Elezra vs. Baxter HSP...Huh?

[TheDna]

+gets baxter on donkeytilt if he hits his one outer [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[barncat]

i dont remember the board but i dont think he could have won both..but this did come from a micro donk

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
run once: elezra wins whole pot rarely or loses whole pot

run twice: elezra wins half pot rarely, loses whole pot most the time, wins whole pot extremely rarely

[/ QUOTE ]

That's one way to put it.

Another is:

Run once, Elezra almost never wins (virtually always loses), never splits pot.

Run twice, Elezra never wins (statistically-speaking), splits rarely, and loses most the time.

This is subjective. Hard to say which way some folks would go on this.

[Micro Donk]

oops im an idiot, i just rememered theres only 1...

but its much better to run it once still

run once: win whole pot almost never, lose pot almost always

run twice: win half pot almost never, lose pot almost always

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
oops im an idiot, i just rememered theres only 1...

but its much better to run it once still

run once: win whole pot almost never, lose pot almost always

run twice: win half pot almost never, lose pot almost always

[/ QUOTE ]

But, uh, you forgot to mention that the chances of splitting the pot when run twice are (actually technically better than) double those of winning the pot when run only once.

[Micro Donk]

but in a set v set thing, would you rather have a 2.5% chance of winning the whole pot or a 5-6% chance of winning half the pot?

[Taso]

I'm pretty sure he can't win the whole pot, either of the times. I don't remember the exact board, but they each had a set.

If it's run twice, Elezra would need the 4th of his card (x) to win it once, garnering half the pot. He can't get card X twice, there's only one of them, so he can only ever win HALF the pot.

So the way I see it, he can either draw to 1 card hoping for the win, or he can draw to 2 cards hoping to get a chop. And I'm not sure (at all) if my estimates are correct, but I'd think he has a %2 chance to get his money back if they run it once, and a %4 chance to get his money back if they run it twice. No?

Err- wow, I was responding to a post on the first page, guess it took me a while to type, haha. I guess ignore me, it seems like everyone knows more about what's going on than I do.

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
You dont know much about poker do you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just out of curiosity (and because I don't know much about poker), I was wondering if you could post a response that is more specific, and less designed to simply perpetuate the persona of an internet know it all douchebag.

I mean, I get the fact that you're some sort of poker stud and all, but what I need is the acumen that you so clearly possess.

Please, clearly explain what your point is.

I promise, after you do so, I'll go back to my little world that involves no understanding of poker whatsoever.

Except, of course, for that knowledge that you will so graciously impart.

[LGs0pHT]

Run it twice is to reduce variance, and no chances increase or decrease. Set vs set is a situation nobody can get away from, thus there is no reason to reduce variance.

[Brocktoon]

Oh my God. Has this thread really gone on this long without someone pointing out that running it once, twice, 25 times makes no difference in terms of EV?

For shame 2+2.

It sounds like the guy right above me eluded to that point but lets be clear: No matter how many times you run a poker hand, any hand, your EV remains the same while your variance decreases.

If they run it twice the underset hits the one outter twice as often, yes. But he also wins half the money as he is 100% guaranteed to lose 1/2 the pot everytime he manages to suck out.