Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="HooDooKoo, post: 2196070, member: 102827"]
This is just dead wrong. In most all-in on the flop situations, one of the players is ahead --- sometimes materially ahead --- when the players agree to run it multiple times.  That player that's ahead agrees to multiple runs to minimize the variance, and in some situations this is clearly a reasonable decision.  I am certain that we all run the same in the long run (in terms of "luck").  I am much less sure, however, that we all run the same in the biggest pots (once again, due to randomness, not some rigtard theory).   If you generally only play $25K pots but find yourself in a $200K pot, you need a lot of $25K wins to make up for the one loss if your opponent happens to win the big one.
 
Suppose you're playing a $200K pot where you and your opponent are both all-in on the flop.  You hold top two pair vs. villains's nut flush draw.  For instance A7 spades vs. KQ off, with a flop of KQ4 and two spades.  The guy with two pair is a 64% favorite, but more than 1/3 of the time he'll lose the entire pot. 
 
In this case as the guy holding two pair, I would want to run it three times --- drastically increasing the odds that the two pair turns out to be profitable, even if the profit is less than max profit.  I would probably accept running it twice, though, as it makes it nearly certain (7/8) that I break even at least.  You may not want to play it this way, but it's good variance/bankroll management.  If you get into a LOT of $200K pots so you believe that, in the long run, your luck will even out there, I'm fine with not running multiple times --- but there are situations when it's clearly a reasonable decision.
 
-HooDooKoo
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us