Rulings

[nosey-p]

Couple off rulings in the Goliath both hands I was in

1)   We get down to the river when my opponent checks, I check then he mucks without showing. Do I need to show my cards when he mucks?

2)   On the turn he bets I call, the dealer pulls the money in and says "on your backs" (neither off us was all in) he then mucks the pack thinking he had dealt the river, what happens next?      

[AMRN]

1. Yes you have to show, even though he has open-mucked..... you cannot claim a pot without showing a hand when the hand reaches showdown

2. Strange one - probably not much precedent. I think the dealer has to reshuffle the pack, including all mucked and burnt cards, and continue from there....

[nosey-p]

1. Yes you have to show, even though he has open-mucked..... you cannot claim a pot without showing a hand when the hand reaches showdown

2. Strange one - probably not much precedent. I think the dealer has to reshuffle the pack, including all mucked and burnt cards, and continue from there....

I will let you know what happend when they have been more replies

[nosey-p]

But to give you a hint in number 1 when he mucked the dealer pushed the pot to me  

[PantsMan]

What Steve said. 1, you definitely have to show to win the hand. 2, mistake by dealer, has to be reshuffled and carry on as normal.

[HaworthBantam]

What Steve said. 1, you definitely have to show to win the hand.

+1

...mistake by dealer, has to be reshuffled and carry on as normal.

Burnt cards should remain burnt though, if they can be identified.

[deanp27]

In 1 you have to show to claim, the only exception I have seen to this is when I have played the UKIPT where they specifically stated that you don"t have to show to win if opponent mucks

[nosey-p]

I had seen or heard or read somewhere that you no longer had to show if your opponent mucks at showdown (or non showdown). So when the dealer pushed the pot to me I put my cards over the line, but not in the muck. The dealer pulled the cards in and the game continued. A couple off hands later the opponent in the hand speaks up saying that I had to show to win the hand, the dealer responded "not any more" but to clarify he called the TD over. Whilst we were waiting the table was split saying "yes you should" or "not if you don't want too".

The ruling was in this game yes you need to show to win the pot but in other tournaments you don't need to i.e. UKIPT. So yet again you have two different rulings for the same problem.

[Jon MW]

...

The ruling was in this game yes you need to show to win the pot but in other tournaments you don't need to i.e. UKIPT. So yet again you have two different rulings for the same problem.

Well that"s ridiculous.

In general I think it"s fine if you don"t have to show the hand unless somebody asks for it to be shown but they can only do so if they suspect collusion and they have to explain to the TD why they suspect it.

Most people won"t want to slow the game down that much just for a little bit of extra info, and if the TD is making the decision on it then they"ll soon pick up on people who are just taking the piss with it.

[George2Loose]

Yup UKIPT you can muck if they muck unless it"s an all in and a call.

I like the rule

[LongshanksED]

In hand 1 if he mucks then you shouldn"t have to show but best check with the card room rules. Everywhere is different!
Be sweet if he open mucked and you show 3 high

[SirPercival]

At the same event I twice saw pots awarded without cards being shown.

[AJDUK]

Every tournie you go to you need to ask for a full copy of the rules because they are different everywhere. I"m waiting for the day i get told that a flush doesn"t beat a straight because it"s in their rules.

Also at Cov Goliath i was on a table where another new rule came to light. A guy checked out of turn. The other guy bet, thus changing the action. The offender then moved all in, which he was told he couldn"t do. All hell broke loose. A ruling was called and the TD ruled he could call only or fold. The bet was called and an unlikely river card gave them both the nuts which meant the pot was split. But the out of turn player kept protesting that the action was changed meaning he should be able to shove back. So the game was held up whilst Zac from Walsall the senior TD confirmed the ruling, which he admitted was only changed recently but is common in all G"s. All actions stand whether out of turn or not and whether action is changed or not. He said the rules would be able to be found in the card room. Both players during the next break went to look for said rules and both found different conflicting versions. 

[daveyb147]

I would say it is the norm in most tourneys that you have to show to take the pot,,,but personally prefer the ukipt rule on this.
Shame we cant have some standard rules so everyone knows what they are doing wherever they go

[mrmacacan]

Seen both rules lately at different venue"s

Best rule is you do not have to show, you call a player and he mucks without showing why should you have to show.

The question I always ask, If I call, he mucks, then I don"t show what happens to the chips ?