Opening yourself up to potentially getting freerolled is an appropriate consequence of this type of behavior. That said, I blame the floor more than I blame Harry.

No proof has been presented that Harry saw the heart on the turn. All that exists is a possibility that he did, plus some people ITT saying that he must have done because of his actions and what he said in the aftermath, which also isn't proof that he saw the heart on the turn.

If it can be proven that he saw a heart on the turn then it isn't really an angle, it's just plain cheating.

Based on the footage available at present, I lean towards him not seeing the heart on the turn before he changed his mind to running it once, but I am in no way certain.

If the posters ITT are anywhere near representative of a court room jury then there must be plenty of miscarriages of justice in the real world.

I'd respectfully suggest to those that are certain that he saw the heart on the turn to watch the 1957 movie 12 Angry Men.

I don't think it's an angle shot. I don't think he saw the card come out on the turn before he changed his mind. I think he was looking at the set and realized he needed to go runner runner and felt that would never happen twice, so he changed his mind.

Not an angle.

The ruling was wrong, though. Since the dealer was in the act of dealing the card before he changed his mind, it should stand as twice.

(.87)^6=.433
(.87)^12=.188

So there's an 18 to 43 percent chance Harry gets convicted in a court of law depending on the jurisdiction.

100% well said ( I could not say it better since when I watch Harry compose himself as this plays out and after, it annoys me to no end :P )

Aha, saying something that definitely isn't true doesn't mean that he's a liar. How about if he wasn't 100% sure about what he said he shouldn't have repeated it a dozen times to support his claim.
Harry, is it you?

I guarantee that nobody who plays high stakes at the Bike, including Chris, wants Harry banned, or wants to do anything to discourage him from playing

Yeah, listening to Harry talk all that BS and bully everyone was the tilting part to me,,,, everything else was just bad timing and a tough break.

Dealer is terrible here. I've played and seen lots of big pots where it was run twice, and it's the job of the dealer to establish clearly with both players if they are running it once or twice before burning and turning. If there is no discussion of multiple runs, then firing the turn and river right away like that is good. However, once any sort of talk of running it twice occurs, the dealer needs to verify with BOTH players how many times it is going to be run, and then proceed. The dealer acted way too quickly there.

I don't think Harry saw the turn before changing his mind. Although his logic is misguided, I think he legitimately only wanted to run it once based on his opponent having a set. I've seen tons of recreational players who want to run it once or twice depending on whether they are ahead or behind, and what their opponent specifically holds. It's really the job of the pros to cater to whatever they prefer.

Yes, saying you will run it twice then seeing your opponents holding and changing your mind is a little off putting. However, pros will understand he gains zero advantage by doing this. I'm sure if the dealer had held up until cards were tabled and negotiations were complete, Harry's opponent would have been OK with running it once, although a bit miffed he changed his mind - but it absolutely would not be an angleshoot. In order to be an angle, you need to gain an unfair advantage, which he is not doing.

I don't know anything about Harry, but given the fact that he holds 93o there, I'm guessing he's not a pro and probably helps build good action in the game. If he wants to run it once when he's ahead and twice when he's behind, or once vs a set and twice vs a draw, or whatever - it should be totally fine. He shouldn't be given a hard time about it, and the last thing that should occur is some witch hunt to try to make him out to be a cheater.

the dealer waited after they agreed to run it twice then started to burn as harry yelled once once once
he did nothing wrong.

harry flip flopping on whether or not to rit is fine. what's not fine is his timing, lying about it then talking about "we're not even allowed to run it twice here" bs.

I wish the poll question was phrased more precisely, because I see two different lens of analysis being used throughout the thread. Arguing malicious intent is different from arguing if Harry's actions were ethical.

Yeah very absurd for so many people to think this was an intentional malicious angle.

Super unlikely he saw the turn and was trying to get a 20% edge in a 6k pot.

Significantly more likely he saw Chris's hand and had an emotional reaction wanting to get the hand over with.

Reminds me of the Manti Teo case when he had a fake girlfriend and everyone thought he was in on it. It was obvious to me he was innocent.

And about Harry saying that running it twice is a gentlemans agreement and running it once is the casino policy. That just proves he thinks he's right. He knows he said "once" before he saw the turn so if they rule twice then he is getting freerolled. I would bring up the casino rules too if I thought I was getting freerolled. But then again I try to apply Hanlon's razor when looking at someone else's actions so I can understand why others see it differently.

Intentionally malicious is up for debate, we don't know if he saw card but he might have.

Also I'd be pissed if, after agreeing to run it twice, I showed him a set.
He then takes this new info, puts it into some secret formula, and decides to run it once.

Anyone with a ounce of honor should stick to running it twice, when the option is unilaterally dropping out of an agreement, while a favorable turn card is potentially exposed.

So even if there was no malicious intent, you should realize it's gonna make you look like a scumbag/thief and do the right thing.

he's bringing up casino rules bc he's a scumbag not because he's right.he didn't care about casino rules all of the times he's run it twice in that casino.

if anyone was trying to free roll it was him.

if he has any integrity he would realize at best (for him) he started screaming "once" as the dealer already started to put the turn card out and just go with what he already agreed to.

He did, the players agreed on running it twice.

Do you want the dealer to wait for someone to check the weather too? Some players only run it once when it is not raining so they don't get wet on the parking lot when they bust.

Perhaps it is on the player to think about the variables before coming to a decision? There's a gazillion idiotic reasons people can have to change their mind, you really expect the dealer to give a damn?

The oddest thing in this thread is people blaming the dealer... It’s pretty unreal.


Twice?
Twice is good...
Twice [It is... I’m gonna deal now since we’ve all agreed on twice and I’m the dealer]

Simply isn’t enough

There were two things going on at once, negotiating how many times to run it and showing down of hands. Best to let both of these fully complete before dealing. It's very common to have a longer pause than this before dealing the next card when negotiations are happening in a big pot. Also, if the dealer was solid that twice was agreed too, he should have dealt the second board.

I watched this live and it was surreal. There was the huge angle then ranting for 15 minutes stopping play the whole time, not sure which was worse.

Some deceptive tactics to observe:

1. Double speak when the turn hit. He basically said both once and twice at the same time then went with the more favorable of the two after seeing the turn card.
2. Saying a lie so often that it becomes true
3. Polluting the discussion with noisy irrelevant information

No matter how profitable it might be, I would be leaving the table and not playing with him again.

Poker does not need this kind of slimeball.

That solves nothing because others will be more than happy to take his money. You're going to let some moral high ground cost you a lot of money. Just use his methods against him to take him for more money, people never learn until they feel the results of their action. By leaving you just give him complete control.

this.

If you quietly tolerate angling and bad rulings you'll get the tables you deserve. I have no problem finding profitable tables that are well run and enjoyable to play.

lol

First of all, whales like these are simply more profitable. You will be paying out of your own pocket by walking away.

Second, anyone who gets fooled by this more than once isn't the brightest anyways. If he wants to play this game, I'll play it and find a way to do it better. Either he quits because he gets the message or I win more money. In the meanwhile you're sitting there playing a "enjoyable" game and making way less.

The players have no choice, it's an impossible situation when dealing with insufferable whales. You just have to deal with these manbabies and let them do whatever they want.

I wish the casinos would do something about it though. I used to work at a restaurant, and sometimes you'd get unruly customers that throw tantrums and abuse staff. My manager would tell these people to GTFO. In other places, most managers will value that single customer more than employee morale or the experience of other customers within earshot, and just allow it to continue. Probably a -EV decision overall.

I realize this is a naive fantasy, but I do think it would be better for everyone, even the bottom-line, if all the rooms just put their foot down on this sort of thing regardless of how much action they give.