Samuel Touil takes brutal angle shot at Matt Glantz at $10k Dealers Choice

[Dan Druff]

https://www.pokernews.com/tours/wsop...ips.165414.htm

The article is a bit inaccurate, but Matt Glantz clarified for me, so read the cliffs below.

Cliffs: In a NL hand, Touil raised to 4200, Matt Glantz 3 bet to 11k, and Touil grabbed all of his remaining chips (54k), closed fisted in 2 hands, and started moving them forward toward the bet sitting in front of him. Glantz said that he "did a full motion across his cards, and arms fully extended in a circular motion", out front. His fists touched the felt, but the chips did not.

Matt jumped the gun a bit and believed that was Touil going all in, said out loud, "I call", and tabled his AK.

Turned out Touil only had AJ, saw he was likely going to lose, and then said he never actually went all-in.

A ruling was requested from the floor, and surprisingly they ruled on Touil's favor, because apparently the WSOP rule states that the chips aren't considered bet unless they leave your hand!

Glantz protested, but everything stood. They got the chips in anyway on the flop, and Touil rivered Glantz to double up.


Just in case you think Touil perhaps did this accidentally, read this report about him from Phil Galfond in 2016, where Phil called him out as both a scammer and routine angle-shooter.

Galfond did report a few months ago that Touil did eventually pay him back, after being called out.

[Dan Druff]

Regardless of the rules, tournament directors have the ability to, at their discretion, disqualify players or make rulings at their own interpretation as to what's best for the game.

Clearly Touil was angling here, and it should have been forced as an all-in.

Furthermore, he should have been warned that he would be disqualified and banned from the WSOP if any further angle shots were reported against him.

Also, the ruling that he had to "just call" the 11k (and not go all-in) is odd. Because if they ruled it wasn't an all-in, then he should have had the option to either fold for just the 4200, or take another action of his choice. Sounds like the "had to call, but not all-in" ruling was just a weird middle ground which was incorrect. But honestly it should have been ruled an all-in.

[Dan Druff]

Here is a pic of Sam Touil:

[Hockey Guy]

Hopefully you have permission to post that picture. I'd hate to see any frivolous copyright infringement lawsuits happening.

[Erin Micunt]

How did the guy go all in on the flop if he was behind? Makes no sense, you said that glantz got rivered. Never mind clicked link and read more detail.

[BeerAndPoker]