I'd fold. Hero has next to nothing invested in the hand. Why navigate a turn re-raise and river bet when the hand already looks very fishy and potentially an angle.
@@CrushlivePoker just fold and move on, it’s obvious the guy had a boat. The caller whined because he fell for it and paid off when he should have just folded to the raise and laughed at how the guy saved him money.
This isn't even an angle as you mention at the end. The guy probably just actually checked out of turn thinking nobody has anything or lookin to X/R. But then BB bets and he knows he clearly has something so he raises. I guess this take makes me braindead uh ohhhhh!
I do agree with the caller that at these stakes, calling the floor caps your range. There are very few players with the wherewithal to call floor with a monster hand in this scenario, at low stakes.
That's all I agree with, though. Calling the floor over an angle is wild and gives the guy exactly the reaction his scummy little ego wants. I agree with Bart, show him the nut flush and tell him you'd have raised him for sure if not for his action on the turn and he cost himself a few hundred. Make sure he knows that he's so bad that he knows he needed a 1 out turn (because the other 6 costs the hero nothing, he just folds) into a 9 out river to even get the pitiful pot he did get in a disgusting cooler hand.
Yes. Bart, who is usually always right, is 100% wrong on this. If you call the floor, there is no way you have quads or a full boat. Unless you yourself are an absolute idiot. Just re-raise the guy and get more money in there. You know he’s got a strong hand and you’ve got him toasted.
@@Vipr77 Would that make it acceptable for someone not involved in the hand to call the floor after the obvious angle shoot once he raises after checking out of turn? Or do we still follow the rule that if you're not involved in the hand, you stay silent even if you observe another playing doing a really scummy angle shoot?
@@gabrielrockman Up to judgment of course.....but I am the guy who calls the floor in this scenario out of the hand. I hate this garbage. I'd be conflicted but likely call floor for the sake of integrity. I've taken heat in the past for this but I do it anyway. I just hate anglers.
Why did this know it all even bother calling in? Literally messed up every street. Changed the action to where the only thing villain couldn’t do was check 😂. It may not even of been an angle, he could have got all giddy lost when he turned the boat and thought he was first to act, looking to check raise. I would think a checking angle would induce more checks, and risking checking it around with the hope that someone catches a flush is costing money. Ps, the floor didn’t want to talk to that guy because he sounds like a pain in the a$$.
honestly even i, as a relative novice was thinking, that the guys has a two pair then a boat the whole time. it does raise the question about how to handle these sorts of players - they do something when they have the hand once, it works and then they do it when they don't have the hand. everyone wants to win, but sometimes making a friend who has your back in the parking lot if shit goes south is worth more than gold.
I agree with you. The action was changed. The Villian gets to raise. That is the rule in the casino card room I play at. At low stakes, most plays aren't smart enough to angle. They are just stupid or bad or both.
I agree with Bart. He could be doing this with a boat too , I tend not not to read into situations like this too much , cause they are to easy manipulate into what you want your opponent to think , which then pretty much makes them meaningless. I can’t remember an exact scenario, but I’m pretty sure I’ve called over a floor before in a situation similar to make my opponent think I was Capped too. When I wasn’t. There are obviously more betting rounds to come , plus sometimes you just want an exact ruling as to the rules , has nothing to do with your hand and whether you are perceived as strong or weak. I agree generally most people wouldn’t call over floor with a boat , but like I said it’s too easy to manipulate your perceived range after that , that putting to much thought into that is probably just a waste of time. Plus you can usually tell if your opponent is the type that would try and mess with your opinion. If he is , than him calling the floor just becomes meaningless , if he’s just a casual player than yes it could lean my decision, but if it’s a player that has experience I wouldn’t put much thought into it In a side note , I like how caller says he wants to punish the player by beating him in the hand. lol. That’s the opposite way of punishing him. You punish this type of player by basically snap folding your hand and thank him for giving g away the strength of his hand.
I agree with niki. No chance he calls floor if he has a book. Let's be honest 99% of players aren't trying to be ethical or do what's 100% right according to rhe rules...they're trying to win $. Why would you call the floor if someone wants to donate you more $ ? To be more ethical?
@@Fred-rg5vwcaller really shouldn’t have any boats here anyways , but it’s live poker so who the heck knows. I guess he could have 6s full , but obviously as we find out later he can’t have that.
@@Womenandwine Yes as someone else posted it most likely wasn't an angle at all. He just got excited to slow play when he hit is 2 outta. If it was an angle it doesn't really make any sense anyway..not gaining much if anything. Had position and a small bet was always gonna be called...mighta even induced a raise.
I feel for the caller, and I agree with the caller (disagree with Bart) that calling the floor in the middle of the hand gives away info on your hand. However, playing the hand out and then whining about it with the floor and the manager when you lose isn't a good look either. Plus, it could have just been a legitimate mistake. The other player could have checked with the intention to check raise, but then realized it wasn't his turn.
At the end caller says to “check the cameras”. Even if the cameras caught the action, they can't discern intent. The cameras don’t know whether it was an innocent mistake by the guy, or whether he purposely acted out of turn. Could it have been an angle? Sure. But the caller still sounds like he thinks the world is out to get him.
where i play, if you check out of turn you are not allowed to raise to any ensuing bet. (ie: you're not allowed to take any kind of aggressive action (bet or raise) if you performed a defensive action out of turn). any cardroom that doesn't have this rule just invites the kind of abuse described in this video
This seems like the kind of thing that derives from people who think check raising itself is immoral. It’s not as if someone couldn’t honestly want to check, or raise.
@@mikemck4796obviously nothing wrong with check-raising. but checking out of turn to induce a bet in order to then raise is an angle-shoot. and where i play, it is simply not allowed. if you check out of turn, you cannot bet or raise when it comes back to you, you can only check or call.
Or any raise... You don't need to say re-... same with somebody telling a story and saying 'cold call' etc... another annoying thing is when a player gets raised heads up on the river and acts annoyed like the raiser did something personally wrong, or played their hand like a moron (just because a player caught them) - another one, this happened a ton in the early-mid 2000's... A player would be raised on the turn or river and would call time and look up and mouth words like "look at me, I'm strategizing and openly showing everybody that I'm thinking" then shaking their head in disguist and sarcastically saying "nice hand" "if you want if that bad, go ahead..."
Some people consider checking as "betting $0" So a check, and then a bet Is really a bet, and then a raise Don't worry, I am not one of the people. Lol
This was NOT an angle and the Villain in all likelihood had 66 when he does this, and what advantage is the villain even getting by doing this? I see this particular mistake a lot and everyone flips out and always assumes it's an angle but what advantage is the "angler" getting by checking out of turn when he has a made hand? Yes maybe it somewhat encourages the hero to bet but if the hero checks the "angler" is now forced to check behind. This scenario stinks for the villain. And as for it encouraging the hero to bet, considering every single time someone checks out of turn the entire table always starts saying "omg angle" I'm not even sure if it does encourage the hero to bet more often,.... it might even encourage a check more often. Psychology 101. Villain spikes his 2 outer, gets excited and "aggressively slow-plays" . You just get excited and want to do something, most bad players first instinct is to slowplay, so you just start checking even though it's not your turn. It's the same process that makes a baseball pitcher throw the ball to first base on a hard comebacker at 100mph even though he has all day to make the throw, the adrenaline rush of the ball coming hard at you that you just caught. This check out of turn is almost never an angle, and the villain is heavily weighted towards 66 as soon as it happens.
Exactly right. I think its more likely a bad player that wants to check raise a pro or for-profit whiner, and gets alittle ahead of himself by checking out of turn, than an angler. Also, the only way this "angle" works is if you do it against someone that will call the raise because they are too emotional in their decision making. By the caller's explanation of why he called the turn, looks like the villian found the perfect sucker.
Oh my word, I love it when people check out of turn. Gives me so much more information. In this case, it clearly showed the angle and it became a trivial fold on the turn. The caller let revenge mode get the best of . And it cost additional money. Just fold, thanks for the free information and moved to the next hand.
First - this is room dependent, so no harm in asking. I have seen rooms where the player is only allowed to call/fold - he can't raise when he checks out of turn. (right or wrong, there needs to be SOMETHING to make people conscious of betting in turn) I don't think it caps the range at all...even if you don't have the presence of mind to angle the angler here, I'd call the floor to make sure it's allowed, first to remove any doubt of the validity of the action in that hand (If I do have the nuts I don't want the floor doing something stupid after the fact, get the ruling in real time), and second to know for next time. It also puts everyone on alert about this clown. I would call the floor with JJ in this hand.
I thought this guy was talking about me for a second. I hit a boat on the turn and I was so exited to slow play it. Hoping for a flush to come on the river, so I can stack anybody with a flush draw and jacks. When I did this, I was not trying to angle anyone. I just did it because I was too excited to slow play a full house. That might have been the case. Anytime a player is too interested in a board or act out of turn, it is usually a tell that they have the best hand.
Bart is crazy to think that the nuts is going to call the floor over and risk having a raise taken away. Caller is crazy to think about check-raising a flush on the river. Villain has spent this hand thinking about how to angle the caller, lots of boats in his range.
Hero changed action by betting, villain gets all options again. This happens pretty often and is a pretty standard ruling. calling the floor wouldn’t have helped you and yes it would have told (at least me) that you didn’t have a J
FYI, at Bay 101 across the street, the rule is that if you check out a turn you absolutely cannot raise even if the action changes and your options are only call or fold. Checking is the only option out of turn where when action changes it doesn't give you all of the options back specifically at Bay 101 and they probably use the same rule at matrix. I dealt poker at Bay 101 for almost 4 years and this rule was implemented because people were checking out a turn on the button pretending that they thought they were first to act, then raising after somebody bets.
@@charlesnewborn3760This should be the the standard rule no need to reward an angler. If the check out of turn is an honest mistake then you should be forced to honor said check or call a bet. You should absolutely lose the option to raise.
@@charlesnewborn3760yet another reason to NEVER play poker in California. It really speaks volumes when you need rules implemented like that to the character of the average Californian 😂
@@jacobbirkenfeld9261 Oh PLEASE, this has nothing to do with California people; it has to do with the nature of poker players in general. Poker players arent the most honest of individuals on average I mean the game itself promotes lying. I play poker all over the US and out of all the places I played, California has some of the more nicer poker players. Florida was the worst.
actually no you are wrong. non aggressive action out of turn only has non aggressive action when option comes to them. You can not check out of turn and then raise. only option is fold or call.
13:10 i agree w/ caller that trying to deny/challenge the turn raise would make your own hand be perceived as weak, especially when you only bet 1/3 pot already.
I get that the caller is frustrated, but the evidence this is an angle is weak. It's a $90 pot and holding 66 is an easy check on pretty much any turn, he might of just been on autopilot and didn't register the 6 in time. People check out of turn a lot, it stinks when it impacts action but that's kind of unavoidable. In fact, I cannot buy that this guy processed within one second that, "you know what I'm going to do? I hit my 6, I'm going to check out of turn, make it look weak, hope he bets, and then get him with a check raise." That's quite farfetched even for a scummy dude. He also handicaps himself because he takes away his own ability to bet if you check up front. But even *if* he was angling, what is the floor supposed to do after the hand? You still bet the turn, you called the raise, and you called the river. Sure, cameras can see everything but this doesn't meet any reasonable standard of clear intent and illegal action, and the alleged angle was multiple decision points in the past. I wish Bart's whole framing of this video were different, from "that guy is scum" to "look caller, here's a bit of advice."
A. This likely wasn't even an angle: Villian's "angling" line makes sense if he thinks that Hero checked and is going for a X/R or just thinks nobody has anything.. and then when Hero bets he changes course. B. Callers argument is "I knew this guy was angling me but I gave him my money anyways, wahhhh" boo hoo to caller
with perfect 20/20 hindsight, is the best thing to do as the hero - As soon as opp checks out of turn, hero asks the dealer, "now that he has checked out of turn, what are his options if i check, and if I bet?"
Great analysis tho I do agree with the caller that if he calls the floor he caps his range. Why would he call the floor and risk the floor saying villain cannot raise and risk not being able to reraise if hero had AJ. As caller said he wouldnt. Totally agree with Bart that this angle should be covered in the rules ie a check out of turn should mean the only option for the out of turn player is to call or fold to any bet on that street. However, if the villain is a deep thinker it is somewhat possible that he can use all this to launch a creative bluff tho it would be a bit crazy when AJ is a decent part of heros range when he bets and calls a 3B PF.
Just to answer the caller’s question yes you could do that as an angle yourself if you had a nutted hand. I’ve pulled something similar about 10 years ago, when I wasn’t as strict about angling etiquette. This was at Parx East. I had the nut flush post river and shoved, the Villain had a K high flush and went into the tank. He then exposed his cards to possibly get a read. I asked the dealer why his hand wasn’t dead(obviously I knew otherwise). The dealer suggested that we call the floor to clarify and the floor came over to rule that Villains hand isn’t dead. All the other players around him starting telling him to call(apparently the 1 player per hand didn’t mean anything to anyone at that time), and that I wouldn’t have wanted his hand dead if I had him beat. Well much to the Villains credit, eventually folded while being berated by all those around him. I didn’t say anything about it afterwards because it wasn’t my proudest moment. Although it was a time where so many people were trying out new creative angling techniques.
The difference is you wanted a call and you were trying to make it look like you didn’t. So had the floor ruled it was dead, which you knew they wouldn’t. It would’ve cost you money. In this case, the floor might have ruled against the action already taken by the opponent, which was to put more money in. Had that been the case it would’ve cost a lot of money he actually had quad jacks. In your example, the money had not gone in yet.
@@stevehungerford4305 The question was more so to ascertain the perception given off by someone calling the floor. The fact of the matter is that the villain is well within his rights to raise after Hero changing action(angle or not). Given the uncertainty of intention, most poker rooms would not force the villain to only call behind(despite caller’s whining). So my comment was predicated on the hero having the nuts and complaining that the villain was angling. And hero certainly could do so…with the nuts, also as an angle, without capping his range because no legitimate poker room would rule in his favor. But the perception to most would be that he would only do so with a capped range and that is not correct.
Additionally you would only want to do such with someone who was aware that you could/would do so also as an angle. In the callers scenario, obviously calling the floor on people who believe that you would only call the floor with a capped range isn’t advisable.
I think there is a small possibility that it wasn't an angle. He could have the intent to slow play and legitimately check out of turn, but then decide to raise after you bet because at that point he has reason to believe you have a hand. It's possible that the action of betting legitimately changed his decision. That said, it probably was an angle. I just don't believe it's 100% conclusive.
If they are loose, you should 3bet always! The problem with 3bets is vs tight open range, that dominates your 3bet range/a lot of 4bet bluffs. A9s is a mix, but vs the stated pool it is definitely a winning 3bet.
Agree with the caller. When someone angles or makes a speech, they're rarely doing it with just trips. This is a boat or better. If the hero didn't have the ace of hearts it could be a nut flush draw as well, I suppose.
At crown Casino in Australia if you 3 bet the preflop and take it down, they would still take $9 from you, as there was already $60 in the pot + your call of 30. They don't tax your raise. Pretty crazy
The floor seems perfectly right about this. The rule is clear, if the action doesn’t change his check is binding. He isn’t gaining any unfair advantage by being bound to it; you just received free information. It also seems a perfectly logical way to play 66. Stop complaining and play better. Fold the turn when you are clearly behind.
This caller is out of his mind. What does he think the floor was going to do? What does he think the cameras would show? Aside from warning the angler to cut the crap, there’s nothing else they can do, because here’s the thing about angles - they’re not against the rules. They’re sleazy ways to take advantage of the rules, but they aren’t cheating. This guy was pissy because he knew he got angled, he let it happen, and his response to that is to complain about it to the floor? I am not suppprting the angle shooter at all, but at you have to take responsibility for yourself at the poker table. Complaining that the floor didn’t bail him out after he lost that hand is as weak as it gets.
I wanted to hear what the manager said, since the caller stated that the manager saw everything, as if it had bearing on the outcome. (Caller said that the floor was the one trying to rationalize, not the manager.)
At most places I have played if there is substantial action you have the ability to change your action, and substantial action in this case would be either a bet that was not placed at the time that you took the out of turn action or a raise. Since the check happened before a bet was made and there is now a bet the action is open for this player to raise. Now that being said I also think Bart is 100% right that this is ripe for exploitation and angling, it is, but the places I have played live would allow this. Now if you play somewhere with a really sharp floor and a guy does this once or twice I believe there should always be a rule allowing floor discretion and you tell the angler to "Come on Joe, you did this last week and I warned you about this, you can't raise now". Obviously the having a history on a player as the floor is more of a smaller market thing.
I play live poker very infrequently. Last time I did, I inadvertently checked out of turn on the river holding the nuts, because I lost track of position and wanted to check raise. Other player thought it over and then checked (so my action was binding) and I rolled my hand right over. It was a huge pot and probably cost me several hundred dollars. Not an angle, just a mistake. Can’t say whether that was the case here.
Find it hilarious that the caller goes off on the casino for not taking responsibility when ... he should have taken responsibility that he played the hand terribly on the turn and river!
The guy could be excited that he hit a boat and checked thinking it was it, wanting someone to catch a draw on the river since there wasn't much interest shown for the pot yet. After someone has manifested interest he can raise the bet.
It is a viable move. Not the cleanest one, but I wouldn't even call it an angle/scummy. It is possible that LJ wanted to check raise the turn/check for deception and make a move on the river, and once you bet it changes his mind, that you have Ax and he can charge additional value on the turn. Probably he tried to induce a bet, which is also fine - it is a commiting action only if it is a legal action - you cannot check after a bet has been made, so you can do whatever. It is not something I would do, but I would induce a call by saying to someone on the clock that his time is up - I really don't see much difference between these 2 actions - you can talk to the floor and he would just say it's fine
The guy could be excited that he hit a boat and checked thinking it was it, wanting someone to catch a draw on the river since there wasn't much interest shown for the pot yet. After someone has manifested interest he can raise the bet a little knowing he should get called.
21:36 What on earth do you want from the floor when the hand was already correctly adjudicated at the table? He's not going to apply special made-up rules retroactively just because you don't like the standard rule for action out of turn and your opponent was extra-naughty. He probably should use progressive discipline, without changing the outcome of the hand. 1. Warn the guy. 2. Make him sit out an orbit. 3. Bar him for 24 hours. 4. Eighty-six him indefinitely. But that's a lot for the floor to track, especially with the player pool in one of California's largest cities.
If the rule at the casino is that if the action changes, the player that acted out of turn has all options, then the floor did nothing wrong. It’s not guaranteed it was an angle. Guy could have just been going for a checkraise. If you’re aware of the possibility it’s an angle, then you actually have an advantage by him acting out of turn, sine his options are now limited and yours are not. In summary: bad call (in both senses)
Wow. The whole time they were talking about what villain might have if he's angling like that and I'm just setting here thinking he has a boat or better. He could have AA, JJ, 66, or AJ. I don't think someone is going to angle like this with just trips with a flush and potential straight draw on board.
Feels like there's at least a chance dude accidentally checked out of turn, planning to check raise. Especially since he was the pf aggressor and it checked round on the flop.
To punish the angler, fold! The check out of turn, then raise angle line should be something like JJJJ every time Anglers are stupid, they turn their hand face up They do it to enjoy the dupers delight, not necessarily because they think it’s the most profitable play
It’s weird to me that anyone would think checking out of turn would prevent you from raising if bet into. As if no one could reasonably want to only check, or raise.
Geez I love this show couldn’t disagree more Both keep saying “scum” “angling”. I don’t see it 1. Check raises have been allowed and part of poker for a long time now. 2. Hero reopened the action! Villain is no more angling than hero is angling for going for thin value when villain shows weakness 3. Rope a dope is a very effective strategy when you’re paying attention and playing the players at the table well 4. Obvi hero would cap his range if he called the floor 5. And no Bart hero shouldn’t insist on getting a floor ruling unless hero intended on 3d chess angling if a heart comes. That’s hypocritical 6. Only solid way of double angling would be for hero to call floor ONLY with the nuts. But he can’t cause he doesn’t have the nuts: hence he’s capped Love this show Bart it’s my fav but you guys got this all wrong
The Caller called the floor only because he lost the hand. He likely won't say anything if he won. A) What did he want to floor to do after the hand?- Refund? If so, isn't that an Angle? If he wins it's good, if he loses he wants a refund.
Wow, this guy sounded really angry. I play poker almost every week and I've never seen or heard someone "angle" like this. This wasn't even heads up, so there's no guarantee that you would bet knowing that he would check. People get excited when they hit a hand and that's when they act out of turn. Usually people bet out of turn but this guy was probably planning to check raise or trap. Once you bet into 2 people oop you're indicating you have a strong hand and that's when he decided to raise. It's possible this was an angle but not very likely.
Not calling a floor with weak hand is like not asking for an attorney when being questioned by the police... to not look more suspicious than you already are. It's just dumb I think.
Something is fishy about his telling of this story. 1. He claims the guy is more conservative when he doesn't raise with trips on straighty boards but... 2. He claims the guy checked outta turn but raised 2 players with pocket 6s on an AJJ board? 3. The guy flopped that boat and he changed the details to a turned boat instead of a flopped boat to make it appear like the guy got lucky instead of him basically drawing dead. Early on he claimed that the guy was toght and later he claimed the guy was a conservative player. Doesn't make sense. I know super aggressive players who wouldn't make that move and i know 0 toght conservative players making this exact move.
This isn’t an angle and while frowned upon it is allowed. If you had checked he wouldn’t have been able to bet but since you bet it resets the betting action. Kinda sketch in terms of changing up the actions but you should’ve just checked turn if you were worried about getting raised turn. With that same logic - acting out of turn can also backfire on them too. Because if he had bet out of turn you can leverage the check raise so it essentially evens out since you gain extra info due to his out of turn action.
If you play in the Bay Area... at least in 2009-2020... Angling was at every poker room, everyday... It was treated more as "fun" you Have to be alert! I was a reg, but still out of the crowd (the games were mostly Asian)... I always found it funny when a nerdy young white dude would play and act like he was a strict rule enforcer... Poker is just that... deception and understanding the rules... I don't angle but I do believe its part of the game... I don't snap call bets or raises... and would advise players not to do the 'cool guy, insta flip 1 chip in as a river call'
I don't understand complaining about an angle that happens mid-hand after a hand completes. Once you try to 'freeroll' the opponent, you can't whine after the hand and expect things to go your way.
You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. This guy’s ego cost him an extra $300. Fold the turn and move on with your life. This is such a mild/unprovable angle to begin with. The guy may have not even noticed at first that he binked his 2-outer and just impatiently checked to move the hand towards the river and showdown. Terrible turn bet by the way. You should be begging for a turn check back for a free heart. Expecting KK or QQ to call a small turn bet is very ambitious. You bet for protection? Against what, 2-outers? 😂
Is the point of these calls supposed to be about the players learning or just story time? After watching these for so long I can't imagine calling in with the purpose of defending my action or complaining. The whole point is to analyse the play and improve. Side note: the way the caller complains about people being brain dead if they don't think it's an angle shows that a lot of people in real life disagreed with him, and he is only calling to try and get some validation.
Not sure I follow the logic. On the river check>bet then he said if he raised, the villain would just fold. Isn't that what you want? What is the downside of the villain folding to your river raise?
He was saying that if he check raised the river that the villain would just fold alp his naked Jacks (trips) but he would still call him with any full house for sure. Which is logic I agree with here it is a good just call. Should have found the fold on the turn though.
I am not even sure this was an angle. After AJJ got checked around twice he might have thought that nobody had an A or a J and so a bet would just lead to him winning a small pot whereas his check behind could earn him one or even two bets on the river. And then someone bet and then the situation changed and villain had a reasonable chance to make some money by raising ...
Once you bet then the betting is open again. He probably wasn't intentionally angling if he assumed you had checked. Him checking out of turn changes your decision then thats on you. Im pretty sure he was gonna raise had he not checked out of turn. Sounds like the caller was more mad about the results than what actually happened. Im writing this before the reveal btw.
This is not an angle. You checking makes it a viable option to raise for strategic reasons even if he was going to check if the action was to him first. Also, the caller is right. Calling floor would definitely cap your range. Nobody would ever ask for a ruling that would put less money in the pot AND take away your option to reraise if you had a strong hand.
Whether or not villain was angle shooting there was nothing technically illegal about the play and villain won close to the max from the caller. Caller seems to overthink sometimes.
The caller acted like a real Karen afterwards. If you don't call the floor over during the hand, don't whine to them afterwards just because you hit your flush and still lost the hand. The villain is a scumbag, but the caller didn't handle this well either.
I think he can't raise. You can't make a passive action out of turn, and then an aggressive action on the same street when it is on you. It doesn't matter if the action changes. I've seen this ruling made before. Maybe its wrong, but i think thats the rule.
Im new. Whys it obvious that this is an angle rather than an untintentional check out of turn when the original plan was a check raise with an appropriate timed check?
No, it is not obvious. I believe villain thought nobody had an A or a J so he could not get value on the turn and wanted to pick up one or with luck two bets on the river. Then someone bet and he thought that an A, J or a FD was out there and hoped he would get called when he raised. The suggestion that a check out of turn would lead to a bet is questionable in this situation, so the purpose of this alleged angle seems dubious.
Bart ... I very much enjoy your content... But wow ... This guy... It seemed like he wouldn't consider anything you were saying ( which I agree with your position on most things you said ) .... But man I feel bad for the next guy that checks out of turn, he may snap and kill the dude right in the casino 😂.. ... So my take is the dude prob checked before really seeing the turn ( which a lot of people would do with low pockets that missed and got called , but luckily the dealer dropped the 6 , so when he was able to act he raised .... It isn't necessarily an angle
Not all “angles” are equal. While some angling is down right scummy, while others are meh and sometimes humorous. This callers situation falls closer to the unacceptable side but his whining isn’t helping. I’ve played with some atrocious anglers at the Taj and at Parx. But getting all bent out of shape in this specific situation is an overreaction.
I'm just confused. Even if it's an angle, it isn't illegal. He chose to to call for a ruling. What does he want the floor to do? Me? I'm taking the free card and not betting the turn. And if I really felt was was a dirty player, I rack up and change tables
its not an an angle...he checked out of the tun and you bet so the action changed he can do what ever he wants ...if he checks out of the turn and u check he cannot bet , his check is binding
