[binions]

No, it's not enough overlay. You will go on bad streaks and get killed.

In a typical hold'em insurance chart, the house has a much larger edge than you propose.

1 out = 20:1
2 outs = 12:1
3 outs = 8:1
4 outs = 6:1
5 outs = 5:1
6 outs = 4:1
8 outs = 3:1
9 outs = 2.75:1
10 outs = 2.5:1
11 outs = 2.25:1
12 outs = 2:1
and so on until 22 or 24 outs is even money.

If all in on the flop, outs are doubled. 3 outs twice is 6 outs on the insurance chart. If all in on the flop and the turn brings more outs, the player has to reinsure. Otherwise, he could lose the pot and the insurance.

For example, if AK has AQ dominated on a A high flop, AK can insure 6 outs (3 queens twice). Lets say he takes 400 to 100. If the turn brings AQ a flush draw and he does not reinsure, then he owes the house 100 if the flush hits plus he loses the pot.

As you can see, the player insuring his hand is giving up a lot more of his edge than you propose taking. When someone truly only has 3 outs twice, you are ~87% to win. But insuring at 4:1, you only receive 80% of what you insure. You give up ~7% of your edge. You'd be surprised, but people insure their hands all the time in Houston desite the hefty premuim.

If the players tie, insurance is off. When there are a bunch of tie outs, true odds get a lot closer to the insurance chart.

I have never seen it done, but a better way to do insurance with all the poker equity calculators is to input the hand into a computer and figure the true percentages, then take 5% away from the player in the lead and give it to the player that needs to suck out.

For example, let's say you input a hand, and with 2 cards to come, player A is 75% to win, player B is 20% to win, and they are each 2.5% to tie.

Insurance is off in a tie. So the true odds are 75:20. Charge your premium, and you would offer to insure at 70:25.

This way, there would be no need to reinsure the river if the turn brought more outs since that was part of the 75-20-2.5-2.5 calculation.