There's a line drawn out at the tables, but this is merely for aesthetics. The bike casino doesn't recognize it as a "betting line".

Dodah,


You’re the one attempting to angleshoot in this story.

The worst cases of cutting chips in front of their cards every year come during the WSOP ME, but they have a forward motion rule in that tournament. I'm pretty sure they modified the 'pump fake' rule that got some players into trouble in previous years.

Most casinos use forward motion even if they have a betting line, but there are some that still use the betting line very strictly. I played in one Saturday where seats on each end of the table have to extend their bets twice as far as 1,9 and 4-6 in order to get chips into the betting area. GL

My closest casino has a rigorously enforced betting line. If you move chips across the line in your hand, they're committed to the pot. Given all the ambiguous actions I read about here, I'm glad they have the line and enforce it.

The best rule that some places have would make the chips committed even before they have crossed that line.

I couldn't disagree more vehemently. So in this room, for example, if you're facing a bet, you can push out several stacks of chips, stop just short of the betting line, look for a reaction, and then have your full range of actions (including folding) available, right? How is allowing that good for the game?

(By the way if you want to try that move, save it for a big and marginal decision, hopefully against someone who's not a regular at that room and thus would more likely fall for it. Indeed, what is the point of poker, if not to reward rules lawyers for outlawyering their naive opponents?)


Worse, since this is a house rule not shared by many games AND OFTEN NOT BY OTHER GAMES IN THE SAME ROOM (at least in WA), it's easy for a naive player to cut out chips off a stack in a way that would be perfectly acceptable in another room or another game in the same room and end up betting, say, 5x the pot. It's wise to train oneself to cut chips in a method that's OK in any room, way way behind the line and even with the chip stack, requiring no forward motion.

(But such naive players should be punished for their inattention to tracking each game's rules at each casino. Indeed, what is the point of poker, if not to reward rules lawyers for outlawyering their naive opponents?)

Hey OP, was Villain actually crying? because otherwise I'd have to assume that you characterized him that way so that we would picture the villain as a whiner. That way we would disrespect him and favor your side of the story. Giving us a slanted picture of your opponent's response to your angle shooting would sort of fit in with the angle-shooting that you tried to pull.

Do you think if you're not shooting angles, you're not trying? Like those NASCAR guys that are always getting caught cheating and are completely unashamed by it, they say if you're not cheating, you're not trying. I say if you're not cheating, then you're not a cheater, which means you are the better man. If you actually are shooting angles, then you are an angle shooter. If he actually did break out in tears, then I take it back.

At least it is unambiguous as to whether chips crossed the line. With a forward motion rule, people can still reasonably disagree on whether something is forward motion, but it's hard to disagree if chips crossed a line.

I played a lot of years in Atlantic city where the rule was chips moved in front of your cards were bet, I don't remember it ever causing any problems, and there were far fewer betting shenanigans than in any other place I have played.

Where I play the rule is strictly enforced and well known. It is announced before every daily tournament(the whole room can hear the TD's starting spiel). Floors might give a new guy 1 warning. Players are more apt to warn other players if they seem unclear about it.

The key is that the rule is unambiguous. I have no problem with a player moving his chips up to the line and then stopping. this is no different than cutting out chips, or any other body language or table talk that suggests a bet or raise. Because it is unambiguously not a bet, I don't really consider it an angle.

There are only two rooms near where I live, and they both use the betting line (though the other room is much more...mercurial...about enforcing it), so issues caused by inconsistent rooms rules is not really an issue

His bet would have been perfectly legal in my room.

I don't like his behavior (why would you change your bet except to try to gain a "non-poker" advantage?) but angleshooting implies intent. I don't think he was trying to break any rules or etiquette, just somehow thought the opponent's actions made this OK.

I don't see any way in which making this legal (to go all-in at the last moment while cutting out 20 chips) is good for the game.

Tournaments are a much different matter, for two conflicting reasons. Everyone except late entrants should have heard the rules announced, and late entrants realize they're late entrants. (Do we really want new cash game players feeling they need to review a rulebook before sitting down to play?)

Secondly, in the other direction, mistakes in a tournament could be higher stakes depending on the buyin of the tournament. At the very least, you could lose your participation in the tournament through one mistake. And chip stacks are much more heterogeneous in denomination.

I think your room has an OK approach for tournaments: Define the rules but allow a warning. I still prefer the fwd motion rule but couldn't complain about that.




For various reasons I think unambiguity is overrated in poker rules discussions. That's a longer philosophical discussion.

There's also much less ambiguity in forward motion than people think, although with everything we can come up with implausible boundary cases.

I thought angleshots were legal, by definition. If something isn't legal, it's cheating, not angling.

What is wrong with waiting for a player to finish his action before you act?

That's an obvious straw man. Absolutely nothing is wrong with acting prudently. I do that myself. I often try to develop practices that protect myself against weird rulings.

New players, in contrast, may not know even the universal standards of live poker, let alone room- and game-specific variations. Cardroom X uses forward motion, and so does Cardroom Y for the 1-3 game and the 4/8 limit, but Y uses a strict betting line for the 2-5 game at Y. (This is a real example.) What effect does that have on the respective games?

Definitely depends on the room, but in my view the correct ruling should be that you are ALL IN and the other player can decide what he wants to do (his previous statement of "I'm calling whatever it is" isn't binding action in my view).

[QUOTE=AKQJ10;54059453]I couldn't disagree more vehemently. So in this room, for example, if you're facing a bet, you can push out several stacks of chips, stop just short of the betting line, look for a reaction, and then have your full range of actions (including folding) available, right? How is allowing that good for the game?
/QUOTE]

Certainly no worse than taking a fistful of chips forward and watching for a reaction as you slowly drop them while looking for a response. I've been lurking here for a long time, but haven't actually been playing live that long, and only in two casinos. When I started playing live instead of online, I noticed that virtually everyone kept their stacks tight up against the cushion, so counting behind your stack was something I've never seen. If you clearly announce your bet, then the dealer will repeat the amount and you can count them as you wish. I'll grant that some dealers will give a new player a warning that any chips crossing the line are committed, others enforce it strictly on everyone. To each his own, but I like the enforced betting line.

He didn't say that anyway.

In every casino room I have been in, there has been a list of 'house rules' on the wall, often close to the podium/desk. A player that does not familiarize themselves with those rules leaves themselves open to problems. Betting line/forward motion is something that is usually on that short list on the wall.

The need to familiarize oneself with house-specific rules is no different than the person driving down the road at a speed that is legal on one side of the State line but not on the other. They get caught and pulled over for speeding. While they MIGHT get a warning, more likely is that they get the ticket and the defense of "I didn't know" is not going to carry the day. It is the driver's responsibility to be aware of such things just as it is the player's responsibility to know what comprises a bet at a particular table...

Suit,


Hence it being an attempted angle even though it may technically be within the rules where he plays.

Out of curiosity, what are the rules in your room? Can I start cutting out 5-chip stacks of $25 from a $100 stack that I moved out to cut my bet from, then say “$250” and go back to my stack to get the other chips?

As I wrote earlier, that was the way it was way back in the day here in SF, but I haven’t seen that rule anywhere for many years.

Cliff's Notes version:

You can fold your arms and say, "You just have to learn our house rules to play here" and insist you're morally in the right---and maybe you are!---but that's an attitude that makes games dry up.



tl;dr:

Actually it's a lot different for a number of reasons. In this analogy, you'd need highways to depend on out-of-state drivers allocating their recreation time to crossing the state line rather spending their time and money on other things they could be doing. (I guess maybe the tourist commission could bribe the cops to be lenient if this was a real problem scaring people away.) Likewise, new poker players may decide to do some other recreational activity next time. It's sometimes hard to change plans not to drive into that other state, but it's trivially easy to change plans to not play poker.

But regardless, you're mostly missing the point. My contention is that rooms should as much as possible harmonize rules and procedures with the common sense of a new player sitting down. That has nothing to do with whether new players should, for their own benefit, go read the rules on the wall. I wasn't even opining on whether it's fair or morally just to expect them to read the rules. There's a case to be made that everyone should know the rules or accept the consequences.

Regardless of what new players morally SHOULD do, consider: (1) since the house can make up the house rules that get posted on the wall, they should make them as intuitive as possible (2) regardless of moral obligation, it's just good policy to make new players who likely DON'T read the rules as welcome as possible.

Yeah, we can say "Sorry, buddy, a wildcat is only good once a night" (classic poker joke) and "You shoulda learned the rules before you sat down." How on earth is that good for the game?

No one has said this should be allowed; of course it should not be.

I also don't understand your talk of "counting behind your stack". What players should be doing is "counting behind their cards".

It's very easy - chips should be on the rail, cards should be well in front of your chips, where everyone can see them. You count / play with your chips as much as you'd like to do behind your cards while you are thinking. Then when you have finished, you grab the correct number of chips (or even better, state the amount), then move those chips forward. Voila, you have now made a bet!

If only it could be that way.

But anglers gonna angle.

One guy appeared to be about to pick off one of my occasional river bluffs.

(Even an OMC like me can't resist trying this once in a while.)

Dude was watching me the entire hand.

I decided to play as though he was a wanna-be soul reader, so I leaned back on the turn with my hands over my mouth.

Dude picked up pot-sized-bet-calling-chips and eyeballed first me, then the chips, then me, then the chips, and eveeeer-soooo-slooooowly started lowering them, arm fully extended, forward towards to betting line, starting at 90 degrees from horizontal and moving about 5 degrees per second.

After about 8 seconds he got to about 50 degrees from horizonal and was still watching me for a tell. OK, Cecil DeMille, here's a tell for you.

I let one hand drop to audibly hit the felt.

Those chips instantly levitated back into his stack and his cards hit the muck simultaneously.

I smile every time I think about it.

And you can bet your ass I fervently hope he reads it here.

Angle someone else, dude!

What is the angle here?