High Stakes Poker - run it twice - Page 9

Tornado69 · #81 02-14-2006, 04:23 PM

Something weird happened in the last hand with Barry G and Sam Farha ... They get it all in with AA VS KK, Sammy asks Barry if he wants to run it twice and he says no. So Sammy hits a king on the flop then asks Barry if he wants to run it twice and Barry still says no? Why the in world would he do this ??? Makes no sense ... even if he doesn't like doing it, he should at least say yes and return the favorite later on instead of trying to hit a 2 outter with 2 cards left. Watched it 4 times and still wondering about it.

maurile · #82 02-14-2006, 04:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Something weird happened in the last hand with Barry G and Sam Farha ... They get it all in with AA VS KK, Sammy asks Barry if he wants to run it twice and he says no. So Sammy hits a king on the flop then asks Barry if he wants to run it twice and Barry still says no? Why the in world would he do this ??? Makes no sense ... even if he doesn't like doing it, he should at least say yes and return the favorite later on instead of trying to hit a 2 outter with 2 cards left.

[/ QUOTE ]
What favor? Running it once or twice has the same EV for both players. It doesn't benefit or harm either guy in terms of EV. Farha wasn't doing Barry a favor when he offered to run it twice, nor was he asking Barry for a favor.

Farha may have preferred to run it twice in either situation to reduce variance. For whatever reason, Barry didn't want to reduce variance. His choice. No problem. It's not a dis to Farha, nor does it harm Farha's EV.

Tornado69 · #83 02-14-2006, 05:36 PM

So being a 90% after the flop, you really want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot and not winning 200 grand ? I do not get that at all. When I'm a 90% favorite with a 400 thousand dollar pot ( a bit under maybe ) why would I want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot ? 9 out of 10 times I'm going to win it. Why give him a 4 in 5 shot ? I still do not get it. Why would Barry G NOT accept that on the flop ?

Isura · #84 02-14-2006, 06:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So being a 90% after the flop, you really want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot and not winning 200 grand ? I do not get that at all. When I'm a 90% favorite with a 400 thousand dollar pot ( a bit under maybe ) why would I want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot ? 9 out of 10 times I'm going to win it. Why give him a 4 in 5 shot ? I still do not get it. Why would Barry G NOT accept that on the flop ?

[/ QUOTE ]

ALL: A reminder of why it is so easy to win money at poker.

maurile · #85 02-14-2006, 06:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So being a 90% after the flop, you really want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot and not winning 200 grand ? I do not get that at all. When I'm a 90% favorite with a 400 thousand dollar pot ( a bit under maybe ) why would I want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot ? 9 out of 10 times I'm going to win it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Would you rather have a 90% chance to win a 400K pot with a 10% chance to win zero; or an 82% chance to win $400K plus a 16% chance to win 200K with a 2% chance to win zero?

It's the same EV either way.

Nobody gains or loses any EV by running it twice instead of once.

slickpoppa · #86 02-14-2006, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So being a 90% after the flop, you really want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot and not winning 200 grand ? I do not get that at all. When I'm a 90% favorite with a 400 thousand dollar pot ( a bit under maybe ) why would I want to give the guy a better chance of splitting the pot ? 9 out of 10 times I'm going to win it. Why give him a 4 in 5 shot ? I still do not get it. Why would Barry G NOT accept that on the flop ?

[/ QUOTE ]

This has already been answered. A lot of players that Barry plays against are underbankrolled for the big game and just taking a shot. By not letting them reduce their variance by running it twice, it is easier for Barry to intimidate his opponents.

For example, lets say that a tourney player takes a shot at the big game, runs really well, and then gets involved in a huge hand with Barry that is likely a coin flip. Barry will have much more fold equity against that player because the tourney player will be hesitant to put his whole stack on the line when there is a 50% chance that he will lose it.

Bulldog · #87 02-15-2006, 03:29 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It isn't the same though, because once you know you are an underdog, you would not want to do anything to make it closer to the actual percentages of the hand. You want as few iterations as possible because that will be as far from the actual percentages as possible. If they ran it a million times the 30% hand would win 30% of the time. If you run it once, who knows how many times it will win. If you are a smart player and you know you are the underdog you do not want to decrease variance, thereby making the percentages closer to your underdog status.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you had a bet where you are a 30/70 underdog and your entire bankroll is a million dollars, would you rather make one bet for a million dollars, or a million bets of $1 each? Both have the same expected value, but the latter bet has the lower variance.

Morbo · #88 02-15-2006, 05:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They might as well just bust out twodimes and then chop up the pot according to what equity they hold.

[/ QUOTE ]

This will never be possible as the cards other players were dealt (who folded and are not part of the hand) will influence the players equity.

I.E say player A is all-in against player B. Player B has 4 outs, the 4 deuces. HOWEVER, Player C was dealt red 22 and player D was dealt black 22. Therefore, there is no way for player B to win the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that if all deuces are in the bottom of the deck he cannot win either? Or in the middle? Or the burn cards?

This thread has steamed me so bad it's not even funny, I'm amazed how such simple concepts as EV and variance can be so hard to grasp for some people.

maurile · #89 02-15-2006, 06:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They might as well just bust out twodimes and then chop up the pot according to what equity they hold.

[/ QUOTE ]
This will never be possible as the cards other players were dealt (who folded and are not part of the hand) will influence the players equity.

I.E say player A is all-in against player B. Player B has 4 outs, the 4 deuces. HOWEVER, Player C was dealt red 22 and player D was dealt black 22. Therefore, there is no way for player B to win the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize that if all deuces are in the bottom of the deck he cannot win either? Or in the middle? Or the burn cards?

[/ QUOTE ]
The difference is that you have absolutely no way of knowing whether the twos are in the middle versus the bottom of the deck. But you might be able to tell whether they're in another player's hand. Like if Greg Raymer's glasses turn orange with a hint of mauve, it means he's got pocket deuces.

Not that any of this should affect whether to run it once or twice. That's the same either way.

But it can affect whether to accept the twodimes.net numbers instead of running it out. If I have reason to think that a couple players folded an ace on the flop, I will not want to run the twodimes.net sim to settle up if my opponent needs an ace on the river. I'd rather run the cards out (whether once or twice or whatever).

So while there's absolutely no difference in EV between running the cards out once versus twice, there can be a difference in EV between running the cards out versus using twodimes.