker, I understand).
If yes, if I 'm ahead, it's either one or three.
If I 'm behind, I 'd beg for three, but woulnd't be cheeky enough to ask for two.

With nobody knowing who is ahead, fair thing is 2 times.

 

[Taghkanic]

A fundamental detail is whether the players have opened up their hole cards and know who is ahead (NOT compulsory in cash poker, I understand).
If yes, if I 'm ahead, it's either one or three.
If I 'm behind, I 'd beg for three, but woulnd't be cheeky enough to ask for two.

With nobody knowing who is ahead, fair thing is 2 times.

Not to encourage this, but if you’re behind and on an open ender or flush draw, wouldn’t twice be the move?

 

[Coyote]

Not to encourage this, but if you’re behind and on an open ender or flush draw, wouldn’t twice be the move?

Probably the principled answer would be "don't open up hole cards in cash poker even when all-in and, if agreed, play it twice"

 

[loosechange101]

In our games pretty much always the players' decision. I all players involved more or less unanimously want to run it twice, three times etc.... well then you're gonna be counting chips for a little while if it comes to it. Only really happened once or twice to be honest, people usually decide themselves its not worth it if the pot isn't large enough / worth the time to count.