Anyone else think it was strange that floor has dealer burn/turn second runout and keep cards off to the side? Was he just praying it was 9 9 so he could freeroll not having to make decision?

if you listen closely he asks harry if he wants to honor it twice like a gentleman and harry says no i want the whole pot.

if technically the bike can't enforce twice they should give harry the pot and kick him out. but of course the players want him in the game since he's calling 500 with 93 offsuit so that won't happen.so basically the floor's hands were tied once harry wants to be a scumbag.

It's also possible to attempt something unethical without realizing that it's unprofitable. Maybe Harry really believed that running it once in this case was higher EV than running it twice. Revealing the hands doesn't change the equity of once vs. twice, but if you believe that it does, then you're still being a scumbag in welshing on the agreed upon deal.

I'm not saying that's what Harry did. I don't know what was going on in his head. I'm just saying that the "no harm, no foul" argument doesn't really make much sense. Sometimes bad people don't think things all the way through.

I voted no. I think it's funny all the people that are 100% positive that Harry saw the turn before he said "once, once, once, I can't win it twice". That's a warped jaded point of view. It's highly unlikely that Harry saw the turn before changing his mind. Both players have to agree to run it twice, but a player can change his mind before any more cards come out. I think it's bad form/etiquette on Harry's part to change his mind at the last second after seeing Chris's hand, but not an angleshoot.

For me, if Harry sees the hand he is up against, he has the right to change his mind IF the dealer is not already going into the motion of dealing out the hand as they agreed.

If for some reason the dealer was itching himself or whatever other reason, the cards were not being dealt, then Harry easily has the right to change his mind before the dealing is in progress.

To prevent this, as others have stated, just do not reveal your holding until the board(s) is/are run out.

Chris just assumed, that since they agreed, Harry would be a stand up guy or a gentleman and honor what they agreed upon.

My issue is not IF Harry saw the turn in advance. If so, then really he is just a total scumbag. My issue is changing his mind as the cards are in motion so to me, every ones issue with this is not funny at all.

Seems pretty scummy to me. I remember when I first saw Harry playing on LATB and thinking he has a very untrustworthy looking face/demeanor.

I agree with Bart and feel that a person's knowledge of/experience with Harry should determine the shadiness of it more than anything. Could be an angle but he seemed genuine, so without a history and the fact that he's a fun player you should definitely let it happen. Also I think regardless of agreement made you should always be allowed to change your mind and go back to running it once(assuming no turn/river knowledge obv)


Agreed that the timing makes things really hazy, so it really just comes down to your perception of the situation/Harry.

well said +1


Harry has been a rude angry alcoholic for 10+ years at the bike.

Tom, I tweeted this link out at Doug, any chance he'll make a video on this?

Isn't it standard to both see what your sweating against before deciding how many times you want to run it would of avoided the whole situation. Only Harry and the people on the table truly know if he saw the turn before changing his mind but he looks guilty as sin to me.

What do you mean by this? Are you saying he should be given the benefit of the doubt if he's known to have integrity? I guess I'll take Bart's word for that, but the fact that he repeatedly lied to the floor would make me skeptical.

Also his pointing to the rulebook about no running it twice after expressly agreeing to run it twice is extremely sketchy. It's a fairly common scam in some casinos to do exactly this with unaware tourists. It even happened to Dani Stern a few years ago in Barcelona where he got scammed out of a $22k pot.



It's not the exact same scenario, but it's the same dirty tactic of retroactively pointing to the house rules to get out of a gentleman's agreement.

edit: lol actually it is the exact same scenario if he saw the turn card first, but I've been assuming that he didn't

https://youtu.be/l5ppFDjdErk?t=683

at 11:30 three way all in from the poker boom. players asking ivey to run it more than once and he refuses. So much simpler and entertaining to just run it once.

Opponents will not want to go all in with you as light if they know you only run it once. And the irony of phil "run it once" galfond trying to convince them to run it twice. This incident on LATB and the Barry G podcast talking about the same topic (running it once or twice, not the LATB hand) has really changed my mind to always running it once now.

I think he should be given the benefit of the doubt absent any history, so would necessitate a disqualifier, not a qualifier. This seems pretty notably different than the Dani situation, and also the players reactions and perceptions of the act seems notably different as well. I have very little doubt that Dani got screwed.

I don't really view it as repeatedly lying, because I think the spirit of it was "this is what I always do when way behind, you guys know this".

Players with experience with him could probably gauge everything about the situation better than us, and I don't think being a "sketchy looking" alcoholic is too significant.

Dani just shows a whole heck of a lot more class in that interview than I would have. I would have outed this clown every chance that I could.

It just sucks that in a game that I have so much passion for, is just full of a bunch of degenerate pieces of crap that will try to screw you any and every chance that they get.

This whole thing is way worse than what Harry did but again but neither is acceptable to me and just continues to hurt the image of poker all around.

Just be aware of the angle shooting, left handed players who want to run it 1.5 times I guess, that is the rule to live by when it comes to playing live.

It clearly started as a joke once he saw the Qh but then he remembered how much he hates Chris and that he could actually pull the angle off so he went for it. Then of course he's not gonna back down once confronted. And whatever "integrity" Harry may have displayed in the past (e.g. Letting Armenian Mike and Eli off the hook because he happens to like/not feel threatened by/be validated by their own old aged gambling addicted personalities) is completely irrelevant. People can be nice in some situations and complete POS in others.

Limon was shilling for Harry over on Reddit earlier, which was hilarious.

Kick him off the show until he pays Chris back. The agreement was in place when he said twice and he didn't speak up with enough time to cancel it. If both Ryan and Limon who own Live at the Bike want to bring some integrity to their business that's the only choice. And of course Harry will play the but I lost it all back to him with JJ to QQ card but ignore that bull****.

Harry loves the attention of being on the stream enough that he'll pay Chris eventually.

shady and infuriating

Harry now blames the dealer.

What a clown for not taking responsibility and blaming the dealer for his own ridiculous actions.

Harry is so full of shiznit:
MOney dont mean anything
THe rule is not enforcable
I pay you if I saw the card
It doesnt matter
I give action w/ no problem all these years
Why would I do that

Harry's a scumbag.

LATB diminishes their brand each time they let him play. But I guess he gets views, and that's what's important to them clearly.

I said it before, what's the dealer supposed to do? Give them "Is this your final answer...?"

Dealer hears them both agree on twice, he's there to work and make money - get hands out.

Both are all in, both agree to 2x, dealer goes. Dealer did nothing wrong, but not a shock that Harry blames the dealer

I disagree, but respect that you said no and defended your position. WP.

No while some people go back and forth based on the hand tbeyre up against most people just consistently go once or twice (if the pot is big enough)

Most people also don't tell the other person what they have before they decide.

I've never played it him but Bart limon etc have incentive to defend him bc he's terrible at poker.

As far as integrity

1)he lies over and over again to the floor about what happened and what he said

2)he then ,despite having initially agreed to run it twice then wants to play the "running twice isn't even allowed here" card which is beyond scummy.

3) he tries to blame the dealer when the dealer did nothing wrong

I always laugh when I hear people say "the money doesn't matter to me" as they use sole kind of unethical move to make money that they otherwise wouldn't have.

For the people saying he changes his mind before the turn card is dealt, watch again.

He's leaning forward looking intently at the board when he blurts out "once", then it cuts to the card most of the way through being laid down literally a fraction of a second later. It's quite clear he only changes his mind because he is reacting to seeing the turn card.

When he says "I can only win once" it's a continuation of this response, because he understands that he might be able to hit a backdoor flush but he's unlikely to beat a set twice.

If he wasn't such a fish he should be banned, real crappy move.