Rule Question (1 Viewer)

[Pinball]

Yesterday the following happened:

On the river player A bets and after some tanking player B calls. A mucked his cards and player B takes the pot. Player A insistented that B shows his cards but B refused.

A: No, showdown can be won without showing

B: You have mucked, I won without showing any cards

Who is right?

 

[Mr Tree]

I may be wrong but once A mucked he lost all right to demand B show his cards IMO

 

[spikeithard]

Treeman is right I believe. 'A' should not have mucked

 

[Mr Tree]

My thought is this. The pot has to go to somebody. Once you muck your cards you have relinquished any right to it. The pot belongs to the other guy so you have no leverage to force him to show.

 

[pokerplayingpisces]

I may be wrong but once A mucked he lost all right to demand B show his cards IMO

That's the way I feel, too. If A wanted to see B's cards, he should of flipped his up first ( as per equitte), so B would have to show his hand to claim the pot. Once you toss your hand in the middle, I think you've lost that right.

 

[ChaosRock]

Player B has to show his cards to win the pot. Outside of a fold when facing action, the winner always has to show his cards. Player A was't facing any action, action was complete once Player B calls. Now, to the matter of Player A having to show his cards, it's a bit of a gray area. By rule, Player B has the right to see Player's A cards, he paid for it. However, it is an unspoken rule that when the bettor is called on a bluff and mucks, it is okay to let it go... There's video on YouTube in which JRB and Helmuth argue about this very issue, the whole table siding with Helmuth who was caught bluffing and mucked his hand... Yes, JRB can insist on seeing the mucker's hand but it's a little of a DB's move...

 

[Mental Nomad]

It's douchey, but the mucker is correct - he both has the right to ask for the cards to be shown (as does anyone else who was dealt in), and in a called pot, at least one hand must be shown to claim the pot.

You can only claim a pot with no show if uncalled... Even if you were the caller, it's called, someone has to show to win.

 

[jbutler]

Player B has to show his cards to win the pot. Outside of a fold when facing action, the winner always has to show his cards. Player A was't facing any action, action was complete once Player B calls. Now, to the matter of Player A having to show his cards, it's a bit of a gray area. By rule, Player B has the right to see Player's A cards, he paid for it. However, it is an unspoken rule that when the bettor is called on a bluff and mucks, it is okay to let it go... There's video on YouTube in which JRB and Helmuth argue about this very issue, the whole table siding with Helmuth who was caught bluffing and mucked his hand... Yes, JRB can insist on seeing the mucker's hand but it's a little of a DB's move...

It's douchey, but the mucker is correct - he both has the right to ask for the cards to be shown (as does anyone else who was dealt in), and in a called pot, at least one hand must be shown to claim the pot.

You can only claim a pot with no show if uncalled... Even if you were the caller, it's called, someone has to show to win.

this is the rule on the east coast rooms and in most vegas rooms, but is not the rule in california or in many tribal casinos. in those rooms, the last one with a hand does not have to table his hand to win. all the home games i play in use the east coast/vegas rule, however.

 

[grandgnu]

According to Roberts Rules of Poker:

THE SHOWDOWN

1. A player must show all cards in the hand face-up on the table to win any part of the pot.

2. Cards speak (cards read for themselves). The dealer assists in reading hands, but players are responsible for holding onto their cards until the winner is declared. Although verbal declarations as to the contents of a hand are not binding, deliberately miscalling a hand with the intent of causing another player to discard a winning hand is unethical and may result in forfeiture of the pot. (For more information on miscalling a hand see “Section 11 - Lowball,” Rule 15 and Rule 16.)

3. Any player, dealer, or floorperson who sees an incorrect amount of chips put into the pot, or an error about to be made in awarding a pot, has an ethical obligation to point out the error. Please help us keep mistakes of this nature to a minimum.

4. All losing hands will be killed by the dealer before a pot is awarded.

5. Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that has been called, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

6. If you show cards to an active player during a deal, any player at the table has the right to see those exposed cards. Cards shown during or after a deal to a player not in the pot should be shown to all players when the deal is finished.

7. If everyone checks (or is all-in) on the final betting round, the player who acted first is the first to show the hand. If there is wagering on the final betting round, the last player to take aggressive action by a bet or raise is the first to show the hand. In order to speed up the game, a player holding a probable winner is encouraged to show the hand without delay. If there is a side pot, players involved in the side pot should show their hands before anyone who is all-in for only the main pot.

 

[MikesDad]

this is the rule on the east coast rooms and in most vegas rooms, but is not the rule in california or in many tribal casinos. in those rooms, the last one with a hand does not have to table his hand to win. all the home games i play in use the east coast/vegas rule, however.

This ^^ -- the rule varies among the many casinos. In our home games, if A mucks, B does not have to show.
Rule 5 that grandgnu quoted is to prevent collusion and while technically applicable here, it would be a douchy application of the rule

 

[Zippity]

LoL.

I clearly need to read the post more clearly.

Agree with Mr. Tree on this one. That's the way I've always played it. If you muck your hand and you're in first position, then you have relinquished the right to have your opponent show his hand.

Obviously that's not in agreement with Robert's Rules of Poker.

 

[10centguitar]

Player A is a scumbag and should be ridiculed accordingly. Bluff at a pot, get called, muck, then whine. What a tool

 

[Bloody Marvelous]

Since player A mucked his hand, there is no showdown. Just like if you fold when facing a bet, your hand is dead and the only player left in the hand wins the pot.

Player B can show his cards if he wants to but is under no obligation.
Player A can ask Player B to show his cards, but again, B is under no obligation to do so.
Player A can ask the dealer to turn over Player B's cards, and the dealer will have to oblige, but not until Player A's cards have been pulled into the muck and the pot has been awarded to Player B. This is however a douchebag move since you're accusing Player B of foul play. If the hand is fouled, the action will still stand.

On the other hand if you have a Show'em chip, that's a different story all together...

In the PH vs JRB video, Phil also agrees that Jean Robert is not obligated to show by the definition of the rules, but it is considered good poker etiquette to turn the winning hand face up.

 

[10centguitar]

Tournament vs cash folks

 

[CdnBeerLover]

Since player A mucked his hand, there is no showdown.

I respectfully disagree. To my mind, B called A's bet, and as soon as that call occured, they are at showdown. You can't muck, as the action has closed. Both have to show, with A showing first as they were the last aggressor.

That said, B paid to see A's cards, and A should have shown first as A was the aggressor. To not show and then insist that B has to show is ridiculous.

Note that we mostly play tournaments, so I'm looking at it from a tournament perspective. If I was host/TD, my ruling would be to flip both hands over and let the cards speak. If A's were irretrievable, then B's would be flipped up and they win. A would get a warning...if you don't want to show your hand at showdown, fold before the river.

 

[Leonard]

1) This is definitely a showdown. A bet and a call on the river makes it so.
2) Showing both hands at a showdown is not required. If one player mucks his hand voluntarily at any time the mucked hand is dead. With only one live hand remaining, it is rewarded the pot.
3) At any showdown, any player who was dealt cards in the hand can request that any hand involved in the showdown be revealed. If you follow RRoP, this request must be honored. If the player who is winning the pot makes the request, the hand to be revealed is live and can win the pot. If any other player makes the request, the hand is dead and cannot win the pot. The dealer in a casino will usually touch the hand to the muck before exposing it to signify that it is dead. As above, this rule is rarely applied as it is in place to prevent cheating. Many casinos will warn the requesting player before exposing the cards and tell him that he cannot make repeated requests to see mucked cards. Whether or not to allow this rule in a home game is up to the house. If I were to be asked to rule at one of my games, I would either allow it but tell the player that he cannot repeat the request or, more likely, ask if he was looking for information or making an accusation of collusion. If the reply is the former, I would deny the request.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

Player A seems like a douchebag. Jam.

 

[BGinGA]

At showdown, the winning hand must show to be awarded the pot. Makes no difference if the other player attempted to fold (which technically, he can't do - since with a bet and call, the hand is at showdown with no further player action). Only a dealer can muck a hand, not a player.

In the OP's 'showdown' situation, the dealer should instruct player B to show the winning hand prior to awarding the pot.

 

[ChaosRock]

At showdown, the winning hand must show to be awarded the pot. Makes no difference if the other player attempted to fold (which technically, he can't do - since with a bet and call, the hand is at showdown with no further player action). Only a dealer can muck a hand, not a player.

In the OP's 'showdown' situation, the dealer should instruct player B to show the winning hand prior to awarding the pot.

That's been the case in all casinos and home games I played on, including the Commerce and Bicycle in L.A. (have not played in any other casino in California though, so those two might be the only ones following East Coast/Vegas and RRP rules)

 

[Zippity]

I go by home rules:

He who hosts the game, hosts the rules.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Like BGinGA said, the player does not muck - the player folds, the dealer mucks the hand.

In most home games, this situation becomes a little more difficult, as a passing deal and amateur dealers are less likely to protect the muck. In the OP, Player A has the right to see, but also must show his cards first (as the aggressor). This is why I try to enforce all rules, even rules as simple (and often ignored) as proper showdown order.

As a TD, I would rule the mucked hand dead (if it was in fact mucked) the same way I would rule a hand accidentally mucked by the dealer. I would explain the proper showdown order to Player A. Player B collects the pot without a showdown. This does 2 things (both good for the game).

1. Player A impinged upon the rule (not following proper showdown order), not B. A should not be rewarded with extra information.
2. If B shows, A may realize they had a winning hand after the fact. This would then lead to trying to retrieve mucked cards and another argument as to whether A's hand was live or dead.

On a related note:
This question came up at my table during the WSOP when the exact situation occurred. Player A demanded to see. Player B refused. The dealer said B must show to collect the pot. B asked "What happens if I muck?" Dealer said "I'll call the floor". Given the cluster that was the Colossus, this delayed the game while waiting for a floor-person, until B finally just decided to show.

 

[12thMan]

Yesterday the following happened:

On the river player A bets and after some tanking player B calls. A mucked his cards and player B takes the pot. Player A insistented that B shows his cards but B refused.

A: No, showdown can be won without showing

B: You have mucked, I won without showing any cards

Who is right?

--In all cash games I have ever played, if one player folds while heads up, at any time, be it for a bet on the flop or not wanting to show his called bluff, the other player is pushed the pot and has absolutely no obligation to show the hand they bet or called with.

--In all tournaments I have ever played in for a hand to win a called/all in pot at showdown the winning hand must be shown.

Are you playing cash or tournament?

I may be wrong but once A mucked he lost all right to demand B show his cards IMO

Yep, if playing cash. But in a tournament the dealer would announce "Call. Both hands please." and not push any pot until she sees a winning hand. If one player shows a hand and the other player decides to fold the pot is pushed to the exposed winning hand. The hand that was folded can be asked to be turned over, but that gets into the whole "douchey" (i hate that word) side of things.

Player B has to show his cards to win the pot. Outside of a fold when facing action, the winner always has to show his cards****************There's video on YouTube in which JRB and Helmuth argue about this very issue, the whole table siding with Helmuth who was caught bluffing and mucked his hand... Yes, JRB can insist on seeing the mucker's hand but it's a little of a DB's move...

Not if playing cash, if playing a tournament by RRoP player B would have to show.



The thing about the Helmuth/Belande video is that Helmuth does NOT fold his hand (for the dealer to muck), he holds onto it and expects JRB to show his hand so he can then fold his face down. This is why, while I understand what is being said about the "usual" way and "etiquette" and agree that's how it is usually done, I don't think it's the right thinking on it being bad etiqute. I believe, in reference to the video above, that PH should be the one looked at as using bad etiquette. He holds onto his cards and says "nope, you got it. nice call." and waits for JRB to table his winning hand, be it an Ace for trips, a 9 for a mid pair, or a hand that is air but better than his own air, he wants , and expects per etiquette, that JRB show his hand to win. When he does show his hand, and it is better than his, he will fold. Now JRB has paid to see Helmuths hand, but not only does he not get to see Phil's cards he is forced, by etiquette or phil holding onto his cards and still being live, to show his own hand. He pays for information, doesn't get what he paid for, and has to show his own cards?? I've always thought that was wrong.

Also, one other reason I believe JRB isn't wrong in his thinking is something that is said in the video itself by Sheiky. He says to JRBsomething to the effect of "let me tell you how stupid you are, why would you want Phil to turn his hand up. What if he has misread his hand and has the winning cards, you would lose the pot.", to which JRB responds "i don't want to see his hand, I want his hand to hit the muck so I can throw away mine.", in other words so JRB himself doesn't have to show what he called with. So, let me get this straight, the "etiquette" in this situation dictates that PH's bet is called, and he is able to say "nice call, you got it.", hold onto his cards, and then after seeing what JRB is calling with throw his cards away for no one to see? Ok, so JRB had 9's, but lets say he had an even worse holding than PH. Somehow JRB is on god-mode level 4 thinking and knows that PH is betting with cards that are bad enough that a call alone signifies to PH that he is beat so he calls with worse for PH to throw away his cards. He makes the hero of hero calls, but etiquette dictates he would have to show his "bluff call" first? Really? Because as soon as JRB tables the hand that he called with, and it's worse than PH's holding, Phil would excitedly exclaim "oh wow, I do got you" and turn his hand over to win the pot... That has never sat right with me. I feel if you want a shot at winning the pot turn your hand over, otherwise you are being the jerk if you wait to see if your called bluff is really the worst hand.

Do you think there is any possibility in any universe that PH would, after seeing JRB's hand and realizing his hand that he thought was a busted bluff was actually the best hand, then folds and says "I had the best hand, but it would be bad etiquette to say "you got it" and then win the pot..."??? No way. To win the pot show your hand, and if you are called that means turning it over first. If you don't want to do that then fold and have zero rights to the pot and zero expectations of seeing the hand that called you.

(that's a lot of etiquette, sorry. )

this is the rule on the east coast rooms and in most vegas rooms, but is not the rule in california or in many tribal casinos. in those rooms, the last one with a hand does not have to table his hand to win. all the home games i play in use the east coast/vegas rule, however.

For what it's worth, my opinion and way I've seen it done is home games and tribal rooms up here in Washington. I have played plenty of poker outside of WA, but not enough to know how they handled a situation like this. Either I never saw it happen or CRS. I'm going with CRS.

At showdown, the winning hand must show to be awarded the pot. Makes no difference if the other player attempted to fold (which technically, he can't do - since with a bet and call, the hand is at showdown with no further player action). Only a dealer can muck a hand, not a player.

In the OP's 'showdown' situation, the dealer should instruct player B to show the winning hand prior to awarding the pot.

Again, I think this might come down to missing information in the OP. If they are playing cash I disagree with you, if they are playing tournament I think you are correct.

 

[BGinGA]

Again, I think this might come down to missing information in the OP. If they are playing cash I disagree with you...

You aren't disagreeing with me; you are disagreeing with written poker rules (RROP) and those used for cash games in most casinos across the US. Pots at showdown are awarded to the best hand shown.

 

[12thMan]

You aren't disagreeing with me; you are disagreeing with written poker rules (RROP) and those used for cash games in most casinos across the US. Pots at showdown are awarded to the best hand shown.

No, I'm disagreeing with you because I know for a fact yo are wrong about theway it is done up here in the games I play. RRoP are applied by TD's to tournaments, if the cash game side of things in the same room uses RRoP to make rulings fine, but that's not the way it is always done. Tell you what, come and play with me up here, you can make a bet on the river which I will call, you can then throw away your hand. The dealer will then push me the pot. If anything else happens I will double the pot and give it to you.

So yeah, I am disagreeing with your assumption that every room plays the way your room does, or the rooms in Vegas, or where ever. You sound like a blast to have at parties though.

 

[BGinGA]

No, I'm disagreeing with you because I know for a fact yo are wrong about theway it is done up here in the games I play. RRoP are applied by TD's to tournaments, if the cash game side of things in the same room uses RRoP to make rulings fine, but that's not the way it is always done. Tell you what, come and play with me up here, you can make a bet on the river which I will call, you can then throw away your hand. The dealer will then push me the pot. If anything else happens I will double the pot and give it to you.

So yeah, I am disagreeing with your assumption that every room plays the way your room does, or the rooms in Vegas, or where ever. You sound like a blast to have at parties though.

I'm making no such assumption about the rules used by 'every' room. But the vast majority do follow RROP, which has sections for both cash and tournament games. If you've found one of the few that don't, then goody for you.... but don't make the error of assuming that it is the norm everywhere else. It isn't.

 

[jbutler]

So the obvious question for everyone so certain that the hand must be shown for the player to win: what happens to the pot when player A's hand is mucked and then, afterward, player B's hand is mucked?

 

[12thMan]

I'm making no such assumption about the rules used by 'every' room. But the vast majority do follow RROP, which has sections for both cash and tournament games. If you've found one of the few that don't, then goody for you.... but don't make the error of assuming that it is the norm everywhere else. It isn't.

I will happily agree with you and admit I am wrong in my way of thinking if you could please:

1. Show me the cash game section of RRoP that say in a cash game a hand must be shown to win the pot (i can look this one up, you don't really need to do this)

2. Show me how you know "the vast majority" (what would we call a vast majority, 75% of the rooms in the US? 80%? 90%?) would be applying that rule to their cash games?

If I'm wrong I'm wrong, I have no problem admitting that (we all are at sometimes), but I know how it is played here, and it's not what you are saying. I feel it's conjecture on your part to say the vast majority of card rooms would play it the way you are describing in cash games, because I for one know of many rooms that DON'T do it that way.

Also, no where did I assume that how my rooms do it is the norm, the exact opposite actually. My post has a response to jbutler's post about where he knows the rule exists, I say very plainly that what I am describing fits his post about tribal rooms. You are the one assuming anything about "the vast majority". (by the way, if tribal rooms are one that do it the way I am describing and don't have to have a hand tabled to win, then that could really open up a question about the vast majority doing it any one way. There are a LOT of tribal rooms in this country, right??)

 

[BGinGA]

So the obvious question for everyone so certain that the hand must be shown for the player to win: what happens to the pot when player A's hand is mucked and then, afterward, player B's hand is mucked?

The dealer won't muck player A's hand, and if he does, he certainly won't muck player B's hand before it's shown to award the pot. Players don't muck (they can only fold or surrender their hands). Only dealers can kill/muck hands.

 

[jbutler]

The dealer won't muck player A's hand, and if he does, he certainly won't muck player B's hand before it's shown to award the pot. Players don't muck (they can only fold or surrender their hands). Only dealers can kill/muck hands.

So what happens if the dealer does muck both hands? If you're relying on dealer competency, you have not spent much time in commercial card rooms.

 

[10centguitar]

--In all cash games I have ever played, if one player folds while heads up, at any time, be it for a bet on the flop or not wanting to show his called bluff, the other player is pushed the pot and has absolutely no obligation to show the hand they bet or called with.

--In all tournaments I have ever played in for a hand to win a called/all in pot at showdown the winning hand must be shown.[/QU


Exactly. These guys are all tourney people. Although certain properties vary, cash rules differently than tournaments.

At all casino cash games ive been to, if a player mucks from a failed bluff, the dealer pushes you the pot whether you show or not. If the rules stated otherwise, only a douche of a dealer would enforce it if no one asked to see the hand. Great way for them to not get toked