Originally Posted by Mooby72
I'm certainly not complaining that he didn't turn his cards over in this scenario as if he did, I wouldn't have won, but I am still unclear on the cash game ruling of having, or not having to turn your cards over... In my experience, the last agressor ALWAYS has to show his hand if requested by the other player. I used to work as a dealer in a poker club and I have never heard of the rule that protects his hand in a cash game. Sounds like a very odd rule to me and it surely defeats the purpose of 'paying for information'. I'm not even really talking about my original post any more, but is this definately a rule?
In most cash games it's not so much a rule as a convention. In a cash game the other player can request that any hand they've paid to see be shown but there's kind of a convention that people won't exercise that right in a lot of cases, with the expectation that at some point in the future they'll be allowed to muck a hand they don't want to show as well.
The actual rule is just that a player wanting to claim any part of the pot has to show all their cards and that any hand that goes to showdown has to be shown on request: http://www.homepokertourney.com/robe...m#THE_SHOWDOWN
Tournaments force you to turn the hands over to avoid problems with collusion and chip dumping. Those issues (chip dumping in particular) aren't such a big issue in cash games which is why the rule is somewhat relaxed in its application.