Showing cards when all in (and before decided how many times to run it) do you show?
Bug bearer of mine is people not showing cards . I often shout "cards over!" as you would in a tournament but not everyone does it.
Do you think it's correct to show cards before deciding how many times to run it? Or should you just run it twice and then show?
I think people should show before deciding how many times to run it. seems odd otherwise.
I usually run it once, and as such, I'm generally the first to flip my hand over when everyone's all-in.
If you only like to run it twice if you’ve seen both hole cards then say “I prefer to see all hole cards before deciding if I want to run it twice, otherwise I’d rather just run it once, please and thank you.” Clear is kind.
Yelling “cards over” is so rude lol. You do it in a tournament because that’s the rules in a tournament. It doesn’t make sense to do it in a cash game. You wouldn’t yell at someone to vacate their seat when they get “knocked out” of a cash game because that’s not the rule.
It makes sense to me that people who want to realize their AIEV as quickly and reliably as possible want to run it twice no matter what and people who want to gamble-gamble (or don’t like the time and mental energy it takes to run two boards and chop half the time) just want to run it once. I fall in the former category so I just tell people “I prefer to run it twice, but if that’s not your thing then let’s burn and turn and get this over with.”
I don’t personally understand all the haggling over how many times to run it, but it takes all types to spread a poker game so whatever.
If someone asked me to see my hole cards so that then maybe they’d run it twice, I’d honestly think they were angling and just tell the dealer to deal the board lol.
This is a strategy forum, so I'll move this to the etiquette forum, as this makes no difference IRT strategy.
Also, the term is bugbear, assuming you mean "source of annoyance." A bug bearer is completely different.
Spoiler
that's not a bugbear. THIS is a bugbear.
If you only like to run it twice if you've seen both hole cards then say "I prefer to see all hole cards before deciding if I want to run it twice, otherwise I'd rather just run it once, please and thank you." Clear is kind.Yelling "cards over" is so rude lol. You do it in a tournament because that's the rules in a tournament. It doesn't make sense to do it in a cash game. You
It's not rude at all especially if i'm dealing. Talking mainly about pub poker, I wouldn't yell at anyone else in a hand that i'm not in unless im the dealer. "On their backs" is another one.
What is annoying is if someone says "how many times you wanna run it" without us first turning over our hands and finding out it's AK v QQ for e.g. Depending on the holdings it might be better to run it more than once.
Any dispute and it should just be run once I agree.
p.s. on the high stakes televised cash games you see the players turning over their hands in these situations, they even turn over losers after the rivers (see the Daniel 10 9 hand v Eric's quad 88s. Daniel shows the table the loser after being shown the quads.
Card over! Get it sorted
I’m sorry, was the point of this thread to ask a question or were you just expressing your personal pet peeve in the form of a question?
Depending on the holdings it might be better to run it more than once.
This is incorrect.
The only time it might matter strategy wise is if some is drawing stone dead. Then you rioto save time. Ritor a dozen times does alter the strategy.
It s not rude to keep cards face down. Some og pros do this. Sammy Fsrha almost never turned his up. Often did not tell what he had either.
As to showing losing hands. Most often don’t. This includes DN
I think the high stakes comparison is off-base for 3 reasons:
1) We're talking about a situation where people's hole cards are literally being broadcast on national tv
2) These are semi-private games where being fun and loosey goosey is mandatory to justify your seat
3) Yelling "cards over" makes you neither fun nor loosey goosey, and it doesn't keep the game moving, so it accomplishes none of the things that insta-flipping your cards does.
Generally speaking, I don't volunteer my hole cards at a typical 5/T casino game unless I'm almost certain I won. But I'm also not a huge hole card nit, especially in an AIPF scenario where people almost certainly aren't getting much information off whatever I have. I have played in games and against players where protecting someone's feelings or the overall vibe was more important than protecting my hole cards.
With all due respect, though, you don't sound that fun, and if I'm volunteering my hole cards to you it's probably because I think you're a whale.
Are you sure?
Assumptions:
- Let's say you have a flush draw to an overpair.
- Let's say we're all in on the flop. 2 cards to go.
We run it 10 times, then at most you can win is 9 times. (excluding occasional runner runner trips or 2p), wheras the overpair can win it all 10.
Perhaps it all balances out to the EV and I'm wrong.
What if we're using an 8 deck shoe?
Are you sure?
Assumptions:
- Let's say you have a flush draw to an overpair.
- Let's say we're all in on the flop. 2 cards to go.
We run it 10 times, then at most you can win is 9 times. (excluding occasional runner runner trips or 2p), wheras the overpair can win it all 10.
Perhaps it all balances out to the EV and I'm wrong.
Running it multiple times has the same EV as running it once due to the linearity of expectation.
It's a funny little concept because the fact that E [X + Y ] = E [X] + E [Y ] almost feels like a fallacy resulting from a lazy high school student forgetting a fundamental principle, kinda like saying (x+2)*(x-1) = x^2 - 2
But then it just always happens to be true, and as it turns out, it's mathematically provable!
A lot of much simpler and easier to understand analogies have been devised to understand how RIO=RIT, but AFAICT they all actually are probabilistic fallacies (either resulting from ignoring the dependency of each board's runout and/or from failing to consider the compounded probabilities of the interaction of multiple cards for each runout)........However, they all end up being true anyway due to the linearity of expectation 😃
I think the high stakes comparison is off-base for 3 reasons:1) We're talking about a situation where people's hole cards are literally being broadcast on national tv2) These are semi-private games where being fun and loosey goosey is mandatory to justify your seat3) Yelling "cards over" makes you neither fun nor loosey gooseyGenerally speaking, I don't volunteer my hole cards
i'm not a whale, and I am fun. Im talking about pub games and house games, the cards on their back is so we can all watch the action and talk about the hand.
If it's strangers I may ask "are we flippin them? and many people say yes and it becomes tournament style.
It of course makes a difference if you wanna run it once or twice, it might be top pair v a flush draw, or it might be AK V AQ three outer situation. It might be prudent to try and at least get yourself half the pot v a close to 50/50 situation, or you might not wanna give the AQ an extra chance to escape.
Also if someone is drawing dead when the cards are flipped why would you run it more than once?
Lots of reasons. And before you think me a heartless bas I do understand the opposite viewpoint. They wanna keep their holdings secret and muck a missed flush draw for example. Often though,, you DO have to end up showing your hand as you cannot win a share of the pot without showing.
The only time it might matter strategy wise is if some is drawing stone dead. Then you rioto save time. Ritor a dozen times does alter the strategy. It s not rude to keep cards face down. Some og pros do this. Sammy Fsrha almost never turned his up. Often did not tell what he had either. As to showing losing hands. Most often don’t. This includes DN[/QUOTE]Rememer phil ivey sho
Rememer phil ivey showing the A2 v Dwan in the famous hand where dwan had 67. He could have mucked but he didn't....(or he announced ACE DEUCE )
I mean, barely? That hand is old enough to play poker in most municipalities. Should we post all the examples of people mucking their losing hand facedown in the interceding 20 years? I can think of 1 or 2 million off the top of my head...
I genuinely don't know what you're trying to accomplish with this thread. It's like asking "Does anyone actually like sorbet? I hate it" and some people are like "I do, " and now you're arguing that no we don't or we shouldn't.
I don't care about anyone's own personal proclivities for the number of times they run a board or why they do it, and you shouldn't either. You said what your preference is and you're entitled to that. I just gave you a recommendation on how you can clearly communicate what you're trying to accomplish because just saying "Cards over" doesn't accomplish that. It might give the false impression that you don't know the rules of cash game poker, and now you're arguing with someone about rules that you don't disagree on and you find yourself using phrases like "Well, I never said that {thing they wrongfully but understandably inferred from what you said and the tone you said it in}."
I know this is a bugbear of yours, but this is a situation you might get more bees with honey than vinegar. Just say what's on your mind, my guy, and who knows, maybe they'll say yes.
And sorry I said you don't sound fun.
We all have our peeves. Lord knows if the topic of conversation were turn signals or crosswalks, then I'd probably sound like a Karen myself. But it's good to know these things about yourself.
Are you sure?
Assumptions:
- Let's say you have a flush draw to an overpair.
- Let's say we're all in on the flop. 2 cards to go.
We run it 10 times, then at most you can win is 9 times. (excluding occasional runner runner trips or 2p), wheras the overpair can win it all 10.
Perhaps it all balances out to the EV and I'm wrong.
Assume we are at the river. Player behind has 1 out. We know 8 cards, 2+2+4 on board, so 44 unknown.
Run it once. Behind wins 1 and loses 43 times.
RIT. Now first board behind wins 1 of 43 times but if he wins he only gets 50%. For second board, his chances are 1 win and 42 losses but only if he lost first board. So again 1 chance to win, 42 chance to lose, plus 1 chance he has already lost so again 1 win, 43 losses to win 50%.
Sum up and he now has 2 wins apin 43 losses but for only 50% of pot. Which is exactly the same EV.
Will let you draw your own conclusion on right or wrong.
[/B]
Rememer phil ivey showing the A2 v Dwan in the famous hand where dwan had 67. He could have mucked but he didn't....(or he announced ACE DEUCE )
I don’t recall that particular hand. But one instance proves neither most often do or do not show.
When they are running it 2 or 3 time, yes most folks tu4n cards over. But not required and Farha is minority example who did not. But in normal showdown, last to show more oft3n mucks wo showing if they lose.
More split case is where last to show immediately flips though could wait and wins. Now how the player who was supposed to show first does or does not actually show or muck is more split.
Running it multiple times has the same EV as running it once due to the linearity of expectation.It's a funny little concept because the fact that E [X + Y ] = E [X] + E [Y ] almost feels like a fallacy resulting from a lazy high school student forgetting a fundamental principle, kinda like saying (x+2)*(x-1) = x^2 - 2But then it just always happens to be true, and as it turns
Thank you this is good.
Assume we are at the river. Player behind has 1 out. We know 8 cards, 2+2+4 on board, so 44 unknown. Run it once. Behind wins 1 and loses 43 times.RIT. Now first board behind wins 1 of 43 times but if he wins he only gets 50%. For second board, his chances are 1 win and 42 losses but only if he lost first board. So again 1 chance to win, 42 chance to lose, plus 1 chance he has
Thank you.
I don’t recall that particular hand. But one instance proves neither most often do or do not show.When they are running it 2 or 3 time, yes most folks tu4n cards over. But not required and Farha is minority example who did not. But in normal showdown, last to show more oft3n mucks wo showing if they lose. More split case is where last to show immediately flips though could wait
yea that's what I was getting at. Cards over so we can all watch
