Showdown on a checked river
 

Robert's Rules clearly states that if everyone checks the river, the first to check is the first to show their cards. What isn't clear is what happens if another player shows first, what players are then REQUIRED to show their cards. Example.

At the river, two players remain, and first to act checks. A common sitiuation here is that the second player will infer a check, by saying something like "I just have pocket 4's" and flip them up. Player 1, having been on a draw or whatever (can't beat the 4's) mucks.

This same type of situation occured at a recent home game, and although I wasn't at the table, I was asked my opinion. Players at the table insisted on seeing player 1's cards, as he was first to act. In my opionion, by showing his cards first, player 2 forfeited his option to see player 1's cards (he could have waited for player 1 to show first as is the rule.) I think some of the players were under the assumption that player 2 earned a showing by actions on previous betting rounds (calling player 1's flop bet for example).

Any thoughts on the situation?

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

[ QUOTE ]
Robert's Rules clearly states that if everyone checks the river, the first to check is the first to show their cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it matches the required order of action- left of the button around the table. If, however, there was a bet/raise on the river, the last bet/raise made (not called) determines who shows first.


"This same type of situation occured at a recent home game, and although I wasn't at the table, I was asked my opinion. Players at the table insisted on seeing player 1's cards, as he was first to act. In my opionion, by showing his cards first, player 2 forfeited his option to see player 1's cards (he could have waited for player 1 to show first as is the rule.) I think some of the players were under the assumption that player 2 earned a showing by actions on previous betting rounds (calling player 1's flop bet for example).

Any thoughts on the situation?"

By checking, Player 1 has "called" a "bet" on the river. Any hands that make it to the showdown stage can be turned up, against their owners' will, if ANYONE who was in the hand originally requests it.

It's generally considered bad form to request to see the mucked hand. However, if Player 1 is known for stalling to avoid having to show, then I would call for his hand to be exposed.

Now, if Player 1 mucked to a river bet, or mucked immediately on the river before Player 2 could check himself, then technically I believe Player 1's hand could not be shown.

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

Player 2 doesn't "earn" anything by showing his cards out of turn. If he wanted to see player 1's cards, he should have properly checked and then waited for player 1 to show.

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

Larry's right(I am starting to feel like Larry's Yes Man) I have seen alot of players waiting to expose hands. I have also seen people pitch a fit over having people request both cards. They have to expose if their isnt any action.

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

[ QUOTE ]
Larry's right(I am starting to feel like Larry's Yes Man)

[/ QUOTE ]

There's nothing wrong with acknowledging greatness....

:P

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

Nobody was or had been waiting to expose their hand. Player 2 'checked' and showed his hand immediately.

On another note, players not at showdown ought to have damn good reason to demand cards being shown other than curiosity.

In this particular case not only was the demander not at showdown, he was the one to actually flip player 1's cards. The ONLY person that should be allowed to expose cards is the hand owner and the dealer.

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

"Nobody was or had been waiting to expose their hand. Player 2 'checked' and showed his hand immediately. "

Hmmm- tougher call, but I still say that it falls under the showdown timing and therefore Player 1's hand could be required to be exposed.

"On another note, players not at showdown ought to have damn good reason to demand cards being shown other than curiosity. "
Damn right

"In this particular case not only was the demander not at showdown, he was the one to actually flip player 1's cards. The ONLY person that should be allowed to expose cards is the hand owner and the dealer."
BIG no-no by Player 2. Why did you let him grab your cards?

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

[ QUOTE ]
and although I wasn't at the table, I was asked my opinion...

[/ QUOTE ] Really...this isn't one of those "a friend of mine has a rash and wants to know what to do" posts [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

And it was player 3 that flipped the cards. Even worse.

Re: Showdown on a checked river
 

I never make the "second shower" show if they don't want to claim the pot. I tell new players that if they have misread thier hand and would like the table to read it, they should table it. That priviledge goes away the third time you're at my game [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] I never say anything at other people's games.