Well, since the thread has died down a bit, and someone sent me a PM asking for results, I figure I should tell the longer story now. This may be a bit of a letdown for some as there was no decision actually made at the table.

This all happened at the 10/20 limit holdem game at the Taj, and there had already been some confusion when I was moved to the main game when someone (who turned out to be the villain in the hand) had apparantly claimed the vacant seat, and someone else had claimed his, but then the guy wasn't moving so the second guy could move, so I could sit down. He was a man in his 60s or so, wearing headphones, stacking chips, and not really paying much attention. A few other players were commenting about him being a PITA already at the point; he had apparantly done some other things the table didn't like.

Anyway, in this hand I was the late position player, called a raise from middle position with 77 for a 4 way flop IIRC. The flop was 844, and the big blind (villain) said "fold" quite clearly, but did not toss in his hand. The preflop raiser bet, I raised, and then the villian said "reraise" and put in his $30. I immediately said something like "woah, he already folded", but the dealer (small and timid asian lady) said and did nothing, and the preflop raiser (only other player left in the hand) seemed to not be bothered by what happened at all.

I immediately thought that villain's hand should be dead, and considered making a stink about it and holding up the game, but decided it would be pointless as it looked like the preflop raiser had me beat anyway. I guess I could have tried to get my $20 back too, but in this particular instance if villain had said "check" instead of "fold", it really wouldn't have changed my actions in the hand, and in fact this may have actually saved me money, as I folded right there. The villian ended up losing a lot of money in the hand with Q8o to the preflop raiser's TT anyway.

I was still kind of annoyed about the hand though, and also curious if what villian did was legal. I started talking with a few other players at the table about the issue. I was not talking to the villain at all, but he was half-talking to me occasionally saying things like "it's over" and then "shut up, idiot". I decided to call the floor (my first time ever that I remember). Wimpy pretty boy male floorperson gave villain a warning about his name-calling. Then I started talking to said floor about the original folding issue, and asked him if the hand should have been alive or dead. He wouldn't really give me a straight answer (likely didn't want to say there was a problem when that hand was over), but said he would get back to me).

Several minutes later another person at the table and I were talking about the issue again, and villain again started calling me names. I called the floor again, and this time villain was given a half hour "break" away from the table. A few minutes later he decided to just leave the table, which no one at the game seemed sad about.

Not too long after that I talked to another floorperson, a "tough broad" who doesn't take any crap and is not afraid to upset anyone. She told me the hand should have been dead. Of course, she only heard "my side" of the story; if called to make a ruling at the time I'm sure she would have listened to what the dealer and others had to say, and I don't know what exactly she would have ruled if I had called her over mid-hand.

Good summary. I think you handled the situation as best you could.

I agree with you that the hand should be dead or, for those of you who hate to kill hands, the option of check-raising should be taken away from villain immediately in that hand on that street. He also should be warned that further silliness will result in mandatory time away from the table.

Of course this had to happen at the Taj...that place has gone so far down hill it is not even funny....

I have found that many of their dealers are reluctant to "get involved" especially with players who seem agressive (and I don't mean in their poker play), like your villian seemed to be.

I would also say that I think you handled the situation in the best way possible, short of creating a huge stink which might not have ended well....

This is another situation that is avoided altogether if you simply consider out-of-turn action as never binding.

"Fold" is no more a valid option when there's no bet as "I'm all-in" with a rack in a LHE game. Since it was stated out of turn, give it no credibility whatsoever. The time to make a stink about it is before you act, not after.

"Tough Broad" was meant as a compliment. "Pretty Boy" wasn't, and I wouldn't call him that to his face, but that guy never seems to do his job and seems more intested in looking spiffy than in doing his job.

A question for the people who don't think villain's hand should be killed for this. What penalty, if any do you think he should incur behavior which was either a bad joke or an angle?

If I'm in this situation and the floor rules the hand is live I accept it and move on. But even if the first time it happens it's just a joke if any unethical players witness this and realize there are no consequences the next time you see it happen it will almost likely be by an angleshooter.

There just isn't an angle to be shot here. Saying "fold" isn't a normal action. Nobody is going to look around the table, see some guy with cards and come to the conclusion "he said fold, those cards he has don't count."

It sounds like that's exactly the angle that was shot. Whether the intervening players actually considered the guy's hand folded is open to interpretation, but in any case he pretty clearly intended for them to think that.

Outside of the other obvious interpretation, "dumb joke", how would you interpret the "fold"-reraise play?

Most likely the dumb joke, but even if he was shooting an angle it doesn't work. People are accustomed to cards being live. Nobody is going to get tricked by that.

Just wanted to say that when ever I see someone "check-out"......The dealer almost always says, "check-out" or "checking out", out loud.



Some rooms frown upon checking out (there have been threads about this before). Some rooms could care less. That's the modern climate of poker.



One time I was in a capped pot, pre-flop. $20-40 game. 3 players to the flop.


I check the flop. Next guy "Checks-out".

Button goes ballistic.



After the hand is over, Button demands the floor come over. Floor comes over and tells Mr "Check-Out" to never do it again.


Button's case was that if he (button) bet the flop, I (Hojo) now no longer have to worry about the middle player slowplaying behind me since he already checked-out to no bet.


FWIW,


Best Wishes

Hojo

I did. And I am not a newbie to the card room either, but I had never seen this happen before.

RR, you're obviously incredibly knowledgeable and a well-respected member of this community, but I really think you're wrong here. "[I]t doesn't work" is an extremely weak retort and patently incorrect based on the mix of responses we've seen in this thread. It is obvious from the responses we have seen here that many people are not accustomed to "fold" meaning "my cards are still live."

I don't know if "[n]obody is going to get tricked by that" is a backhanded jab at OP, but it goes against at least half of the responses we've seen in the thread. I think it's important for you to know that there probably are players in your room who think "fold" means "fold." If you accept that, you might be able to explain the situation to them better than you did here when it comes up in your room.

Villain is exactly the type of person who would make newbies not want to come back.

Newbie: "Wait, he said fold, but now he's reraising? He's allowed to do that?"
Villain: "I am allowed to say whatever I want as long as I protect my hand. I like saying things to make other players think I'm going to fold when I'm going to reraise or raise when I'm going to fold. Plus I think it's fun to make other people upset."
Newbie: <exit stage left>

END OF SCENE

LOL something's wrong with you.

RR is right on the money.

I am curious.

To those who say this is not an angle shoot by the guy who said "fold", why do you think he said "fold" instead of "check" if that was his intention?

Solid contribution.

Agreed. At the very least, the VERY least, dealer had a responsibility to clarify such an odd verbal declaration. If "Fold!" means check, dealer needs to tell everyone that rather counterintuitive fact. (Not to blame dealer, but obviously he ended up knowing that the cards should be live.)

Even that seems in variance with the spirit of verbal declarations being binding. Since RR is usually all about common-sense enforcement of rules according to the intent of the rule rather than the letter of the rule, and since I agree with him, I'm a little surprised by his opinion on "Fold!" meaning check.

Seems like a blatant angle shot to me. "No one could be ignorant enough to fall for that," doesn't seem like a good philosophy to deal with angles.

RR very well may have the correct conclusion, but it is stemming from an incorrect logic chain. It could very well result in a situation like the one described right above your post.

Understand this, an angle is not against the rules. It might fall in a gray area, but an angle is not illegal. It may be considered "unethical" by most, but it is not illegal.

This is not the Internet forum. People do not click on buttons to signify Bet, Call, or Fold. There is no software to look into the players' cards at showdown and signify the winner.

In a B&M, you are dealing with human beings. Unless you set up robotic rules, there will always be 'the human element'.
Some places, if you break your stack, you must bet. Too rigid for you? Fine, but you are opening the door to a ton of angles.
Don't like the 'you win' or overcalling a hand at showdown problems? Just make a rule that all hands must be turned over. Period. Removes a lot of angles. But do you want that rule?

I agree an angle is not illegal.

I guess we can agree that this was an angle shot though? If not, back to my question, why do you think he said "fold" instead of "check" if that was his intention?

Ok, it was an angle. He was a baaaaaaaaaad boy. Do we rap his knuckles with a ruler?

Or do we make up rules on the fly to punish those who we consider to be angle shooters?

If it is an angle, then him saying "Fold" was not a fold. It was a check. Most places allow check raising. One might argue that a 'fair' ruling would be to say he can just check-call and not check-raise. But people saying his hand is dead are trying for 'frontier justice'.

An angle may not be illegal, by the letter of the law. But good dealers and floorpersons will interpret the law in such a way as to reduce angle shots. If nothing else, this item from Robert's Rules, or similar "good of the game" clauses in every cardroom in existence, reserve to management the right to cut down angles:
(I'm assuming that you agree with me that angle shots are contrary to the "spirit of fairness" and not in the best interest of the game.)

Who knows why. A lot of players (more often with newer ones) get confused about which words mean what. I have seen many players get excited and throw in a big stack of chips while they excitedly yell "check." Or how often doesn't someone say "raise" when they mean "bet." I am just not able to see how or why someone would possibly think that someone that still has cards would be out of the pot.

Reductio ad absurdam.

Folding the hand after he says fold isn't making up rules on the fly; it's a particularly pointed (but I would argue appropriate) application of "verbal announcements may be binding".

Announcing to the table loudly, "He checks! Ladies and gentlemen, he has not folded. He still has cards!" is not making up rules on the fly. It's clarifying the action to everyone involved in the hand to prevent the angle shooter from shooting angles. I don't see how anyone could possibly object to such a clarification, unless they desire to protect the angle shooter's stock-in-trade.

You seem to be bending over backwards to protect the angle shooter's "right" to shoot angles. That's not a characteristic I hope to see in management of the cardrooms where I choose to play.

No it is not making up rules. It is the dealer protecting the less knowledgeable players. Such a radical concept! One that most dealers would never follow, unfortunately. I would love for dealers to alert players to angle shooters' little tricks.

But

they

don't.



I don't. But if the other two players are so ignorant of the rules and the dealer is too busy with other things to protect the innocent, what are you going to do? What if the first guy was not a regular angle shooter, just someone acting goofy after 4 Budwisers? You still going to kill his hand?