Calling someone on a string bet = ultimate form of angle shooting - Page 5

oneifbypez · #41 01-22-2005, 01:53 PM

ok, here comes the newbie trying to get clarification into what has been causing the fist fights in our home games. much like the thread has described, this goes on fluently in our home games. my question is this, is it in fact the definition of a string bet or a string raise when person A announces the raise, then proceeds to wait up to (no exaggeration) 3 minutes before even moving his chips (illedgedly to ponder the amount) to view the reactions of the previous callers and future callers then and only then raising the minimum. there was never any moving forward of a lesser amount of chips, and then re-reaching back to the pile to make it more, but this continually goes on hand after hand in hopes that following players will prematurely muck and or the previous callers give up a little as to whether they were happy or aggrevated with the raise. is this unethical, just annoying to the speed of the game, angle shooting, or just plain cheating? a little help for the newbie is greatly appreciated.
thanks in advance,
ken

sthief09 · #42 01-22-2005, 02:04 PM

just play with all red chips

coffeecrazy1 · #43 01-22-2005, 02:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Here is my point. People who call string raises when the person who raised had no intention of angle shooting (don't believe me if you want that I wasn't trying to do this, I don't really care) is in fact angle shooting themselves by taking advantage of the rule to call string raises.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a minute. You are claiming that someone is angle shooting by calling out someone else as an angle shooter? Isn't this the same reasoning as saying that someone is colluding because they accuse someone else of collusion? Or, for that matter, whoever smelled it, dealt it?

I am failing to understand what the problem is. How is it possible to know what someone's intention is? I believe you that you had no intention in your personal example of angle-shooting, but you seem to be angry at the table because no one could read your mind.

And, just to ask the question, what possible angle do you gain by calling a string raise? I'd like to know, because rule enforcement is certainly an area of angles I'm unfamiliar with.

Look, Sponger, I've read many of your posts on here before, and I have much respect for you, but in this case, what the heck are you talking about?

dtbog · #44 01-22-2005, 02:32 PM

I agree with you, Sponger. I haven't been called for a string bet in a very long time, but I never call them on anyone else unless it's clearly affecting the hand.

A few days ago, I'm dealt T9s on the button at Turning Stone. A few limpers around, so I limp. SB completes, BB says "raise" and throws out two white chips, and a split-second later throws out four reds. Blinds here are 1/2, and it's VERY apparent that this guy forgot he was in the big blind, and meant to say "raise", throw out a call, and then throw out his raise. (He'd been betting like that all day.)

In this position, it's definitely to my advantage to call the min-raise and take a flop with my hand, but I'm not going to call the string bet to be a douchebag. Of course, some asshole across the table starts yelling about it... admitting the whole time that he knows what the bettor's intent was, but that he wants to see a cheap flop. The floor is compelled to go with the book ruling, which states that the player made a string bet. The min-raise of $2 holds, and I crack PFR's aces with my flopped two pair. (He's not the one who pays me off, though).

Bottom line? Being a d-bag like this is +EV, but so is being a thief -- that doesn't mean it's right. Don't be a prick.

-DB

CountDuckula · #45 01-22-2005, 02:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
ok, here comes the newbie trying to get clarification into what has been causing the fist fights in our home games. much like the thread has described, this goes on fluently in our home games. my question is this, is it in fact the definition of a string bet or a string raise when person A announces the raise, then proceeds to wait up to (no exaggeration) 3 minutes before even moving his chips (illedgedly to ponder the amount) to view the reactions of the previous callers and future callers then and only then raising the minimum. there was never any moving forward of a lesser amount of chips, and then re-reaching back to the pile to make it more, but this continually goes on hand after hand in hopes that following players will prematurely muck and or the previous callers give up a little as to whether they were happy or aggrevated with the raise. is this unethical, just annoying to the speed of the game, angle shooting, or just plain cheating? a little help for the newbie is greatly appreciated.
thanks in advance,
ken

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not a string bet or raise. That involves going back for more chips after you've already placed your chips on the table. However, it's certainly angle-shooting and extremely obnoxious, and I don't think you should put up with it. I'd suggest implementing a house rule that anyone who announces raise must specify the amount of the raise or put his chips in within a certain period of time (30 seconds to a minute seems about right to me), and if he fails to do so, his hand is dead.

Another alternative would be to expel the offenders from the group, or if they're the ones running it, stop playing there. There's no reason to put up with this sort of nonsense.

-Mike

detroitplayer · #46 01-22-2005, 02:47 PM

Like an opinion as to whether or not you guys would consider this a string raise...

NL hold'em tourney, almost everytime the guy would raise, he would put all the chips he was going to bet in one hand... and the way he'd bet would be to lay down the amount for the call, announce that amount, and then lay down the amount of his raise and announce that amount. (ie. "there's 85, plus 200 more"). There was no real hesitation with his words or his actions, it was in a continuous motion... like a dealer breaking down a big stack of chips down to stacks of five...

I think his intentions for doing it were to make clear that he was placing the correct amount of chips into the pot. But again, he'd never say raise... just "there's the x, and it's x more to go" and variations there of.

Now, to me, it was obvious every time he was raising, and no one had a problem with it, but I am just curious as to if it would be considered a string raise by the book.

dtbog · #47 01-22-2005, 02:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"there's the x, and it's x more to go" and variations there of.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I were the floor and someone called it on this player, I'd absolutely call it a string bet. Why? Well.. he could put 10k chips in his hand.. notice a reaction, and then put half of them on the table. (etc.)

Any sort of "call-and-raise" nonsense is a string bet.

-DB

CountDuckula · #48 01-22-2005, 03:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Like an opinion as to whether or not you guys would consider this a string raise...

NL hold'em tourney, almost everytime the guy would raise, he would put all the chips he was going to bet in one hand... and the way he'd bet would be to lay down the amount for the call, announce that amount, and then lay down the amount of his raise and announce that amount. (ie. "there's 85, plus 200 more"). There was no real hesitation with his words or his actions, it was in a continuous motion... like a dealer breaking down a big stack of chips down to stacks of five...

I think his intentions for doing it were to make clear that he was placing the correct amount of chips into the pot. But again, he'd never say raise... just "there's the x, and it's x more to go" and variations there of.

Now, to me, it was obvious every time he was raising, and no one had a problem with it, but I am just curious as to if it would be considered a string raise by the book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, yes; I believe that once he says, "There's 85", someone could insist that the first words out of his mouth were binding as a call, and the TD/floor (in a formal/casino setting) would uphold that. If he wants to raise, he should say that first, or quietly put out the chips for the raise. Breaking it up like he did is just asking for trouble, if anyone at the table is inclined to be a stickler.

I'm not an expert on the rules, though; someone who is might tell me I'm wrong. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

-Mike

detroitplayer · #49 01-22-2005, 03:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"there's the x, and it's x more to go" and variations there of.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I were the floor and someone called it on this player, I'd absolutely call it a string bet. Why? Well.. he could put 10k chips in his hand.. notice a reaction, and then put half of them on the table. (etc.)

Any sort of "call-and-raise" nonsense is a string bet.

-DB

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the thing that kept this guy in my good graces was the fact that every time he bet, all the chips that were initially in his hand would go into the pot. No more, no less. If he were to hesitate in any way, or not put all the chips he initially counted out that were in his hand into the pot, I would have been annoyed.

However, he'd sit there and count them out directly in front of him. You know, he'd sit there and count out the 85, then put 2 blacks on top, then, using one hand, break down the 85 stack and the 200 stack in the pot...

Obviously if he announced "raise... there's 85, and heres 200 more" and made those exact same actions, I think that would not be a string bet, but the fact that he doesn't initally say raise would probably be considered a string bet by the book.

DeuceKicker · #50 01-23-2005, 12:38 AM

I think the ruling might be different from place to place. (Some places wouldn't care what he said as long as he moved out the first time with enough chips to raise, others might consider his words a binding call.)

If it were me I think I'd wait until the hand was over then politely tell him that in SOME card rooms that would be a string-raise, and that someone could call him on it to get an advantage. I'd tell him that if he says "raise" before moving the chips out, then he won't have to worry about it.