Quote:
Originally Posted by IvegotnoClue
Sorry Doug, can you further explain your Argument why saying you looked at your Cards when you (may) didn't is anyhow an Angle?
I stumbled upon this part but didnt look the whole thing and may missed something.
First, isn't it your responsibility to be aware and look what the player did or did not?
It may be unethical in a very friendly homegame, but how is it in any casino setting?
Second, how is that different from any other lie about your Hand(including a Bluff) or tabletalk?
Third, Isn't it the case that you want to take advantage of him raising blind by 3betting light and therefore want to know if his statement is true?
So he says he didn't look which might or might not be true, if true he puts himself in disadvantage, if not true he (tries to)put himself in advantage, but in both cases, it only will apply if you also want to take advantage of him.
If this is not your Intention, you just could ignore his statement, like any other tabletalk, and play your hand accordingly.It would be either good, or bad(aka angling) for you, just neutral, so no reason to speak up on it.
Further on just try to see if he has any pattern with raising blind, if he really does look at his cards or not, if he does it with random or specific(premium) hands only.If you spot a pattern, exploit it.Just like he does try to do with you with this kindergarten trick.
If you don't spot any pattern or don't want to, cause you play gto and are not into that, just ignore it.
So, IMO, either your logic isn't correct here, he tries to exploit as you do, or it LOOKS like you are just turn things around and say he's angling while IMO you are angling(socially kinda^^) You try to get the truth out of him and want to know what to do, so you are angling yourself by accusing him of angling, because, as stated, otherwise his statement of raising blind is just neutral to you and not worth a single argument. It's technically within the rules, but just goes against the spirit of the game and is a massive angle.
Besides that, he is a clown, you are not
Just because there's a way to exploit someone attempting to angle you, doesn't mean it's not an angle. Of course it's your responsibility to attempt to not be angled. The whole idea of an angle is whether or not it's something within the spirit of the game. For example, it's okay to lie and say "yeah I have the nuts, you should fold", because verbal deception is considered part of the game. However, the idea of playing blind but not actually have played blind seems to go against the "spirit of the game". Of course this is up for debate, as all determinations if something is actually angling or not is up for debate, because "spirit of the game" or "unethical play" can't exactly be codified. Most people have simply determined lying about playing blind goes outside the scope of "spirit of the game" or "ethical play" which I agree with. Another comparable example of an angle is two people agreeing to flip by going allin blind, so the first guy goes allin blind and the second guy then goes back on his gentleman's agreement, then decides to looks at his cards and call or fold. It's technically legal, but a big angle. You made a gentleman's agreement about the nature of the game you're playing, and then you're changing the game you're playing without the other person's knowledge to get an advantage. Lying about your holdings while saying things like "I have the nuts and you should fold" is understood as part of the game of poker, whereas lying about agreeing to flip blind or saying "I'm playing this hand blind" goes against the gentlemen's agreement of the game you're playing and to me is an angle. In a different time, all 3 of these things could be considered angles or all 3 of these could be considered fair game, it's really just up to the general public's perception of "fair play".
Last edited by Ten5x; 04-25-2017 at 04:09 AM.