Why exactly is it bad etiquette to ask to see a losing showdown hand?

[swingdoc]

This is probably a silly question but can the bettor simply muck his cards after someone else calls? Basically in the same way the caller could muck after seeing he is lost, but without the obvious advantage of knowing for sure that he lost?

[Nuevo99]

[ QUOTE ]
This is probably a silly question but can the bettor simply muck his cards after someone else calls? Basically in the same way the caller could muck after seeing he is lost, but without the obvious advantage of knowing for sure that he lost?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, he has that option. In that case the caller may have to show because some casinos have a rule that you need to show two cards at showdown to win the pot.

The problem is usually the bettor doesnt show and doesnt muck (mucking is silly since usually they dont know if they are beat yet) and trys to wait for the caller to show, which wastes time....

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
During the Caesars noon tourney yesterday a rules question arose, which then lead to further random discussion amongst the dealers and floors later on. The rules question that came up in the tourney was whether someone could conceed the hand after going all-in. I said no. Floor says "sure, he can always fold if he wants to".

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you at least roll you eyes when you heard this assinine opinion?

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
During the Caesars noon tourney yesterday a rules question arose, which then lead to further random discussion amongst the dealers and floors later on. The rules question that came up in the tourney was whether someone could conceed the hand after going all-in. I said no. Floor says "sure, he can always fold if he wants to".

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you at least roll you eyes when you heard this assinine opinion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I told him I thought he was wrong, but I wasn't as polite about it as I should have been. I apologized at the next break. That's when we started the discussions about various edge-condition rulings. The floor said he'd gone and checked the rules as best he could and had discussed with other floor people the situation about letting an all-in player muck a tourney hand before the dealing is done, and they claimed not to be able to find a rule against it. I pointed out that was kinda sorta like the whole POINT of the TDA rule that all-in players have to show their hands...to prevent chip dumping. Which then lead to a discussion about the absurdity of various TDA rules and other what-if's like the AK vs AK vs mucked-winner hand.

But the CP floor people remain unconvinced that a player cannot muck a tourney hand after going all-in. They understand the theory but the TDA rule only says the cards will be turned face up after an all-in--it doesn't say you can't then concede the pot. The current rule reads:

All cards will be turned face up once a player is all in and all action is complete.

It apparently needs to read:

All cards will be turned face up once a player is all in and all action is complete, and the hand will be dealt to completion and the pot awarded to the best hand.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
It apparently needs to read:

All cards will be turned face up once a player is all in and all action is complete, and the hand will be dealt to completion and the pot awarded to the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or they need to hire someone that makes decisions that is familiar with poker.

[0evg0]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a set rule? Does this change depending on venue? Is it the Floor's discretion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about the written rule in this spot, but I would definitely stop the game, call the floorman and invoke the rule saying "I am suspecting collusion and IWTSTH." Because it's pretty clear that button is getting screwed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was obviously button.

I did just this as chips were being raked to the SB I clearly said "IWTSTH" to the Dealer and Floor who was on-hand. Floor then became agitated and told me "This isn't ESPN, you don't get to just see all the hands" and refused to allow me to see the mucked hand from BB. He even went so far as to say that he cannot force BB to play in any manner and the most he could do would be to warn him.

Thoughts?

[Nuevo99]

[ QUOTE ]
Final 3 of an MTT

BB has 220k
SB has 30k
Button has 50k
Blinds are 8k/16k/1k

SB and BB know each other and are friendly. Button did not agree to chop earlier when both suggested it. There has been some flared tempers between Button and BB. There have been some questionable (in Button's eyes) plays between the two since 3-handed including BB checking behind on all streets in unraised pot when he flopped TPGK. There have also been two seperate occassions where BB folded to SB's push getting odds good enough for a smart player to know to call, and good enough odds for even a poor player to likely understand he needs to call.

Button folds
SB moves all-in for 30k total
BB folds

Button asks to see BB's mucked hand.

Is there a set rule? Does this change depending on venue? Is it the Floor's discretion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think IWTSTH only applys in the showdown, I dont think you can ever see someone's hand when they simply fold. No wonder the floor was aggitated

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there a set rule? Does this change depending on venue? Is it the Floor's discretion?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about the written rule in this spot, but I would definitely stop the game, call the floorman and invoke the rule saying "I am suspecting collusion and IWTSTH." Because it's pretty clear that button is getting screwed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was obviously button.

I did just this as chips were being raked to the SB I clearly said "IWTSTH" to the Dealer and Floor who was on-hand. Floor then became agitated and told me "This isn't ESPN, you don't get to just see all the hands" and refused to allow me to see the mucked hand from BB. He even went so far as to say that he cannot force BB to play in any manner and the most he could do would be to warn him.

Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I went back and found your prior post, I didn't see it the first time through because I was responding while you posted it. I will summarize briefly before I respond so others don't have to go looking for a post from 12/31. The above poster is down to three handed in a tournament and believes the other two players are colluding. On a particular hand he folds his button and the SB goes all-in and the BB folds. He tells the floor he thinks they are colluding and wants to see what the BB folded.

First of all IWTSTH does not apply here; however, the casino has the right to see any hand it wants to. The floor can take a look if he suspects collusion. There is a legitimate explanation for this behavior. If the BB is the chip leader and the SB has a small stack; there are a lot of people that believe the BB should keep the small blind in the game to keep taking the blinds from the button if the button appears to be trying to outlast the sb for second place. The floor is going to be in a tough spot here because there is no rule against being a bad player, but if he can establish that the BB is definitely doing something wrong he should give him a penalty away form the table (which pretty severe 3 handed). Most likely what will happen is the hand will be something that it is hard to say "anyone would call the push here" so the floor will remind them that poker is not a team sport and that anyone playing in a collusive manner is subject to a penalty. I probably would not play at that casino again.

I actually was in a similiar situation once. I was at the final table of a small locals' casino in Vegas. These two old men agreed to "check it down," I called for the floor and complained. She told me "they always check it down, they are friends."

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
If the BB is the chip leader and the SB has a small stack; there are a lot of people that believe the BB should keep the small blind in the game to keep taking the blinds from the button if the button appears to be trying to outlast the sb for second place. The floor is going to be in a tough spot here because there is no rule against being a bad player, but if he can establish that the BB is definitely doing something wrong he should give him a penalty away form the table (which pretty severe 3 handed). Most likely what will happen is the hand will be something that it is hard to say "anyone would call the push here" so the floor will remind them that poker is not a team sport and that anyone playing in a collusive manner is subject to a penalty. I probably would not play at that casino again.

[/ QUOTE ]

On a related note:

Several years ago Men the Master had a big stack when it was down to two short tables. If one player is busted they go to the final table. I forget the exact details but Men didn't call a fellow short stacked Vietnamese when he clearly had pot odds to call no matter what he held. This was controversial and I think it was heavily discussed over on the newsgroup RGP (back when RGP was good for this sort of thing)

Barry Shulman (owner/editor of Card Player) in a later column (or perhaps on RGP, certainly not here) defended Men's move as brilliant. In essence he said that Men with a big stack (and knowing how to use it) gained tremendous "steal equity" (and overall equity) by keeping the other player in and the tables short.

Sometimes decisions are tough.

~ Rick

[gsw615]

[ QUOTE ]
Like many of the younger players around today, I started playing online before at a casino. And online, its very easy to click on the hand history box and see what cards your opponent mucked when he lost at showdown.

Now I have never asked to see a losing hand at showdown in person because I know that its considered bad etiquette. But my question is why? Poker is a game about acquiring information imo, and a player should be able to do anything within the rules in order to help him do this. Furthermore it just makes sense to me that both players SHOULD HAVE TO show their cards at a showdown.

Can anyone explain to me the basis behind the etiquette here?

[/ QUOTE ]
In the past three weeks I've done this twice: once was b/c I honestly suspected collusion: two players (obviously friends, one visiting from out-of-town), playing in a pretty small local casino, a number of times would raise, call, re-raise, re-re-raise etc, trapping a few players in the middle, either pre-flop or on-the-flop. Once it got down to just the two of them in the pot they checked-it-down EVERY SINGLE TIME. It just SMELLED like collusion. And either they were not colluding, or I just happened to ask when they both had hands worthy of such action.

And the other time was to simply help put a guy on tilt. This guy tilts fairly easily, and spits out money when he does, and he was just close enough to that state that I hoped my purely selfish, tacky, lame, and rude request to see his hand would push him over the edge. I was right: he bluffed all the way, and he spewed money over the entire table for almost two hours afterwords, muttering something-or-other in polish under his breath the entire time.

Tacky? Yep. Rude? Perhaps. Within the rules? Yes. Worked to my advantage? Yes. Will I do that all the time? No, I played with the same guy yesterday, sat next to him, and congratulated him on every single hand he won. We had a nice time together.

There are a lot of tools at my disposal at the tables, and I don't mind using a rule to my advantage - even if said rule may make me look like an ass to some for a while.