Angle shooting is engaging in actions that may technically be within the scope of the rules of the game, but that are considered unethical or unfair to exploit or take advantage of another player. For example, an angle shooter might motion as if they were folding their hand to induce other players to fold theirs out of turn. Angle shooting in poker is defined as using unethical, intentionally deceptive tactics to take advantage of (usually more inexperienced) opponents. Examples of angle shooting include: miscalling one's hand in the hope that a player with a better hand will muck, intentionally acting out of turn to see another player's reaction, verbalizing an action in an ambiguous manner that can be interpreted in one of two ways depending on how the hand goes, or misrepresenting the size of one's chip stack.
One reason I like poker is its uniqueness compared to other sports and games. Its perfect mix of skill and luck combined with the unending variety of people you encounter at the tables make it a lot of fun. One unique aspect of the game that I am not as fond of, however, is angle shooting.
For those new to poker, angle shooting is doing something during a poker game that is not technically against the rules, but is nonetheless considered unethical. It is pushing the limits of the rules while not crossing the line of illegality to the point where the person doing it is generally perceived to be pretty scummy or disrespectful.
For example, a player might purposely act out of turn in order to influence the actions of his opponents. Perhaps a player wants to see the flop for free or cheap. He might, before it's his turn to act pre-flop, throw out a raise. He then takes it back after 'realizing' that it wasn't his turn yet, but now the players ahead of him might be scared to bet, thinking he will raise. When it checks to him, however, he just goes ahead and checks behind.
In another instance, someone with a strong hand on the river might pretend to accidentally toss the wrong denomination chip into the pot, supposedly making his bet much higher than intended. Since he can't take it back, he acts like he is upset about betting too much, which then induces his opponent to call since they think they have him beat. Neither of those instances of angle shooting is illegal, but nobody is going to like someone who is perceived to have made those moves intentionally.
I find angle shooting interesting for a couple of reasons. First, it is, for the most part, unique to poker. In other sports, there isn't usually a gray area between legality and illegality. Either something is against the rules or it isn't. Now, sometimes players get away with breaking the rules, like when Hall of Fame pitcher Gaylord Perry would throw his famous spitball without getting caught, but getting away with it doesn't mean it isn't illegal.
The closest thing I can think of to angle shooting in other sports is in basketball when a defender flops in the hopes of drawing a charging foul. It's not against the rules to flop and it sometimes works, but most fans think it's a pretty bush league move. Similarly, you will often see a jump shooter throw his legs forward, towards his defender, and then fall backwards to make it look like he was fouled. Again, not against the rules, but fans don't like this sort of thing. But still, neither of these examples is a true angle shot. Basketball players can flop, dive, and dance a jig as much as they want – it's up to the refs to see a foul.
The other reason angle shooting is interesting to me is that it evokes such strong emotional responses from people. I would say the majority of poker players simply despise angle shooters. Many fans thought Perry's efforts to get away with a spitball were amusing. In fact, his Hall of Fame plaque alludes to this with the sentence, 'Playing mind games with hitters through an array of rituals on the mound was part of his arsenal.' But angle shoot in poker and you are generally considering a sleaze.
Why is that, though? I'm not saying that attitude is wrong; I can't stand angle shooters. But I find it odd that I, along with the majority of poker players, so strongly condemn players for trying to gain a competitive edge within the confines of the rules. It seems to me that the biggest reason for this is money. We play poker to win money and when someone pulls a shady stunt to try to take our money, we get upset. Most of us just want to play poker and have enough to think about over the course of a game without having to worry about someone angle shooting us.
Piggybacking on that point, a single hand, especially in a tournament, can make a big difference in the course of the game. If I get angle shot out of a good chunk of chips and therefore hurt my chances to advance in a tournament, I will not be a happy camper. In other sports, a single sketchy play, while not appreciated, isn't generally going to affect a player's financial well-being. Sure, it hurt a hitter's stats to strike out on a spitter, but it's just one at-bat of many in his career and shouldn't hurt him in contract negotiations.
Finally, in poker, we're on our own. If we fall victim to an angle shot, that's it. In team sports, we still have teammates who will have our backs. If I strike out on a spit ball, the next guy can pick me up by hitting one out of the park. My pitcher can silence the opposition's bats. My coach can get on the refs about the power forward flopping or my teammate can block the guy's next shot and turn it into a fast break dunk on the other end.
At the poker table, it's every man for himself. We were all taught to play nice and when someone doesn't, it hurts.
What's wrong? What's right? What's an angle? Got a question about how to behave at the poker table (or a comment about a column)? Email TRG at editor@cardplayer.com.
Props to Daniel Negreanu
Is Daniel Negreanu good for poker? Duh! Of course he is. And a recent tweet demonstrates how and why. Read on.
Dear The Rules Guy:
I am 100 percent sure you've read about the mini-controversy at the PokerStars Championship Barcelona main event: When facing a river bet against Luigi Shehadeh, Patrick Leonard engaged in some table-talk and finally said, 'You got it' – but didn't muck his hand right away. In fact, he didn't touch his cards while giving Shehadeh a Ben Lamb-like stare-down (minus the creepy, terror-inducing soul-read that only Lamb can deliver). Shehadeh retained his poker face and put his fingers on his card as if to whoosh them away, but then paused until Leonard did in fact muck. Shehadeh took the pot.
Daniel (@RealKidPoker) Negreanu subsequently mused on Twitter: 'Do you think this was shooting an angle by @plenopads during Barcelona main event?' Negreanu posted a poll. Leonard took offense. Twitter war ensues.
What do you think, TRG?
- President, American Society for the Prevention of Angle Shooting
Dear PASPAS:
Sometimes, TRG hears of a situation that he literally can't wait to write about – and this is one of them.
Why?
Because: The fact that there's controversy about this hand is frankly incredible: Of course Leonard was shooting an angle.
Because: This hand and situation demonstrate so perfectly how the spirit of the rules differs from the letter of the rules (and the spirit of the rules is crucial to poker).
And because this situation is a reminder to players to be observant and protect their own interests at all times.
Of course, it's perfectly fine for Leonard to engage in a bit of table talk before he says, 'You got it.' He's trying to get a read, and probably not even for use at that moment but for future hands. This is something good players do and bad players imitate. (A lot of table talk comes from poker poseurs who wouldn't know a physical or verbal tell if it slapped them in the face.)
But when Leonard makes no move to muck his cards after saying 'You got it,' he was shooting an angle, and he opened the door to a potentially nightmarish situation.
Leonard vehemently denied this was his intent in an Aug. 25 tweet to Negreanu: 'What way could it possibly be an angle? You're suggesting it's possible that I'm trying to get him to muck and I win uncontested'
Um, yes: exactly.
In fact, that's the first interpretation a disinterested viewer – say, someone like TRG – would take away from this scenario. And when you view the clip (easily found), note that it's almost the first thing one of the commentators says as the action unfolds.
One reason I like poker is its uniqueness compared to other sports and games. Its perfect mix of skill and luck combined with the unending variety of people you encounter at the tables make it a lot of fun. One unique aspect of the game that I am not as fond of, however, is angle shooting.
For those new to poker, angle shooting is doing something during a poker game that is not technically against the rules, but is nonetheless considered unethical. It is pushing the limits of the rules while not crossing the line of illegality to the point where the person doing it is generally perceived to be pretty scummy or disrespectful.
For example, a player might purposely act out of turn in order to influence the actions of his opponents. Perhaps a player wants to see the flop for free or cheap. He might, before it's his turn to act pre-flop, throw out a raise. He then takes it back after 'realizing' that it wasn't his turn yet, but now the players ahead of him might be scared to bet, thinking he will raise. When it checks to him, however, he just goes ahead and checks behind.
In another instance, someone with a strong hand on the river might pretend to accidentally toss the wrong denomination chip into the pot, supposedly making his bet much higher than intended. Since he can't take it back, he acts like he is upset about betting too much, which then induces his opponent to call since they think they have him beat. Neither of those instances of angle shooting is illegal, but nobody is going to like someone who is perceived to have made those moves intentionally.
I find angle shooting interesting for a couple of reasons. First, it is, for the most part, unique to poker. In other sports, there isn't usually a gray area between legality and illegality. Either something is against the rules or it isn't. Now, sometimes players get away with breaking the rules, like when Hall of Fame pitcher Gaylord Perry would throw his famous spitball without getting caught, but getting away with it doesn't mean it isn't illegal.
The closest thing I can think of to angle shooting in other sports is in basketball when a defender flops in the hopes of drawing a charging foul. It's not against the rules to flop and it sometimes works, but most fans think it's a pretty bush league move. Similarly, you will often see a jump shooter throw his legs forward, towards his defender, and then fall backwards to make it look like he was fouled. Again, not against the rules, but fans don't like this sort of thing. But still, neither of these examples is a true angle shot. Basketball players can flop, dive, and dance a jig as much as they want – it's up to the refs to see a foul.
The other reason angle shooting is interesting to me is that it evokes such strong emotional responses from people. I would say the majority of poker players simply despise angle shooters. Many fans thought Perry's efforts to get away with a spitball were amusing. In fact, his Hall of Fame plaque alludes to this with the sentence, 'Playing mind games with hitters through an array of rituals on the mound was part of his arsenal.' But angle shoot in poker and you are generally considering a sleaze.
Why is that, though? I'm not saying that attitude is wrong; I can't stand angle shooters. But I find it odd that I, along with the majority of poker players, so strongly condemn players for trying to gain a competitive edge within the confines of the rules. It seems to me that the biggest reason for this is money. We play poker to win money and when someone pulls a shady stunt to try to take our money, we get upset. Most of us just want to play poker and have enough to think about over the course of a game without having to worry about someone angle shooting us.
Piggybacking on that point, a single hand, especially in a tournament, can make a big difference in the course of the game. If I get angle shot out of a good chunk of chips and therefore hurt my chances to advance in a tournament, I will not be a happy camper. In other sports, a single sketchy play, while not appreciated, isn't generally going to affect a player's financial well-being. Sure, it hurt a hitter's stats to strike out on a spitter, but it's just one at-bat of many in his career and shouldn't hurt him in contract negotiations.
Finally, in poker, we're on our own. If we fall victim to an angle shot, that's it. In team sports, we still have teammates who will have our backs. If I strike out on a spit ball, the next guy can pick me up by hitting one out of the park. My pitcher can silence the opposition's bats. My coach can get on the refs about the power forward flopping or my teammate can block the guy's next shot and turn it into a fast break dunk on the other end.
At the poker table, it's every man for himself. We were all taught to play nice and when someone doesn't, it hurts.
What's wrong? What's right? What's an angle? Got a question about how to behave at the poker table (or a comment about a column)? Email TRG at editor@cardplayer.com.
Props to Daniel Negreanu
Is Daniel Negreanu good for poker? Duh! Of course he is. And a recent tweet demonstrates how and why. Read on.
Dear The Rules Guy:
I am 100 percent sure you've read about the mini-controversy at the PokerStars Championship Barcelona main event: When facing a river bet against Luigi Shehadeh, Patrick Leonard engaged in some table-talk and finally said, 'You got it' – but didn't muck his hand right away. In fact, he didn't touch his cards while giving Shehadeh a Ben Lamb-like stare-down (minus the creepy, terror-inducing soul-read that only Lamb can deliver). Shehadeh retained his poker face and put his fingers on his card as if to whoosh them away, but then paused until Leonard did in fact muck. Shehadeh took the pot.
Daniel (@RealKidPoker) Negreanu subsequently mused on Twitter: 'Do you think this was shooting an angle by @plenopads during Barcelona main event?' Negreanu posted a poll. Leonard took offense. Twitter war ensues.
What do you think, TRG?
- President, American Society for the Prevention of Angle Shooting
Dear PASPAS:
Sometimes, TRG hears of a situation that he literally can't wait to write about – and this is one of them.
Why?
Because: The fact that there's controversy about this hand is frankly incredible: Of course Leonard was shooting an angle.
Because: This hand and situation demonstrate so perfectly how the spirit of the rules differs from the letter of the rules (and the spirit of the rules is crucial to poker).
And because this situation is a reminder to players to be observant and protect their own interests at all times.
Of course, it's perfectly fine for Leonard to engage in a bit of table talk before he says, 'You got it.' He's trying to get a read, and probably not even for use at that moment but for future hands. This is something good players do and bad players imitate. (A lot of table talk comes from poker poseurs who wouldn't know a physical or verbal tell if it slapped them in the face.)
But when Leonard makes no move to muck his cards after saying 'You got it,' he was shooting an angle, and he opened the door to a potentially nightmarish situation.
Leonard vehemently denied this was his intent in an Aug. 25 tweet to Negreanu: 'What way could it possibly be an angle? You're suggesting it's possible that I'm trying to get him to muck and I win uncontested'
Um, yes: exactly.
In fact, that's the first interpretation a disinterested viewer – say, someone like TRG – would take away from this scenario. And when you view the clip (easily found), note that it's almost the first thing one of the commentators says as the action unfolds.
And it's the possibility of that scenario which is so troubling: Consider an alternate universe where Leonard says, 'You got it,' and Shehadeh nods, flicking his cards into the muck. As he starts to reach for the chips, Leonard turns his unmucked hand face up and claims the pot as the only player left with cards.
This is entirely possible. Note well: Leonard did not say, 'I fold' and he did not muck his hand – technically, his cards were live, so if Shehadeh mucks, Leonard could win.
As Matt (@SavagePoker) Savage pointed out in a tweet, citing Poker Tournament Directors Association rules: 'Official betting terms are simple, unmistakable, time-honored declarations like: bet, raise, call, fold, check, all-in, complete, and pot (pot-limit only).' If Leonard says 'fold,' the hand is over whether he has cards or not (because verbal declarations are binding). Similarly, if he mucks his hand (irretrievably), the hand is also over. Neither of these things happened, opening the door to a floor person's nightmare.
TRG is confident that most floor people and tournament directors would say 'that's a fold,' giving Shehadeh the pot and giving Leonard a warning and/or a penalty.
Remember the first rule of the Poker TDA: 'The best interest of the game and fairness are top priorities in decision-making. Bram haenraets poker. Unusual circumstances occasionally dictate that common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules.'
This is a tremendously useful rule in many situations, including this one. If Shehadeh mucks, it's because he believes the hand is over and he is unopposed – and most players would agree that's the common sense decision. Most rules buffs know that there are two cardinal, unassailable poker rules: 'One player per hand' and 'Cards speak.' Let's add a third: 'Common-sense decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over technical rules.'
Now, in Leonard's defense, it appears that he was not trying to work that particular angle. TRG believes his intention was to gather information and induce Shehadeh to show his cards. Trying to get a read is generally fine; this particular attempt seems misguided from the start. But he took it too far and opened himself up to allegations of angle shooting – bad for him and his reputation and bad for poker.
So what have we learned?
Angle Shoot Poker Term
First, we learned that Daniel Negreanu was 100 percent justified in offering up his question and his poll on Twitter. Note that more than 4,500 people voted, and an overwhelming margin of 76 percent agreed that 'this was shooting an angle.'
Angle Shoot Poker Terms
Second, a lesson to all players at every level: Your cards are your receipt. Relinquish them only when you've been pushed the pot and you are confident that your opponents have ceded their claims by mucking or saying, audibly and clearly, 'I fold.' It's hard to know what Shehadeh was thinking when his fingers go to his cards, but his instinct to slow down and ensure that Leonard was mucking seems spot on. Be careful out there.
And finally, we learned what Leonard should have done: If you're going to muck, just muck for god's sake. Say 'I fold' or even 'you win' or 'you got it' while simultaneously tossing your cards away to eliminate any ambiguity.
Patrick Leonard may believe himself to be completely innocent in this situation. But he acknowledged this was an issue when he said, 'I regret the choice of words, saying ‘you got it,' because ‘you got it' does kind of mean you're going to fold….It's just a word and a phrase you shouldn't use, and I won't use it in the future.'
TRG regrets that he qualified his acknowledgement by saying 'does kind of mean you're going to fold.' (What else could it possibly mean, anywhere, ever, when facing a river bet?) But if the perpetrator can learn a lesson here, so can we. ´
