live players, am I in the wrong?

Karozi615

Karozi615

Visionary
I played a hand last week where I had a passive/weak opponent fire the turn and then ship the river on me. I had nothing but second pair but I can generally recognize when a bad player is doing bad things. I took a minute to think about it and ended up correctly calling the all in. (opponent had QJ and turned a straight draw).
Anyhow, I was first to act and I check called the shove. When I called, I looked at my opponent but he didn't flip his cards over. He was waiting for me. After 20 seconds some idiot at the table who I had just successfully 3barreled with 6 high berated me about how I'm supposed to show first.
I was under the impression that the party that makes a larger bet shows first, regardless of position, while the calling party has the option of mucking if they are beat. I have understood this as I have seen it in countless tournaments on youtube.
So was I supposed to show first because I was first to act or was he supposed to show his terrible play first because he initiated the betting on the river and I only called?
 
Mr Sandbag

Mr Sandbag

Legend
The player who is called must show first. If he chooses not to show and mucks, the player that called can take the pot without showing his cards.
 
JusSumguy

JusSumguy

Chipmonger
Awards
2
Yeah, you called him. You can force him to show, if you want.

-
 
Jillychemung

Jillychemung

Stacks & Stacks
Awards
1
Just look at them and say 'I called you.' they usually get the hint.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
In most card rooms yes, the last aggressor (your opponent in this case) is required to show first.

As mentioned above, a gentle reminder is usually enough. Or you can be the bigger man and just turn your hand over if it's obvious that your opponent was caught bluffing - you're going to have to show your hand regardless.

That's sometimes what gets other players irritated, and it's possibly what happened in this case: if it's obvious that you've won then, even though technically the other player has to roll their hand over first, to an extent it's actually you that's holding up the game.

If he chooses not to show and mucks, the player that called can take the pot without showing his cards.

That's not technically correct - according to Robert's Rules Section 3 - General Poker Rules - The Showdown:

1. To win any part of a pot, a player must show all of his cards faceup on the table, whether they were used in the final hand played or not.​

Even if the other player mucks, you're required to show your cards to win the pot if the hand goes to showdown. Some places may let you get away with not showing them, but technically you're supposed to before being awarded the pot.
 
Mr Sandbag

Mr Sandbag

Legend
That's not technically correct - according to Robert's Rules Section 3 - General Poker Rules - The Showdown:

1. To win any part of a pot, a player must show all of his cards faceup on the table, whether they were used in the final hand played or not.​

Even if the other player mucks, you're required to show your cards to win the pot if the hand goes to showdown. Some places may let you get away with not showing them, but technically you're supposed to before being awarded the pot.

No. Calling a river bet gives the caller the right to see the bettor's hand. If the bettor mucks, the bettor forfeits his right to see the caller's hand. The game would be entirely imbalanced if a guy could just muck his hand at showdown when called and still have the right to see his opponent's hand.

The rule you mentioned only applies in situations like:
Player 1 bets an Ace high board on the river. Player 2 calls. Player 1 flips over King high (a bluff). Player 2 flips only an Ace. Player 2 is required to show both hole cards even if it is clear he has the winning hand.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
No. Calling a river bet gives the caller the right to see the bettor's hand. If the bettor mucks, the bettor forfeits his right to see the caller's hand. The game would be entirely imbalanced if a guy could just muck his hand at showdown when called and still have the right to see his opponent's hand.

The rule you mentioned only applies in situations like:
Player 1 bets an Ace high board on the river. Player 2 calls. Player 1 flips over King high (a bluff). Player 2 flips only an Ace. Player 2 is required to show both hole cards even if it is clear he has the winning hand.

Erm... no, the rule doesn't make that distinction. In any hand that goes to showdown, you're supposed to show your hand in order to claim any part of the pot. Among other things the rule is there to prevent cheating and collusion - in fact if the rule was uniformly enforced the way you say it should be above, then it'd give people massive potential to collude and angle shoot.

Some places may have a house rule that's different and, like I said, some places may let it slide from time to time too (I know my local casino does from time to time). But it doesn't change the basic rule.

The bit about the bettor forfeiting his right to see the caller's hand if he mucks is just plain wrong too. We're talking about a hand that went to showdown. Everybody who was dealt cards in the hand has the right to insist on seeing both the bettor's cards and the caller's cards if they want to.

From the same section of Robert's Rules:

5. Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that was eligible to participate in the showdown, 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.​
 
D

dasher

Enthusiast
No. Calling a river bet gives the caller the right to see the bettor's hand. If the bettor mucks, the bettor forfeits his right to see the caller's hand.

False. I got called on that in a casino. I made a river call and my opponent tossed his cards in the middle. I tried to muck mine, but the dealer informed me that I had to show a hand to claim the pot.
 
wanderingthehall

wanderingthehall

Rock Star
False. I got called on that in a casino. I made a river call and my opponent tossed his cards in the middle. I tried to muck mine, but the dealer informed me that I had to show a hand to claim the pot.

In this situation I believe you had the right to ask the dealer to show your opponents mucked cards. Usually even if the last aggressor has mucked his cards, they are identifiable and the dealer can flip them over.

I personally find it very annoying when players at the table don't want to show their cards. Especially when there are several players and clearly none of them have a strong hand. I will usually flip my cards up right away just to move things along. Man up and flip your cards over, who cares how bad it was, find a way to use that to your advantage later.

Another advantage of always flipping your cards up is that you may have misread your hand or your opponent may have misread his. This way you aren't accidentally mucking the best hand. I had a player at the opposite end of the table show his two cards and say he had a straight and I folded my top pair. It turns out he misread the board and only had 4 cards to the straight. I was kicking myself over it, but figure it was my fault for believing what the other player said. The dealer felt differently and called the manager over. The dealer was able to identify my cards in the muck and I was awarded the pot because whether it was an accident or not, they considered the other players actions misleading and potentially a form of cheating.
 
D

dasher

Enthusiast
wanderingthehall: I'm glad to hear the dealer kept the game honest.

I know I have the right to ask to see folded cards, but the only time I saw someone do that, it caused a game delay, a bit of an argument and nobody was happy about it.

But after I call the final bet, I do wait on the last better to show before turning my cards over. Otherwise, I don't get to see what he was betting with unless I'm willing to disrupt the game to do it.
 
dj11

dj11

Legend
Awards
9
Other players get pissed only because the **** fight is wasting precious time......:icon_quee:mad:
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
But after I call the final bet, I do wait on the last better to show before turning my cards over. Otherwise, I don't get to see what he was betting with unless I'm willing to disrupt the game to do it.

But by stubbornly insisting on waiting for them to turn their cards over, even when it seems pretty obvious that you've just caught them bluffing and you've won you're... disrupting the game. DUCY?
 
S3mper

S3mper

Moderating W/ Despotism
Moderator
Awards
2
False. I got called on that in a casino. I made a river call and my opponent tossed his cards in the middle. I tried to muck mine, but the dealer informed me that I had to show a hand to claim the pot.

I think that is stupid and makes no sense.. What if you refuse is the dealer just going to split the pot between you guys lol

If a player who is at show down throws their card into the muck the pot should be yours regardless if you showed or not. Why should your opponent get information without showing information when he is the last aggressor.
 
Grossberger

Grossberger

Cardschat Elite
In most card rooms yes, the last aggressor (your opponent in this case) is required to show first.

As mentioned above, a gentle reminder is usually enough. Or you can be the bigger man and just turn your hand over if it's obvious that your opponent was caught bluffing - you're going to have to show your hand regardless.

That's sometimes what gets other players irritated, and it's possibly what happened in this case: if it's obvious that you've won then, even though technically the other player has to roll their hand over first, to an extent it's actually you that's holding up the game.



That's not technically correct - according to Robert's Rules Section 3 - General Poker Rules - The Showdown:

1. To win any part of a pot, a player must show all of his cards faceup on the table, whether they were used in the final hand played or not.​

Even if the other player mucks, you're required to show your cards to win the pot if the hand goes to showdown. Some places may let you get away with not showing them, but technically you're supposed to before being awarded the pot.

Some house rules hand must be shown but TDA rules do not. The WPT has had this for a while The wsop I believe allowing this now. I know Jack Effel has always said player must show to win pot, but Matt Savage has said otherwise, if a player mucks the last person with a live hand wins the pot without having to show. Now this does not apply if you declare a hand but not turn over and your opponent mucks.

Here is TDA rule for not having to show cards if opponent mucks:

Matt Savage ‏@SavagePoker 12m
RT @Grossberger23: What TDA rule says if player mucks last player does not have to show?<~#18

18: Asking to See a Hand
Players not still in possession of their cards at showdown, or who have mucked face down
without tabling their cards, lose any rights or privileges they may have to ask to see any hand.


Heres the TDA rules for showdown:

16: Showdown Order
In a non all-in showdown, if cards are not spontaneously tabled, the TD may enforce an order
of show. The last aggressive player on the final betting round (final street) must table first. If
there was no bet on the final street, then the player who would be first to act in a betting round
must table first (i.e. first seat left of the button in flop games, high hand showing in stud, low
hand showing in razz, etc.). Except where house policy requires a hand to be tabled during the
order of show, a player may elect to muck his hand face down.

I encourage everyone playing live poker to follow @savagepoker (Matt Savage) on twitter and if you have a question about a rule he answers them. I will tell you the most common question he gets is the single chip call.

Cleveland horseshoe I will tell you does not make player show their cards if opponent mucks first.
 
Last edited:
H

hffjd2000

Legend
The last aggressive player on the river will have to show first. If he bets and you call, the one who bets must show first. If he bets and you raise and he calls, you must be the first to show. If everyone checks, the first to act must be the first to show.
 
A

aznman08

Rock Star
I think that is stupid and makes no sense.. What if you refuse is the dealer just going to split the pot between you guys lol

If a player who is at show down throws their card into the muck the pot should be yours regardless if you showed or not. Why should your opponent get information without showing information when he is the last aggressor.

Most house rules require two cards to claim a pot at showdown regardless of bettor/caller.

Unless we're taking about a tournament, generally try to apply Robert's Rules of Poker over TDA as necessary. Something to remember is if you call villian's river bet and ask to see the hand, it's considered live.

on a side note, Kazorki this sounds like something that would happen at foxwoods
 
wanderingthehall

wanderingthehall

Rock Star
wanderingthehall: I'm glad to hear the dealer kept the game honest.

I know I have the right to ask to see folded cards, but the only time I saw someone do that, it caused a game delay, a bit of an argument and nobody was happy about it.

But after I call the final bet, I do wait on the last better to show before turning my cards over. Otherwise, I don't get to see what he was betting with unless I'm willing to disrupt the game to do it.

I was happy with the decision since it was a decent sized pot, but the rest of the table wasn't because he was a reg in a morning 3/6 game and I'm just the random girl that showed up to play with all the old farts. The poker room manager actually wound up giving him the equivalent of what he put in the pot from the cage, but some of the other regs still weren't happy.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Some house rules hand must be shown but TDA rules do not. The WPT has had this for a while The WSOP I believe allowing this now. I know Jack Effel has always said player must show to win pot, but Matt Savage has said otherwise, if a player mucks the last person with a live hand wins the pot without having to show. Now this does not apply if you declare a hand but not turn over and your opponent mucks...

Interesting. Here's the complete relevant sections from the TDA rules:

13: Tabling Cards & Killing Winning Hand
A: At showdown, a player should put all cards on the table so the dealer and players can read the hand clearly . “All cards” means both hole cards in holdem, all 4 hole cards in Omaha, all 7 cards in 7-stud, etc. Dealers cannot kill a hand that was tabled and obviously the winning hand.
B: If a player does not fully table his cards, then mucks thinking he has won, he does so at his own risk. If the cards are not 100% identifiable and the TD rules that the hand could not clearly be read, the player has no claim to the pot. The TDs decision on whether a hand was sufficiently tabled is final.

14: Live Cards at Showdown
A: If the house does not have a mucking line or forward motion rule at showdown, pushing non-tabled cards forward face down does not automatically kill them; a player may change his mind and table his cards if they remain 100% identifiable. However, the cards are at risk of being killed by the dealer when he pushes them into the muckpile.
B: If a mucking line or forward motion rule is in effect at showdown, house standards apply.

15: Face Up for All-ins.
All cards will be tabled without delay once a player is all-in and all betting action by all other players in the hand is complete. See Illustration Addendum.

16: Showdown Order.
In a non all-in showdown, if cards are not spontaneously tabled, the TD may enforce an order of show. The last aggressive player on the final betting round (final street) must table first. If there was no bet on the final street, then the player who would be first to act in a betting round must table first (i.e. first seat left of the button in flop games, high hand showing in stud, low hand showing in razz, etc.). Except where house policy requires a hand to be tabled during the order of show, a player may elect to muck his hand face down.

17: Playing the Board at Showdown
When playing the board a player must table all hole cards in order to get part of the pot.

18: Asking to See a Hand
Players not still in possession of their cards at showdown, or who have mucked face down without tabling their cards, lose any rights or privileges they may have to ask to see any hand.​

Here's the thing though -this is the equivalent rule from the 2013 WSOP rules (emphasis added):

70 . Showdown: At the end of the last round of betting, the participant who made the last aggressive betting action in that betting round (last person to bet or raise on the final round of betting) must show first. If there was no bet in the last round, the participant to the left of the button shows first, and so on in a clockwise direction. In stud games, the participant with the high board must show first. In razz, the lowest board shows first. At showdown, any participant at the table may request to see a folded hand from any participant who has called all bets on the last round of betting. The winning hand must be shown to claim the pot. If a participant refuses to show their hand and intentionally mucks his or her hand, the participant in violation will receive a penalty, in accordance with Rules 39, 102 and 103.​

Note that the highlighted section varies TDA rule 16, and directly contradicts TDA rule 18.

It's worth remembering that the TDA rules only apply to tournaments where the house adopts them in full. The WSOP does not adopt the TDA rules - it has its own full set of rules (some of which are based on / similar to the TDA rules).

Personally I don't like the TDA rules on this issue: Rule 18 in particular leaves a hole wide open for angle shooting and collusion. That aside though, I think the important thing to take away is this:

Unless you're absolutely sure that the house rules where you're playing say otherwise, if a pot goes to showdown assume that you'll need to show all your cards in order to win any chips, and that any player who was dealt in can ask to see the hand of any player involved in the showdown.
 
LeanAndMean

LeanAndMean

Legend
Awards
4
Seems the dealer was derelict in his duty to let the stand off continue that long. He should have tapped the table in the bettors direction. Making him act first.
 
JOEBOB69

JOEBOB69

Cardschat Elite
No. Calling a river bet gives the caller the right to see the bettor's hand. If the bettor mucks, the bettor forfeits his right to see the caller's hand. The game would be entirely imbalanced if a guy could just muck his hand at showdown when called and still have the right to see his opponent's hand.
This is what happens on every cash table i've played in the US. An i have played in a a lot of them.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
This is what happens on every cash table i've played in the US. An i have played in a a lot of them.

Here's the thing though: do you know if that was happening because it was the rule in those card rooms, or because the dealer just let it happen regardless of the rules?

A lot of dealers will let the rules slide because it's quicker and easier to just award the pot rather than telling the remaining player they have to show their hand and then reading the tabled cards. I know I see that happen regularly in my local card room.

That doesn't mean they're doing it because it's the rule though - if someone chirps up and says they want to see the cards, chances are in a lot of those card rooms you'll find the dealer reverts back to formal mode and makes the player show their hand.
 
Organize a Home Poker Game
Top