Running it twice - Run it twice
Hello
From Florida here. I am interested in knowing what the rules are for running it twice in your local room.
Do they allow RIT in multipot/ multiplayer/ multi streets all ins?
If multi pot- Do they allow RIT only on outside if all in inside does not agree ?
Lastly, what is the house rake when RIT? Do they take more for JP?
Thanks
12 Replies
1. Good rules only allow RIT with HU all ins and no side pots or other player all in.
2. Any street when all in should then allow RIT
3. On your "outside" question, RIT should not even be an option regardless if main pot all in agrees or not.
4. If it is a rakes game (see below) of course all boards get raked. 1, 2 or 3 if allowed. As to JP, if the second board is JP eligible (which is not common in regulated rooms) then yes, pull in JP for each board. But as noted not usually allowed in regulated rooms.
Side comment, the rake question should not matter because RIT at $1/$2 or $2/$5 is just silly and a waste of time, especially in FL where the regulated games (AFAIK) are all hard max buy in caps. Those games simply don't have enough $ variance to justify the waste of time running it multiple time. When I get asked, I simply laugh and say no, run it out.
So since $5/$10 and larger (where RIT makes sense/is worth the time) are time games, the rake question become moot. But if you want to waste time and money running multiple times in a raked game, go for it. Just realize you look silly or broke.
I've only seen extra rake for running it twice in Florida, though I'm sure it exists elsewhere. Most everywhere else you can only run it twice in time rake games anyway, so 5-10 and higher plus PLO.
Most places only allow it if all players agree, often only if there's two players. If I recall correctly, at the Lodge you can run it twice for just the side pot. Main pot is still awarded to whoever wins the top board.
I've only seen extra rake for running it twice in Florida, though I'm sure it exists elsewhere. Most everywhere else you can only run it twice in time rake games anyway, so 5-10 and higher plus PLO.
Most places only allow it if all players agree, often only if there's two players. If I recall correctly, at the Lodge you can run it twice for just the side pot. Main pot is still awarded to whoever wins the top board.
As noted FL is where I run into RIT at 2/5 or maybe even 1/2 NLHE. It is REALLY funny to see the nit regs doing it. They see it for 10s or 100s of thousand dollars on their favorite stream or TV poker show, so they think it makes them look "big time" doing it for a $225 pot.
Have to say, glad I don't play at the Lodge if two players can agree to run only the side multiple times. Screws with the decision process to call the short stack all in if the bigger stacks "know" they will RIT on the side.
Doesn't change the math but it does have potential to change the decisions. IIRC, this has been discussed here before
Money is all relative I'm sure there are people laughing at you for running it twice in a 5/10 game.
Makes more sense to look at how many big blinds the pot is rather than dollar value to see whether or not it's justifiable.
Money is all relative I'm sure there are people laughing at you for running it twice in a 5/10 game.
Makes more sense to look at how many big blinds the pot is rather than dollar value to see whether or not it's justifiable.
Did I ever say I RIT in 5/10? 5/10 never runs where I normally play. But if I was playing in such a game, I would only run it once. What I said was it doesn't make sense less than 5/10 to offer the option of RIT. Frankly to me it is never justifiable for me to RIT. If I regularly played mid stakes or higher, and the other person wanted to do so, I might to keep them happy.
About 2 weeks ago, I lost a $5000+ 3 way, all in...AA vs. KK vs. QQ (short stack, $1500) when a K turned. Was about a 1700 BB pot. We couldn't RIT (not allowed at that room) but I would not have anyway.
Also as noted, the pots in FL are generally smaller than what I am used to because they have a hard cap and normally I play with a match stack.
But I disagree. It isn't #BB in the pot that matters. It is the pot size vs. roll (either poker or life). But since you will really struggle to live off the capped 2/5 games or smaller, really only against life role. And if your life roll can't suffer the variance at those capped buyins, you might want to look for limit games.
Michigan .. Most casinos only allow RIT when HU .. One casino only allows RIT if the money goes in on the 'same street'. So if a short stack is all-in on the Flop but one Player bets another out on the Turn, whether dry or with a Side Pot, then RIT is NOT allowed.
Home games will vary from HU to 'anything' .. being that if a Player only wants to go once that's OK, but if they lose the 1st Board then the others in the hand can RIT if they want. It's a Home game courtesy and really doesn't slow the game down since most games have the best Dealers around.
Charity Rooms are leaning more towards 'the customer is always right' and taking a Home Game approach.
I'm pretty sure that only one casino double rakes RIT. I've told the Charity Rooms that they should be taking an extra $1 for RIT, but none have adopted.
The obvious issue with RIT is the time wasted on deciding what to do as Players vacillate their fate and it definitely a significant factor that drives management into their policy.
Personally I think it's pretty bad to fully double rake a RIT pot, but I also understand that it's a business so I wouldn't give a thought to an extra $1.
Another RIT issue comes down to BBJ or other Promos .. some casinos void any Promo, so you have to remind the Dealer to put the Promo drop back into the pot. Some casinos allow Promos on the 1st Board only. (I can see a policy where the Promo drop just goes into the rake as the 'fee' for RIT)
Kind of rambling (as usual) .. but RIT policies need to take into consideration the Player Pool and the local poker scene. I have always felt that if Floors took the time to explain the policies to the Table Captains that the Player Pool will fall into place. Obviously if the TCs don't like the policy then you will just have an abundance of table talk.
Poker is a business and Players forget that most of the time. A Room that charges double rake is probably doing so as a deterrent to the Players?
PS .. Obv the Player side of the discussion is much deeper IMO, but that's not this Thread.
This lowers the winning chances of the player all-in for the main pot without giving him any additional benefits. He'll have to play against additional hands for the main pot, hands which might have been folded had the remaining community cards only been run once.
The only solution I've figured out to make it fair for the main pot all-in player is to only have their hand play against the worst remaining hand at showdown (even if that hand lost every sidepot). If the main pot player wins, they win the entire main pot; if they lose, the main pot is handled/split the same way as any sidepots.
This lowers the winning chances of the player all-in for the main pot without giving him any additional benefits. He'll have to play against additional hands for the main pot, hands which might have been folded had the remaining community cards only been run once.
The only solution I've figured out to make it fair for the main pot all-in player is to only have their hand play against the worst remaining hand at showdown (even if that hand lost every sidepot). If the main pot player wins, they w
Suppose the short stack is all in with QQ. Two villains in side pot have KK and AK. Board is KQ852 (no flushes). Good luck explaining to the player with KK why the short stack player with a set of queens wins the main pot over his set of kings. Or at least that’s how I’m interpreting your idea.
There’s no way it’s even remotely fair for the KK player in my example to contribute money to a main pot that he is disqualified from winning. You would have to refund that player his money to disqualify him from the pot. Good luck again telling someone who gets a $300 stack in against an opponent who covers him and another who has a $295 stack that he only is actually eligible to win the $10 side pot and that the other $295 of his shove don’t count. (Especially after a good runout).
I must be misreading DisRuptive1's "solution". It makes no sense to me.
I'm lost as well .. the equity in the Main Pot doesn't change (when multi-way) and why are we 'benefit' hunting for any Player? If the short stack chooses to only participate in the 1st Board then that's on them. Need a bit more details on the scenario D1 is commenting about .. what is 'This'?
he is saying that the main pot all in should get to veto running the side pot multiple times, because then one or more players may decide it's too risky to continue on with the hand and drop out, meaning allin has fewer hands he has to beat / cards to fade. Because the side pot players already have this privilege, if they only want to RIO, then no one can RIT.
If, though, you want to allow the side pots to RIT in a situation where allin doesn't want to, he is proposing something to "even the score" a bit.
I agree with the rest of you, the proposal to run the main pot allin only against the worst side pot hand is preposterous.
The only good solution is to say that everyone must agree to RIT (including all ins) or else you RIO for everyone. Or take it a step farther and say you can only RIT if it's heads up at the end, i.e. no side pots.