Showing Cards!

[rubertoe]

I am a litle Confused as to who shows their cards first at a show down

and i wondered if there are any budding TD"s out there that can clarify a few things for me?

If a hand goes to a show down (heads up) then which player would show first in the following scenario"s

1 Player A bets and player B calls.
2 Player A checks, Player B Bets and Player A calls that bet.
3 Both players check!

And can some one let me know the etiquite of seeing a loosing hand before it is mucked, i was under the impression that the only player that should ask to see a loosing hand is a player who is also in the pot!

Cheers.

Robbie

[mrmacacan]

I am a litle Confused as to who shows their cards first at a show down

and i wondered if there are any budding TD"s out there that can clarify a few things for me?

If a hand goes to a show down (heads up) then which player would show first in the following scenario"s

1 Player A bets and player B calls.
2 Player A checks, Player B Bets and Player A calls that bet.
3 Both players check!

And can some one let me know the etiquite of seeing a loosing hand before it is mucked, i was under the impression that the only player that should ask to see a loosing hand is a player who is also in the pot!

Cheers.

Robbie

1. A shows
2. B shows
3. nearest dealer (clockwise)

Usually if someone is pretty sure they have the winning hand then
they usually show.
Sometimes I will wait cos I want to get info on players.

Anyone on the table can ask to see a players hand, but this is as good
as accusing them of cheating.

At a showdown a hand MUST be shown to win the pot.
So if someone was bluffing and gets a call, then mucks the caller must still show
his hand.

Think I am right.

[jacQues]

3. nearest dealer (clockwise)

Um no.  This is, depending on the rules used, either the first player that checked (so the first player after the button) or the last player that bet/raised.

Anyone on the table can ask to see a players hand, but this is as good
as accusing them of cheating.

Again, this depends on the rules used.  Either what you said, or only players in the hand at showdown, can request to see down hands.  Mucked hands (e.g. hands that are placed in the muck pile by the dealer) can only be retrieved by the TD in unusual situations.

Etiquette wise, asking to see a hand is considered rude.  This option is in place for players to check for colluding.  For example, player A who is chip leader checks holding a set and player B checks holding not much but is very short and they are good friends.  In this case, player A could dump her/his chips to player B by mucking the hand.  This, of-course, is a form of cheating.

What I like in on-line play is that mucked hands at showdown can always be seen by all players via the hand history.  Live I will wait for the other player to show in 90% of the case, in order to gain just that little bit of extra information.  If a hand is played very weird, in some cases I do indeed ask to see a down hand.  But this is very very rare.

At a showdown a hand MUST be shown to win the pot.
So if someone was bluffing and gets a call, then mucks the caller must still show
his hand.

Correct.  The reason is that player A who mucked is, in fact, playing the board.  Thus for player B to claim the pot, (s)he must show a hand that beats the board.  In addition to this, a "shown hand" is always two cards, so showing one ace will not do it.

[AMRN]

many places will insist that if a hand goes to showdown, ALL hands left in are shown, even if the holder of the hand concedes defeat. This is to protect against soft play or deliberate mucking of a winning hand.

[hi_am_chris]

I think i saw in a tv tournament where they were saying that the player who performed the last aggressive action in the hand had to show first?

[Roscopiko]

Seems I am just plain rude then cos I always ask to see a mucked hand when allowed to do so.

Didn"t realise this was bad ettiquette and will buck up my ideas in future, sorry folks.

[mrmacacan]

3. nearest dealer (clockwise)

Um no.  This is, depending on the rules used, either the first player that checked (so the first player after the button) or the last player that bet/raised.

Anyone on the table can ask to see a players hand, but this is as good
as accusing them of cheating.

Again, this depends on the rules used.  Either what you said, or only players in the hand at showdown, can request to see down hands.  Mucked hands (e.g. hands that are placed in the muck pile by the dealer) can only be retrieved by the TD in unusual situations.

Etiquette wise, asking to see a hand is considered rude.  This option is in place for players to check for colluding.  For example, player A who is chip leader checks holding a set and player B checks holding not much but is very short and they are good friends.  In this case, player A could dump her/his chips to player B by mucking the hand.  This, of-course, is a form of cheating.

What I like in on-line play is that mucked hands at showdown can always be seen by all players via the hand history.  Live I will wait for the other player to show in 90% of the case, in order to gain just that little bit of extra information.  If a hand is played very weird, in some cases I do indeed ask to see a down hand.  But this is very very rare.

At a showdown a hand MUST be shown to win the pot.
So if someone was bluffing and gets a call, then mucks the caller must still show
his hand.

Correct.  The reason is that player A who mucked is, in fact, playing the board.  Thus for player B to claim the pot, (s)he must show a hand that beats the board.  In addition to this, a "shown hand" is always two cards, so showing one ace will not do it.

I was half right then.

These are the rules we try to stick to in home games.

Thanks for the reply jacQues, very good write up.

This is what a part of forums is for, we are all learning all the time.

[HaworthBantam]

many places will insist that if a hand goes to showdown, ALL hands left in are shown, even if the holder of the hand concedes defeat. This is to protect against soft play or deliberate mucking of a winning hand.

The APAT rules used to state that all hands that go to showdown must be shown. I can"t find them in the current version though....

I think i saw in a tv tournament where they were saying that the player who performed the last aggressive action in the hand had to show first?

If the rules state that all hands must be shown at showdown, what does it matter who shows first ?

Seems I am just plain rude then cos I always ask to see a mucked hand when allowed to do so.

Didn"t realise this was bad ettiquette and will buck up my ideas in future, sorry folks.

I don"t believe it is bad ettequette, you"ve paid to see the other players hand, what"s the problem ?

As Jacques has pointed out, it really all depends on the rules to which you"re playing. And we should always make ourselves aware of local rules before we sit down to play.

[Cyntaf]

At a showdown a hand MUST be shown to win the pot.
So if someone was bluffing and gets a call, then mucks the caller must still show
his hand.

Correct.  The reason is that player A who mucked is, in fact, playing the board.  Thus for player B to claim the pot, (s)he must show a hand that beats the board.  In addition to this, a "shown hand" is always two cards, so showing one ace will not do it.

[/quote]

Not sure this is correct, if you muck your hand I would have thought your not playing any hand.(You"ve mucked and therefore conceded).
Generally I"d agree, last aggressive act to show first. Ie he bets, trying to make opponent lay down. But oppo calls, he is paying to see the bettor"s cards.
I personally turn my cards over straight away, as they are not going to change or improve in any way whatsoever.
When i play live, in tournaments all hands must be turned over immediately at showdown, be it hds up or 4 players. Again i don"t waste the clock deciding who"s showing first or last, the outcome will be the same, and you will get to see all the cards played by your oppo"s.

Cash is different, generally if the winner shows, allbeit because it"s him to act first or to save the blushes of the loser. You do not have to show, Unless it"s to claim the pot. I have seen it where hds up/showdown and winner only shows one card, say an Ace, or card to fill the straight. Whilst i think you should show both cards, if I"m not involved in the pot, i leave it up to the guy who"s just lost his money to ask to see the second, should he wish to. I"ve found that if it"s a big enough pot, he doesn"t really give a hoot what the other card is, he"s still lost a shed load of cash

[kinboshi]

[Cyntaf]

Sorry if i"m teaching grandma to suck eggs with this one. Whilst on the subject of showing cards, we all know that if the dealer exposes a card, then all the table should be made aware of what that card is, it"s information, right?

Similarly at showdown or where all have folded, and the guy who won the pot by default, then shows his mate what he was holding(his hole cards), In a Tournament it"s a case of show one show all, You cannot give one player information, he could later use in another hand against You, and put all else at a disadvantage,The others who haven"t seen what cards you raised with ie utg, in a tourney.

Cash again, at least when I"ve played, if you win the pot, when all fold, you can show one person if you wish to. The others are politely told to do one as they have not payed to see your cards. I personally either don"t show, otherwise turn them on their backs for all to see. I can"t see why you would want to risk starting an argument. Some do it to prove a point??? game slows down, atmosphere changes etc, and lets face it if your winning why would you want anything to change.

Just be nice and polite at the tables, it doesn"t cost anything, but could cost you an awful lot if your not nice. Here endeth the lesson

Does anyone else play it differently in their games elsewhere?

[kinboshi]

At DTD, I"m sure it"s the case that if you show one in a cash game you have to show all.  99.99% sure that"s the case.

[AMRN]

I"ve never played anywhere that doesn"t insist on show one show all....

[hi_am_chris]

Haworth.. i think the point of last aggressive action showing was that the other play had made the call so had a right to see his cards first before being allowed to muck if beat, however this was roland de wolfe trying to force juha helpi to show his 6 2 off no pair no draw hand at showdown

[Jon MW]

At a showdown a hand MUST be shown to win the pot.
So if someone was bluffing and gets a call, then mucks the caller must still show
his hand.

Correct.  The reason is that player A who mucked is, in fact, playing the board.  Thus for player B to claim the pot, (s)he must show a hand that beats the board.  In addition to this, a "shown hand" is always two cards, so showing one ace will not do it.

Not sure this is correct, if you muck your hand I would have thought your not playing any hand.(You"ve mucked and therefore conceded)....

I always assumed it was an anti collusion measure, but thinking about it that would only really work if both hands were shown.