all in deal making strategy

[limon]

in los angeles big bet casinos allow two all in players to make a deal "run the cards" more than once. They dont allow splits or insurance at the table.

My strategy for years in this is to deal with bad players, not deal with good players and always deal when my opponent has 2 outs or less.

the reasoning is: against bad players im gonna break em sooner or later so there is no reason to give them the chance to get lucky. i want to limit swings and grind them down.

against good players i achieved my goal and got them all in and now is my chance to break them, maybe even drive them from the game. my tilt factor is 0 and i want to test theirs.

with my opponent having 2 or less outs I can guarantee myself the lions share of the pot by running it the correct amount of times, say 3 times when i have set over set and totally taking away the chance of a bad beat.

are there any other strategies for this?

[turnipmonster]

do you flip your cards before you make a deal always?

I've done it both ways, but we usually flip. also, if you get it all in preflop, will you make a deal preflop or do you always wait and see a flop?

If I'm all in preflop, I usually will not make a deal, but if it's in on the flop and my opponent has 2 outs I will run it 3 times.

generally I will deal if my opponent has a lot of outs, but not enough to make him a favorite. this rarely comes up for me, because in my regular PL game very few players will do buisness.

--turnipmonster

[AJo Go All In]

[ QUOTE ]
by running it the correct amount of times

[/ QUOTE ]

how do you determine this?

[Boris]

A buddy of mine will run'em 3 times but not twice.

[limon]

I like to run it enough to guarantee a win. thats 3 times for 1 opponent out. 5 times for 2 opponent outs. I the opponent has more than 2 outs i go back to my basic strategy. Deal with losers, dont deal with winners. We always show the hands first. anything else to consider...i love the thoughtfulness of the responses so far.

[sam h]

limon,

i think you have a good strategy. the other factor for me on the few times i've been in this situation has been how much money i have with me and whether my stack is all-in. if i don't have more cash on me, i usually don't want to take a huge amount out of the atm. and if the game is good, i don't want to leave it. so i'll be more inclined to run it a few times.

[The Gift Of Gab]

That's interesting. I do the opposite: deal with good players and not with bad ones. Where I play (and I know you've put in a lot of hours there) we can only run them twice, and we don't usually show beforehand. This obviously limits my options.

The good players know once the money goes in it really doesn't matter who ends up with it. Why not lower everyone's swings?

There are a lot of guys who are tight and decent when even but who will hemorrhage if they lose a big pot - and I wouldn't call them good players. Some players will loosen up if they win a big pot too. Since bad players are much more likely to blow their tops if I bust them, I'd rather take a bigger chance at getting them stuck.

Maybe I'm going about this wrong, though. Do you think you get more loose calls because people know they've got a good shot at a refund? That might make more difference than sometimes tilting them.

Don't take this as criticism, but if you're not going to tilt after losing big pot to a one- or two-outer, why bother to guarantee a win?

[The Gift Of Gab]

Ignore my last sentence; I figured it out. That's an excellent strategy, but I might run them five or more times whether he has one or two outs. If they miraculously get 2/3rds of their money back it might not have the desired effect. It's hard to find people with one out at NLHE though - much easier at PLO.

I was thinking more about hand vs. draw situations where the equity is closer to even. In my experience bad players will tilt more easily than better ones, and will play relatively much worse when they do. I still think there's a lot of value in possibly busting them and having them steam away a few grand. This assumes that the live ones have deep pockets, as they so often do, and that they're not already stuck big. Then you might not want to deal for the same reasons.

.
.
.

Did someone say limit was more complex than big-bet?

[limon]

yes "goodish" (tight) players will tilt after losing a big pot and bad players will also. But tight players dont get in that often so when i do get them in i want to test their metal. I also dont mind pissing them off a little and having them react to me.

bad players on the other hand get their money in all the time. and i definitely dont want to piss one off and make him leave if he wants to deal i deal, poker is "fun" right, we're having a party, right?

i think i mentioned once before about my strange relationship to players at the casino. bad players love me, "good" (tight nitwit) players HATE me (just like on this forum), and the 1% who actually know what i'm doing i consider friends.

[SomeName]

[ QUOTE ]
i think i mentioned once before about my strange relationship to players at the casino. bad players love me, "good" (tight nitwit) players HATE me (just like on this forum), and the 1% who actually know what i'm doing i consider friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very very smart. I doubt most of the nitwits realize so.