Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Two scenario's. If you did these in a live poker room would you still win the pot? Obviously these are both low brow and bad etiquette.

Scenario 1

Someone else is contemplating acting after you have raised, you have a garbage hand and want them to fold so you say "all-in" as if they have already acted and you like your hand so much that you will stack it. If they do actually then go all in you say that you had acted out of turn and fold. Allowed?


Scenario 2

On the river you announce you have a full house or a winning hand and try to get the other person to muck without you showing. Then if they do take the bait and muck you flip over an ace high and ship the pot. Allowed?

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

If you were to do any of these at my table, I would make sure the floor kicked you out. Just play with some integrity and play poker. Don't rely on angles to get you in the green.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Both are angleshoots. If you are going to use these tactics, save yourself the trouble of the angry posts you will receive in this forum and keep your use of the tactics to yourself.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Is this serious? Of course these are angles and cheating.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Two scenario's. If you did these in a live poker room would you still win the pot? Obviously these are both low brow and bad etiquette.

Scenario 1

Someone else is contemplating acting after you have raised, you have a garbage hand and want them to fold so you say "all-in" as if they have already acted and you like your hand so much that you will stack it. If they do actually then go all in you say that you had acted out of turn and fold. Allowed?


Scenario 2

On the river you announce you have a full house or a winning hand and try to get the other person to muck without you showing. Then if they do take the bait and muck you flip over an ace high and ship the pot. Allowed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scenario 1:

I'm not an expert, but I believe as long as the action hasn't changed, you are forced to make your raise. Example:

Player A bets $20, Player B is thinking and Player C says RAISE. Player B then states he hasn't acted yet, and announces he is calling the $20. Player C still has to raise to at least $40 because the bet hasn't changed yet.

This wouldn't apply in Example 2:

Player A bets $20, player B is thinking, player C announces Raise, player B informs that he hasn't acted and announces Raise and makes it $100 to go. Player C can now decide whether or not he wants to fold, call, or raise, because the action has changed.

Correct fellas?

Scenario 2: Intentionally miscalling your hand in order to get the other person to muck at the showdown is against the rules, and will result your hand being declared dead and the pot awarded to the other player.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

in situation 1 you would be forced to put all your chips in the pot in most rooms. action out of turn, including verbal, is binding.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

#1

I am confused by this one. It seems to be heads up. You have bet (or raised villain's bet) and are now waiting for villain to make a decision. You then say "all-in". I'm not following this one.

#2

Intentially overcalling your hand is outright cheating. If you do this and are stupid enough to show that you don't have what you claimed, you will lose the pot regardless of where villain's cards are. If you didn't show and villain mucked, and dealer pushed the pot to you, and you mucked, you would be getting away with cheating.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Scenario 2: Intentionally miscalling your hand in order to get the other person to muck at the showdown is against the rules, and will result your hand being declared dead and the pot awarded to the other player.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's what should happen. What does happen is that the mucked hand is declared dead and the anngle shooter wins the pot.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Both are CHEATING, not angles...

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

come on.... don't come around here looking for validation of obviously douchey behavior. you have 1771 posts, were the rest this stupid too?

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Executed intentionally, scenario two is not only cheating but an attempt to literally commit theft.

Just as if a player to your side attempted unsuccessfully to snag a stack of your checks while you were preoccupied and then tried to excuse his action by claiming he mistakenly thought they were his.

Forget angles and work on making correct plays.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Cmon, someone answer scenario 1, I'm curious about it. Seems like people aren't understanding it completely (player C? there are only two players).

Player1 bets, Player2 is thinking, Player1 says "all in". If Player2 raises, is Player1 forced to go all in?

Or is it not verbally binding because he acted out of turn, and then there was a raise?

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cmon, someone answer scenario 1, I'm curious about it. Seems like people aren't understanding it completely (player C? there are only two players).

Player1 bets, Player2 is thinking, Player1 says "all in". If Player2 raises, is Player1 forced to go all in?

Or is it not verbally binding because he acted out of turn, and then there was a raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

In AC rooms that I've played in it is verbally binding I believe if Player2 just calls then Player1 must go all-in. Therefore I guess player2 can reverse-angle shoot if he has a great hand then he can just call, forcing Player1 to go all-in and then calling that.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

where I play:

#1 the allin is binding
#2 your hand is dead and you lose the pot

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

There's a name for angle #2, and it's kneecapping, and yes, it's unethical. Ethics aside however, that move won't work against anyone but real bad and novice players.

#1 is only slightly less dirty. like the first responder said, just play some goddamned poker.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Cmon, someone answer scenario 1, I'm curious about it. Seems like people aren't understanding it completely (player C? there are only two players).

Player1 bets, Player2 is thinking, Player1 says "all in". If Player2 raises, is Player1 forced to go all in?

Or is it not verbally binding because he acted out of turn, and then there was a raise?

[/ QUOTE ]

I did respond. Those other examples were to help explain it. It's binding, that player will be all in.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Both are CHEATING, not angles...

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess that if the rule says "intentionally miscalling your hand" then #2 is cheating. But since you can't prove intentions, #2 is better classified as an angle shoot. The angler can always claim he misread his hand.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

Lets see, you have 1000+ posts on 2+2 and you're asking this question as if someone here would say "Yeah thats ok".... Hmmmm.... Seriously ?

I'm thinking Ban.....

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But since you can't prove intentions, #2 is better classified as an angle shoot.

[/ QUOTE ]

We can prove intnet sufficiently to establish criminal convictions I believe we can surely prove them sufficiently to establish cheating in a poker game.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But since you can't prove intentions, #2 is better classified as an angle shoot.

[/ QUOTE ]

We can prove intnet sufficiently to establish criminal convictions I believe we can surely prove them sufficiently to establish cheating in a poker game.

[/ QUOTE ]

-if we had a poker system comprable to criminal courts.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
in situation 1 you would be forced to put all your chips in the pot in most rooms. action out of turn, including verbal, is binding.

[/ QUOTE ]

It looks like OP simply took your thread, removed the finer details and reposted this.

WOULD THIS BE AN ANGLE SHOOT OR CHEATING?
 

I go up to the cage with three armed men with machine guns and grenades and say "Gimme the [censored] money."

Angleshoot or cheating?

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
come on.... don't come around here looking for validation of obviously douchey behavior. you have 1771 posts, were the rest this stupid too?

[/ QUOTE ]

i was just wondering, i have and never would do any of this stuff obv

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

I believe:

Scenario 1: This is almost always the same. Verbal out of turn action is binding if the action before it doesn't change. So you can fold if your opponent moves all-in, but you have to move all-in if he checks.

Scenario 2: I believe this is much more location-specific. Sometimes the hand is declared dead but also sometimes it is declared the only possible winner by default (only hand left). I think this is because malicious intent is too hard to prove, and you could really have misread your hand/the board.


Some one relating this to theft is incorrect though. If I check to make you think I am weak, intending to check-raising you, am I stealing your money? If I bluff, am I stealing your money? Poker is about deception, but there is a line that separates acceptable from angle-shooting behavior. If you go even further it's cheating, but I think very few actions actually qualify as cheating (ace up your sleeve etc.). The difference between angle-shooting and cheating is semantics though, and if people qualify deliberately acting out of turn as cheating, then that's fine too.

Re: Would this be angle shooting or cheating?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I bluff, am I stealing your money? Poker is about deception, but there is a line that separates acceptable from angle-shooting behavior.

[/ QUOTE ]

As has already been pointed it, these are two distinct concepts which aren't really on a continuum. Deception is fine in poker when it relates to the meaning of one's clear, behavioral action (e.g. "does his check mean he's weak?"); it is angleshooting/cheating when the action itself is deceiving (e.g. betting all-in while knowingly having a large denomination chip buried).