StevePa vs. Jamie Gold (1k rebuy)

[Exitonly]

if he mucks right away dont you still have to show? i remember hearing a ruling that you have to 'show the winning hand' if it went to showdown.

[stevepa]

[ QUOTE ]
if he mucks right away dont you still have to show? i remember hearing a ruling that you have to 'show the winning hand' if it went to showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

not 100% sure what the rule is, but I've seen it happen several times where bettor mucks, callers takes pot and mucks.

[Cornell Fiji]

[ QUOTE ]
if he mucks right away dont you still have to show? i remember hearing a ruling that you have to 'show the winning hand' if it went to showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be wrong.

Just imagine a scenario where you call a bet on the river and the bettor mucks. You then muck your hand. Who gets the pot?

[F0LD--IT]

Steve is my new hero since that donk crushed my run last year.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if he mucks right away dont you still have to show? i remember hearing a ruling that you have to 'show the winning hand' if it went to showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be wrong.

Just imagine a scenario where you call a bet on the river and the bettor mucks. You then muck your hand. Who gets the pot?

[/ QUOTE ]

Remembered where i heard the ruling, it was in a cash game at the Borgata. Floor came over, and said "winning hand must be shown".

but thinking about it now, that floor was probably just a moron.

[Austiger]

I'm not sure about it, but this is what I think:

Once Jamie mucks, Steve wins the pot no matter what. Anyone at the table can ask to see Steve (or Jamie's) hand and they do have that right. However, Jamie's hand is already in the muck, so they would only be able to guess at which cards were his, and if Steve threw his in the muck too, obviously no one would know for sure. I think at that point the floor would determine whether or not to give a penalty to Steve if he intentionally mucked after people demanded to see the hand, but it would not affect Steve dragging the pot. I doubt a penalty would be assessed anyway since it's so irregular for someone to ask, but the letter of the law probably says there should be a penalty.

[10K-in-Clay]

It depends on the cardroom. I beleive at the commerce if one player mucks thier hand the other person doesn't not have to show (Phil Laak said something to that affect on an episode of HSP), the same thing goes for my local casino (casino rama) and i'm sure many other cardrooms. I am also aware of other casinos that enforce the rule 'the winning hand must show' That being said i'm not sure what the rule is at the casino this hand took place.

[curtains]

Highly doubt he had an ace