The Truth About Hitting and Running

In this column, I have written quite a lot about hit-and-run follies, about the silliness of quitting the game when you've won, say, one or two buy-ins. There are quite a few players who regularly hit and run, and who believe they are doing the right thing. For the professional player, the concept of quitting while you're ahead doesn't make much sense, though. It doesn't matter if you play now, or quit and come back the next day, because it's all one session anyway. In fact, you might cost yourself money by leaving early, because every hour you are at the table, you figure to get paid: the more hours you play, the more money you win. Deciding factors in whether or not to continue playing should be: (a) Is the game still as good as it was before? (b) Are you still mentally and physically able to play your "A" game? This all adds up to (c) Do you still have positive expectation? Most hit-and-run players have a very high percentage of winning sessions, but an hourly rate that's a lot less spectacular. This is because they might have nine relatively small wins in a row, only to lose back all of their winnings on day No. 10. Then, they simply cannot quit the game because they're stuck, even though at this point they are by no means favorites to beat the game. (This might be because they are playing a lot worse than usual, because they are playing against good or even excellent players, or because game conditions are unfavorable - for instance, when the rake is simply too high for the type of game they are in).

Having said all this, I get accused of hitting and running quite often. When I scoop a big pot in my regular pot-limit Omaha game, it is not unusual to hear some of my fellow players make comments like: "OK, so you did it again. See you tomorrow. Seat open!" They fully expect me to leave the game soon. Just recently when there was no pot-limit game available and I chose to play in a juicy $10-$20 hold'em game, I got lucky by winning two medium-sized pots in only one hour of play. I was up maybe $200 when, to my dismay, a few of the weaker players decided to leave the game to get some sleep. When there were just five players left, I decided to quit the game as well, because it was a raked game (making shorthanded play unattractive), it was unlikely the game would fill up again, and the people who had stayed were all playing fairly decent poker. In short, I figured my edge in this game would be small - if there was any edge for me at all. It was when I picked up my chips that the gentleman on my left - a very nice and friendly player, someone who is almost never out of line - said to me: "Ace, I thought you were different. But you are just another hit-and-run player. I saw you do it a few days ago, and I see you do it now. In my casino, we ban players like that." I was surprised when he said that - not just because he had always been so nice to me in the past, but also because of the silliness of his statement. I know not a single regular hit-and-run player who is more than only a marginal winner in poker; not one of the top professionals I know thinks this system is of much use. If I were a regular hit-and-run player, I would never have been able to make as much money as I have. Also, that $200 I won on that particular night may have been a decent win for only one hour of play, but it was nothing to become thrilled about for me: On a normal night, in my regular pot-limit game, I figure to do a lot better than that. But more than this, why wouldn't anyone like to play against people who hit and run? You never lose big against them, because whenever they scoop a nice pot, they are out of there. But when they are most likely to be playing badly (when they are stuck, trying to get their money back), they simply cannot leave - even though their future expectation may have become negative, rather than positive. Thus, when they are likely to be playing well and are winning, they leave, and when they are down, stuck, or steaming, they keep on playing; now why on earth would you ban players like that? The truth about hitting and running is this:

In limit poker, hitting and running is simply a silly concept. When you are in a good game, are playing well, and are a favorite to beat the game, there's no reason to leave no matter how much you're winning or losing. In limit poker, the winning player gets paid by the hour - the more hours played, the more money won. Hitting and running will be beneficial to your percentage of winning sessions, but not to your hourly rate, and certainly not to the total amount of money you will have won at the end of the year. That's all there is to it: When you have an edge, play - when you don't, don't. Now, what could be simpler than that?

In pot-limit poker, there is something more to consider, though. In pot-limit, the size of your stack in relation to the blinds and the size of your opponents' stacks is very important. Because you may lose your entire stack on one hand, having a big stack may be a reason for you to leave - especially when there are dangerous, aggressive, and/or experienced pot-limit players on your left who also are playing a big stack. In pot-limit, it is important to be aware of your abilities, and your limitations. Lots of players - myself included - are much better at playing a short or medium stack than a big stack. Now, if you think the danger of losing your stack is quite high, and you therefore might not be much of a favorite in the game anymore, you should quit and come back the next day. Leaving with a win here wouldn't be the same as hitting and running, though, even though your opponents will judge it as such. Also, it is a frequent occurrence in pot-limit that whenever I win a big pot, one or two opponents are busted because of it. When they decide to leave and better players take their seats, or the game becomes shorthanded, I often quit and call it a day. But, once again, this has nothing to do with hitting and running. Any player who quits the game simply because he's up a certain amount cannot be a good player, if you ask me. Despite everything you think you see or notice, hit-and-run players are not doing the right thing - and they certainly are not long-term winners just because of this strategy. In my opinion, that's all there is to say about hitting and running; there's simply nothing more to it.