WPT Bay 101 Shooting Star thread

[tailspin4540]

[ QUOTE ]
wait, Vince's big "let's get ready to rumble!" catchphrase is "Lets go watch 'em gamble?"

[/ QUOTE ]
It's usually "Let's go down to the felt!" which, while not great by any means, is far better than that.

[Taso]

Glad Ted won, he's a great poker player.

[DMC0627]

He definitely is scary good. He was also very gracious to JJ at the end of the tourney. A real class act.

[pa3lsvt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only reason a dealer can state/count the size of the pot in PL is that the pot size is, by rule, the maximum allowable bet. In limit and NL, it is the player's responsibility to track the pot size.

The TD's ruling here was 100% correct, and I suspect Ted knew that, and tried to "bet the pot" in order to induce a call from his opponent by giving a "fake strength" reverse tell. "I know that you know that my attempted PSB is probably a case of strong-means-weak, but I know you don't know that I'm actually strong." Double levelling by a pro, FTW.

[/ QUOTE ]
I thought that as well. Surely someone like Ted would know that you can't refer to pot in NL when you make a raise. If that's what Ted was doing, then it would be classified as an angle shoot, though, wouldn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Like many things in poker, "it depends" is most likely the correct answer - it depends on what you consider an angle shoot. I personally consider what Ted did gamesmanship, akin to giving off a reverse tell like a feigned disappointment when your draw comes in.

I'm more likely to call it an angle shoot when you are deliberately trying to break a rule: trying to get the best hand ruled dead at showdown, trying to break a rule by using a grey area, playing a hand that is foul (i.e. flopping a set of Aces and continuing with the hand when you hold the A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] and another A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] is on the board) then trying to get your investment in the pot refunded when you didn't point out the foul deck immediately, etc.

I'd say "angle shoot" *if* Ted tried to check there, after verbally announcing "I bet the pot", in an effort to get to a cheap showdown (obviously not the case here given he was holding the nut flush). Same as saying "I bet three cheeseburgers"; yes you are held to the bet, now state a valid amount. Ted never tried to break any rules, just to confuse his opponent by using his knowledge of the rules to his advantage.

Another scenario: Player makes a bet smaller than the BB and is told he must make the minimum bet. If player tries to bet bigger, he's shooting an angle because the proper ruling is that a smaller than legal bet is treated as the minimum legal bet and he's trying to circumvent that rule. If player accepts the ruling and bets the minimum, in an effort to get paid off or induce a reraise bluff, it's gamesmanship.

One last close scenario (seen frequently at live low stakes cash no limit): Player in 1/2NL is facing a raise, and tosses in a single oversized chip without verbalizing his intention. Rule is that is a call. If that player subsequently announces he wanted to raise, that's gamesmanship. Same player continues to push his point, calling the floor over - that's an angle shoot as he's trying to circumvent the proper rule. Also an angle shoot if he tosses in a $5 chip when the raise was to $7, then wants to raise when told he has called the $7 bet. (Technically, he could be allowed to fold if the floor agrees that he misunderstood the size of the action to him or be forced/allowed to call $7, but should never be allowed to raise there.)

Again, it's a very fine line and I bet if we took a poll, you'd get a near 50/50 result.

[Dima2000123]

The simplest definition that I heard, and the one I agree with, is that your action is an angle shoot when you're involving someone other than yourself or the other player in your trick. In that particular case, the dealer and TD clearly had to be involved. It's similar to a fake string raise, when you deliberately make two motions while knowing full well that the dealer will stop you after the first one.

[Slim Pickens]

lol@ those of you who are calling JJ's call with the straight "bad." Her mistake was on the turn. It was a calculated risk and it backfired. I personally don't like her slowplaying the turn when she knows she has to pay off any river card and Ted could easily have some sort of pair +FD/SD combo he'd 3-bet shove if she raises.

I would have called with the 9:heart3:heart on the two-[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8-high board. 40-45% is as far ahead of Ted Forrest as I'm ever going to get.

The amateur players were especially bad. I think Amir misplayed every street on the J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] hand.

[Scorcho]

Is the Olivert NVG thread mentioned above still around? I'm having a hell of a time trying to find it with this lousy search function.

At any rate, I loved this episode and thought Ted put on a smallball clinic.

[grdred944]

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. Ted Forrest is scary good.

[/ QUOTE ]

[grdred944]

[ QUOTE ]
The TD's ruling here was 100% correct, and I suspect Ted knew that, and tried to "bet the pot" in order to induce a call from his opponent by giving a "fake strength" reverse tell.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ted knew that. He's too smart not to. Matt simply told Ted to name an amount when Ted said he wanted to bet the pot. Sweet move on his part.

[grdred944]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought that as well. Surely someone like Ted would know that you can't refer to pot in NL when you make a raise. If that's what Ted was doing, then it would be classified as an angle shoot, though, wouldn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see this as angle shooting. Angle shooting is questionable conduct. Stating that you are making a pot sized bet is not questionable. Ted said that is what he wanted and Matt told him that he had to come up with a number on his own.