Ruling/Etiquette question

Hectorjelly

Playing a live tournament a few days ago, twice there was a showdown with very little action. The first time I raised preflop, checked flop, called a bet on the turn and the river went check check. The sb declared rivered top pair and I through my cards away. He then asked the dealer to show my cards. Then a few hands later I called a small bet on the river in a tiny pot by someone else, there was 4 hearts on the board and he (slowly) showed me the ace of hearts. I again threw my cards away and the same guy asked to see my cards again.

I asked him was he going to do this every time, and he said because it was a tournament every time there was a showdown both sets of cards should be shown. Is this right? I thought that just applied when a player was all in. I know that whenever there is a showdown in any game, a player can ask to see both cards ,as a rule that was implemented to stop collusion, but I always thought it was extremely rude to do so as a matter of course. Also if I know hes going to do it I can just throw my cards in the muck cant I?

5starpool

As you know, technically he can ask, but he is being a dick, probably without realising that he is. I doubt this play plays live enough to know about all the etiquette involved. Definitely just throw your cards INTO the muck if you want to prevent this from happening. Did you insist on waiting to see his cards first though? If so that may have annoyed him enough to want to be petty back to you. I don't like it in a game when each is waiting for the other to show first. Just show or declare FFS.

Macspower

Unfortunately I've also seen this happen. I called a bet on the river. He showed me the nuts and I threw away my cards but not into the muck. He asked for my cards to be turned over and got a ruling in which the TD told him that he could request it but it's considered very bad etiquette. He still insisted and another player told him he was rude and ignorant.

have a good aim for the muck....

Mac.

Lazare

This is interesting, I had this discussion with Tom (Dev) on another thread, he said it's bad etiquette to muck a losing hand.

If you are called, you expose your hand and your opponent declares you the winner and goes to muck his cards, you are still entitled to see his cards. This started as a courtesy that used to be extended to other players to avoid humiliating them. Its something that is now (incorrectly) being considered a right. Its also abused by people who wait for you to turn over your hand ALL THE TIME and then decide to muck or show-and-claim. This, imho, is abusing a courtesy in order to deny an opponent information.

I had always assumed that the bettor shows and the caller who paid to see has the right not to expose his/her cards.

Another point he made was...

Considering you have put the same chips into the pot as the other player, why should they get the information of how you played that hand while you dont get the same information from them?

Mellor

5starpool wrote:

Did you insist on waiting to see his cards first though? If so that may have annoyed him enough to want to be petty back to you.

Well in both instances HJ was supposed to show second, last bettor or first to act first.
I was actually unaware that you could ask to see a hand like this. Knew you could ask to see the second card when somebody flashes one card (after all players fold). But if somebody mucks a hand i didnt think you could see it if they weren't to act before you.

mdwexford

if he asks to see your cards just pretend you didnt hear him and fire them into the muck. if anyone tries to retrieve them from the muck break their hands

MrPillowTalk

I dont have a major problem with people doing it however that said I dont think Id ever ask to see someones cards unless they were a muppet.

NickyOD

I think in most cardrooms if the action on the river goes check-checl then the cards are shown clockwise from the button, regardless of the action on previous streets.

As for asking to see your hand all the time, this is where a good dealer should help you out by mucking all losing hands immediately before he even gets the chance to ask.

Incidentally should the dealer not touch your hand to the muck before showing your hand would become live again and is entitled to win the pot. Warning a player of this often deters them from asking again.

fixer

cardrooms in LA are notorious for people asking to see hands, even people not in the pot. It has to be requested before the cards are in the muck, and the dealers are careful to kill the hand first before showing.

Seldom have I seen the winner asking to see the losing hand though!

RoundTower

MrPillowTalk wrote:

I dont have a major problem with people doing it however that said I dont think Id ever ask to see someones cards unless they were a muppet.

Pretty much no one I play with regularly asks to see mucked hands, it's definitely considered a bit rude. Not that long ago I flashed a losing hand and threw it in. A regular at the table asked to see the rest of the hand, I was a bit surprised because no one ever asks this even though they have the right. He had thought I was showing a winner and claiming the pot, and he apologised for getting me to show.

I don't understand why you would ask to see their hands only if they are a muppet, though; if he is a muppet you want to keep him happy and should save your curiosity for another time.

MrPillowTalk

RoundTower wrote:

Pretty much no one I play with regularly asks to see mucked hands, it's definitely considered a bit rude. Not that long ago I flashed a losing hand and threw it in. A regular at the table asked to see the rest of the hand, I was a bit surprised because no one ever asks this even though they have the right. He had thought I was showing a winner and claiming the pot, and he apologised for getting me to show.

I don't understand why you would ask to see their hands only if they are a muppet, though; if he is a muppet you want to keep him happy and should save your curiosity for another time.

I mean a muppet as in someone I dislike rather than someone who is a poor player, in practice I dont think I can remember a time I asked to see someones hand.

DeVore

Ok, what follows is my opinion, I believe Luke Ivory concurs but like all rules in poker, your mileage may vary in your local club. Though that may be because the club is run by someone who doesnt have a good grounding in the rules either....

Etiquette:
Asking to see someone's hand every time (or even regularly) when they call or are called is considered bad etiquette. I too consider it bad etiquette. Mucking your hand when someone requests to see it is, imho MUCH WORST ETIQUETTE and if it continued I'd ask for the rules to be enforced. Since I rarely ask to see cards it rarely gets to that stage with me however if I felt you were mucking BEFORE I could even ask (ie: being a smartarse about it) I'd become beligerent and ask for the rules to be enforced. I'll play friendly if others play friendly and I start off with that intention.

The rules:
My understanding of the rules is that, as noxious as some of you seem to think it is, anyone at the table may ask to see cards at a showdown. A showdown is when all the betting is over on the river and more then one player remains with a live hand.

The usual interpretation of this is that players with money still in the pot may ask to see all cards at showdown, they may (and often DO) forgo this right as a courtesy.

Players NOT holding a live hand (ie: those who had folded) may also ask to see hands to avoid being "whipsawed", this is a form of anti-collusion protection. This, too, can be abused so my middle-path ruling on this (as floor man) would be to privately view the cards myself and determine if any action needs to be taken. I'd do this if I feel the requestor is abusing his right to anti-collusion protection in order to gain information he didnt risk any chips for. A TD always has the right to balance the game fairly for all players. I've never had to do this in a live situation.

If a player was firing his cards into the muck to deny his opponent the opportunity to request to see his hand, I'd warn him. I'd also request the dealer protect the muck so it cant be abused this way. Repetition would invoke a sanction, anything from 20-minutes away from the table to outright banning.

Finally, if a hand was to be shown (at the request of a player) then it should be touched to the muck, formally killed so it can't come back into play, and then exposed. Normally I will say to a dealer that they should explain this to the owner of the hand, as a courtesy, however they have no say in it really and complain all they might that hand will be shown (and it is dead).

These are the rules of the game you are playing as I understand them.

DeV.

DeVore

Mellor wrote:

I was actually unaware that you could ask to see a hand like this. Knew you could ask to see the second card when somebody flashes one card (after all players fold).

Funnily enough, this "rule" is (afaik) quite specific to Ireland. I know its common place here but I can't honestly say its considered a "rule". I think if you tried this in the EPT or WPT you'd be laughed out of it, but I'm open to correction on that.

DeV.

fixer

that's a bastardization of "show one, show all" which keeps a level playing field, but became "show one, show both" which is just silly

DeVore

fixer wrote:

that's a bastardization of "show one, show all" which keeps a level playing field, but became "show one, show both" which is just silly

I think its also confused with "you must show both cards to claim a pot" which became "you can't just show one card" which became "show one show both".

I admit to letting this slide simply because the vast vast majority of local players in the Dublin/Drogheda area play by that "rule". It isnt a serious problem per se to have it in place and it would cause arguments galore if it was changed.

DeV.
ps: While I try my damndest to get the rules as "right" as I can, its in the back of my mind that Kimba could come on at any point and say "do you remember that ruling".... (I made an absolutely, horrifically, shockingly bad ruling once. I still kick myself over. I made it because the player seemed new, got caught on a point of technicallity and I felt sorry for him... turned out he was a total bollox of the highest order. Yes Kimba, I know. It was a dreadful ruling. Never again, lol.... Never feel sorry for a player if the rule is clear. All the more reason to get the rules clarified, agreed and applied to the letter as best we all can.)

ZZR1100

fixer wrote:

that's a bastardization of "show one, show all" which keeps a level playing field, but became "show one, show both" which is just silly

the latest version . raise / every1 folds / flash an A to the table/ some1 says show1 show all looking to see your other card.

phantom_lord

in the gpj 300 game I raised on the co and c-bet an ace high flop, showed the ace and threw in the cards, the dealer then turned over the other card, a 9 kinda damaged my image a little :rolleyes:

I had headphones on at the time, so I'm not sure if someone asked or if he did it of his own accord.

Gholimoli

TBH there is much information that can be gained from seeing some ones card at show down and I wouldn’t blame any one to ask to see my cards if I muck them for that reason alone.
However usually it takes one or maybe two showdowns to find out what type of a player you are dealing with so if this happens on every hand then I think it would be bad manners.
I my self don’t remember asking to see a mucked hand but I usually do pay attention at show down if I don’t know the players involved just to get an idea of how they play so if the rule says that they can see your cards then why not make the most of it!

JP Poker

Finally, if a hand was to be shown (at the request of a player) then it should be touched to the muck, formally killed so it can't come back into play, and then exposed. Normally I will say to a dealer that they should explain this to the owner of the hand, as a courtesy, however they have no say in it really and complain all they might that hand will be shown (and it is dead).

Is it not true that if the player who won the pot requests to see the other players folded hand, then that hand then becomes live again. As a result, if this hand beats the orginal winning hand the pot is then awarded to the player who orginally folded?

This is the risk the that the winner of a pot takes when requesting to see a folded hand.


DeV.[/QUOTE]

RoundTower

JP Poker wrote:

Is it not true that if the player who won the pot requests to see the other players folded hand, then that hand then becomes live again. As a result, if this hand beats the orginal winning hand the pot is then awarded to the player who orginally folded?

I assume you are talking about a hand mucked at showdown, not a folded hand. If so I think this is the rare rule in some places but it is a silly rule.

DeVore

JP, I'm not clear which part is you-quoting-me and which part is you writing a response.

To be clear: A hand which is requested to be seen (by any player, not just the winner of the pot) must be touched to the muck, killed and exposed. If it turns out to be a royal flush, it still doesnt win.

I also gave Luke a shout last night because I'm very sensitive to the fact that what I have written is my interpretation of the rules and frankly it would be perfectly reasonable for someone to say "well thats Tom Murphy's opinion, what makes that any more valid then anyone elses".

He agreed with me on each point and strongly agreed on such things as penalties for people firing cards into the muck repeatedly and disclosure in order. So ok, that just means that Luke and I agree but we have concensus and it was blind concensus (ie: I didnt read him my post and say "You agree with that, dont you?!").

More then that I can reason WHY the rules should be interpretted that way and my point about equal wagers for equal chance and equal reward stand scrutiny. In fact if it were left entirely to me, I would enforce all hands being displayed at showdown, always, to avoid this sort of argument in the first place. We do it for all-ins in tournies, I can see no logical reason against it to be honest! Being nice simply allows the angle-shooters to shoot angles.

DeV.

JP Poker

RoundTower wrote:

I assume you are talking about a hand mucked at showdown, not a folded hand. If so I think this is the rare rule in some places but it is a silly rule.

Just taken this from "Roberts Rules of Poker" by Robert Ciaffone, better known in the poker world as Bob Ciaffone, a leading authority on cardroom rules. He has done extensive work on rules for the Las Vegas Hilton, The Mirage, and Hollywood Park Casino, and assisted many other cardrooms

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.

The author has strongly supported uniform poker rules, and applauds the work done in this direction by the Tournament Director's Association (TDA). Nearly all the rules herein are compatible with the TDA rules, although there are some slight differences in wording

RoundTower

JP Poker wrote:

Just taken this from "Roberts Rules of Poker" by Robert Ciaffone, better known in the poker world as Bob Ciaffone, a leading authority on cardroom rules. He has done extensive work on rules for the Las Vegas Hilton, The Mirage, and Hollywood Park Casino, and assisted many other cardrooms

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.

The author has strongly supported uniform poker rules, and applauds the work done in this direction by the Tournament Director's Association (TDA). Nearly all the rules herein are compatible with the TDA rules, although there are some slight differences in wording

I think those rules are great but I don't like this one, even though it discourages people from asking to see mucked hands. Also I think "folded" here means "mucked", otherwise it makes no sense.

Mr. Flibble

JP Poker wrote:

J
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.

In the second instance HJ's hand wasn't called. He called with it so, as I see it, this rule does not apply.
I don't know about the 1st hand as the river was checked. Does declaring usually go from left of the dealer first or last to bet/raise first in this circumstance?

NickyOD

Internet players are the worst though. Those ****ers just keep going into the instant hand historey to look at your mucked hands, without even asking your permission!!!

DeVore

Being called or calling is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. The disclosure of hands goes from the first player to the left of the dealer and proceeds clockwise. Who called who and who raised and the last aggressor etc means nothing in proper poker.

(In some home games I've heard the rule that the last aggressor starts the betting round on the next street but you never hear anything like that in cardrooms.)

Action always starts from the left of the dealer, on the first round that action is forced by way of the blinds but in essence its still action. Whenever a player "priority" is decided in poker, its left of the dealer... even down to who gets the odd chip in a split pot.

Can anyone think of any instance when the last raiser or last caller means anything in those terms?

This is for NLH... I know Stud has some odd rules about the lowest visible card bringing it in to make a pot rather then having blinds etc. I dont play Stud and dont claim to know much about the rules.

JP, that seems like almost the same ruling as I posted with the exception that the "winner" asking to see the hand will lose if the cards speak a higher hand then his. I can see no logic reason why the person who is *currently* being deemed the winner should lose if a hand is turned over that beats his while if he wasnt currently winning he could ask without risk. That seems unfairly biased against the winner and some kind of "punishment" for asking for equal share of information for equal donation to the pot. In this I agree with RT that "folded" by a player should mean "mucked". My $.02...

DeV.

Macspower

This situation arose again last night at the SE. We had a guy at the cash table who would win a pot with a bet and then show the looser one of his cards which had no relevance to the flop at all (eg AQ7 board and he bets, wins and shows a J ). He did this numerous times. On one occasion I had AJ on an A high flop. I bet the pot and he RR me pot. I folded and he turned up a 6 and threw it in front of me. i asked him if that was supposed to amuse me? He just laughed.

Later in the night he did the same thing but I wasn'n involved in the pot and something I've never done before but I really felt he was taking the P**s. I asked for his other card to be shown. it hadn't been mucked and the dealer refused. I asked for a ruling and Alex made a ruling that this was only a Fitz rule and didn't apply in the SE and he was entitled to show one card if he so decided. Now that he had the ruling in his favour he continued to do the same....

Opinions........

mac.

carfax

Hectorjelly wrote:

Playing a live tournament a few days ago, twice there was a showdown with very little action. The first time I raised preflop, checked flop, called a bet on the turn and the river went check check. The sb declared rivered top pair and I through my cards away. He then asked the dealer to show my cards. Then a few hands later I called a small bet on the river in a tiny pot by someone else, there was 4 hearts on the board and he (slowly) showed me the ace of hearts. I again threw my cards away and the same guy asked to see my cards again.

I asked him was he going to do this every time, and he said because it was a tournament every time there was a showdown both sets of cards should be shown. Is this right? I thought that just applied when a player was all in. I know that whenever there is a showdown in any game, a player can ask to see both cards ,as a rule that was implemented to stop collusion, but I always thought it was extremely rude to do so as a matter of course. Also if I know hes going to do it I can just throw my cards in the muck cant I?

He has no right to ask to see your cards. Next time you want to fold make sure your cards hit the muck.

Just to give an example;
If you're bluffing into a pot and are called on the river;
You immmediately muck and the winning player shows his cards to claim the pot.
No'one then has the right to ask to see your cards unless they suspect collusion.
If this is the case the tournament director should then take a look at the cards and decide if you are cheating.

This is the EPT ruling on it anyway.
Thomas Kremser says 'bluffing is an integral part of no-limit hold'em' - so the only reason one player would want to see the other players cards is to get under their skin.....Which he does not want to see happen.

carfax

Macspower wrote:

This situation arose again last night at the SE. We had a guy at the cash table who would win a pot with a bet and then show the looser one of his cards which had no relevance to the flop at all (eg AQ7 board and he bets, wins and shows a J ). He did this numerous times. On one occasion I had AJ on an A high flop. I bet the pot and he RR me pot. I folded and he turned up a 6 and threw it in front of me. i asked him if that was supposed to amuse me? He just laughed.

Later in the night he did the same thing but I wasn'n involved in the pot and something I've never done before but I really felt he was taking the P**s. I asked for his other card to be shown. it hadn't been mucked and the dealer refused. I asked for a ruling and Alex made a ruling that this was only a Fitz rule and didn't apply in the SE and he was entitled to show one card if he so decided. Now that he had the ruling in his favour he continued to do the same....

Opinions........

mac.

He should be made to show the 2nd card if requested imo.

This is the most common ruling in Ireland and all organisers should be making an effort to standardise rules.

I hope you used the extra information he was giving you to take all his chips.

Mr. Flibble

DeVore wrote:

Being called or calling is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. The disclosure of hands goes from the first player to the left of the dealer and proceeds clockwise. Who called who and who raised and the last aggressor etc means nothing in proper poker.
.
.

Every online site that I've played at will show the cards of the person who has been called (ie. the person who was the last aggressor) first, and then allow the others to muck if they cannot beat it. Why would they all do it wrong?

NickyOD

DeVore wrote:

Being called or calling is UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. The disclosure of hands goes from the first player to the left of the dealer and proceeds clockwise. Who called who and who raised and the last aggressor etc means nothing in proper poker.

According to Roberts and I think Cairo and Cooke also it's not irrelevent, and the player that took last aggressive action shows first if that aggressive action was on the final betting round.

Bandana boy

carfax wrote:

He should be made to show the 2nd card if requested imo.

This is the most common ruling in Ireland and all organisers should be making an effort to standardise rules.

I hope you used the extra information he was giving you to take all his chips.

I completely disagree
i have seen this in the Fitz but in no other club in the world
It is imho a mistake generated on word play for other rules

OK guy was being an A$$ and you would like to punish but play better poker and take his chips

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

ArmaniJeanss

Mr. Flibble wrote:

Every online site that I've played at will show the cards of the person who has been called (ie. the person who was the last aggressor) first, and then allow the others to muck if they cannot beat it. Why would they all do it wrong?

Including the site that Devore has an involvement in
The 'Last Aggressor shows first, rest can fold' method was what I always played growing up, and its what every online site seems to plays, so I'm baffled as to how it can be considered 'wrong'.

Scotty #

its not called a "SHOWDOWN" for nothing. Any players left in at showdown are fully entitled to see any other players cards who are also in the showdown.

On the other question of showing one card when there is no showdown. I believe nobody is entitled to see both cards unless they have paid to do so. If a player decides to show one card, what right, in fairness, does anybody have to insist on the other one being shown?

60 million players and still no proper rules!!

DeVore

Often online you can see the hands in the hand-history. I believe this was the case on tribeca but is no longer (I havent checked).

Invoking online as the paragon of rules accuracy is like reverting to priests for sex-counselling. Most sites dont get the "who gets the button when its heads up" rule right.

Carfax, you might be entitled to bluff but I'm entitled to catch you bluffing and we paid the same into the pot so we should get the same info. That would be my argument anyway.

DeV.

Hectorjelly

LuckyLloyd wrote:

I agree with Bandana Boy. The Fitz rule is a bad rule. It may be irritating sometimes, but players should be allowed to show just one card if they want.

In the example Macspower gave above, while it was annoying - everytime he showed a bad card you would be able to deduce that he wasn't strong and was attempting to bully and bluff the pot. Excellent!! Keep observing him through such hands and use the info to bust his ass.

We want idiots to spew info - if that involves them showing one card then great - the Fitz rule is bad because it discourages players to divulge any information which makes the game harder. Additionally, the "show one, show both" rule does not apply in the States or UK as far as I am aware.

I agree with this totally, I think its a silly rule that is counter productive