Poor etiquette? Hand announcement.

[RocketManJames]

So the board reads: AK976

A guy bets, and he is called. The bettor announces, "AQ."
A second or two passes, and the bettor turns over 76 for bottom two pair. The caller seems disgusted since he has been lied to... the bettor then says, "It's the same thing. If you can beat AQ you can beat my hand."

I tend to agree with the bettor, but I am curious what you all thought. I don't see a problem with the bettor's hand announcement, since it was effectively the same. It surely wasn't any sort of angle shoot, since he announced a hand weaker than he really had.

-RMJ

[MRBAA]

It's rude. Whoever is called should just show their hand without further ado. It ain't that hard.

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]
So the board reads: AK976

A guy bets, and he is called. The bettor announces, "AQ."
A second or two passes, and the bettor turns over 76 for bottom two pair. The caller seems disgusted since he has been lied to... the bettor then says, "It's the same thing. If you can beat AQ you can beat my hand."

I tend to agree with the bettor, but I am curious what you all thought. I don't see a problem with the bettor's hand announcement, since it was effectively the same. It surely wasn't any sort of angle shoot, since he announced a hand weaker than he really had.

-RMJ

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, what is the caller has AQ, then he just went from a split pot to a loss. The bettor is a tard for doing it.

[JTrout]

amen.

If I'm the caller, I'll always wait till the bettor tables his cards.
Out-wait'em.

[MCS]

I don't care what somebody says if they show their hand first.

However, it is NOT the same thing. I don't just care if I won the pot; I also want to think about how my opponent played the hand. That's why the actual hand matters.

Why do you think announcing a weaker hand than you actually hold can't be an angle? If I announce "9 high," you show your one pair, and then I table a straight, I've gotten you to show a hand you might not have otherwise shown.

[Morbo]

Yea, imagine holding 97 yourself and going from a win to a split pot, or if also holding AQ and going from a split pot to a loss. And also, WHY would he lie about it? I just can't find any reason?

[Ed Miller]

It surely wasn't any sort of angle shoot

Huh? It surely WAS an angle shoot. What else could it be? The guy totally lied about his hand. The goal was to get his opponent to muck without having to show his cards. He was hoping his opponent would muck and think that he had AQ.

[Schmed]

total angle....he didn't want the table to know that he called the flop action with nothing.

[RocketManJames]

[ QUOTE ]
Huh? It surely WAS an angle shoot. What else could it be? The guy totally lied about his hand. The goal was to get his opponent to muck without having to show his cards. He was hoping his opponent would muck and think that he had AQ.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess my initial post conveyed the wrong idea... when I said it took the bettor a second or two to show the hand, I had intended that to mean that there wasn't really a pause before hands were shown. But, I can see how this generated confusion.

Basically, I can see how this is rude, but don't really see this as much of an angle. The bettor clearly was going to show his hand first in this case (so if my initial post led anyone to believe otherwise, my mistake).

Also, the AK976 was not the order in which the board developed. I believe it was A769K.

I guess I now see how this can be rude (AQ thought he got a split, but now loses), but I don't see it as an angle (now that I've cleared up my mistake).

Thanks for all your replies.

-RMJ

[Deorum]

[ QUOTE ]
And also, WHY would he lie about it? I just can't find any reason?

[/ QUOTE ]

The most likely reason is probably that he wanted to
impress people at the table by letting them know that he
understands that, at least in this hand, for all intensive
purposes, bottom two pair was virtually the same as TPTK.
It simply serves to temper his fragile ego to have everyone
at the table think that he knows what he is doing.

[MicroBob]

i agree that it was probably a 'look how smart i am' deal.

however, it is not 'intensive' purposes....it is 'intents and' purposes. just letting you know.