Discourteous, Unethical or OK

[KenProspero]

You're dealt rags in the BB, it's checked to you.
The flop doesn't help, either does the turn but you check as does everyone else in the hand.

After the river, it's either impossible for you to have the winning hand, or nearly so.

You're first to act. Can you just muck your hand?

Does the answer change if SB had called pre-flop and you're second to act?

[UMTerp]

Of course you can. You can do whatever you want when it's your turn to act. If you do it out of turn, it's a bit discourteous, but I wouldn't go as far as to call it "unethical" unless you're specifically trying to help another player at the table by doing so.

I don't know why you'd want to muck unless you need to make a sprint to the bathroom or something though.

[cardcounter0]

[ QUOTE ]
You're first to act. Can you just muck your hand?


[/ QUOTE ]

A better course of action would be to hold on to your hand, wait for someone else to bet, and then when the action gets back around to you ...

Stare at the bettor for about 3 minutes. Try to look into his soul.

Then look at your cards. Hem and Haw a little bit. Then stare at him again. Pick up your cards as if to fold them, pull back and look at your cards again, then look at your chips. Put your cards down. Stare at the bettor. Then in very, very slow motion... muck your hand.

[psandman]

I believe checking out is inappropriate, because it gives you no advantage and simultaeously may impact the game by giving information to others who are not entiotled to it.

For this reason it is certainly discourteous (AND WHEN A PLAYER DOES THIS I ALWAYS PRAY THAT THE REST OF THE HAND GETS CHECKED DOWN AND IT TURNS OUT HE WOULD HAVE WON OR CHOPPED). I hesitate to call it unethical generally, however it could be done unethically if you do it for the purpose of freeing up another player to bet without concern (say you have a friend in the game and your intention and you frequently check raise, you do throw away your hand because you want him to be able to bet without concern that you will check raise him -- here your motives make this unethical)

If I had my way, players who did this would be told not to and players who repeatedly did this would be uninvited from playing, but I'm not holding my breath to see this happen.

[Andy B]

It's poor form. By folding to no bet, you are giving the players behind you information to which they are not entitled. I probably wouldn't get too bent out of shape about it in an unraised, checked-down pot.

[SpleenLSD]

Gosh, I see this so often. I'm either immune to it, or I think it just doesn't matter. I think I go with the latter. It's out of my control, and if it does give up info my feeling is that info will benefit me.

[youtalkfunny]

You are well within your rights to act when it's your turn to act. Folding is an option, you are more than welcome to do so when your turn comes around. If there was anything wrong with this, there would be a rule against it.

Don't listen to this "giving away information" jive. I'll never be upset with anyone at my table who wants to voluntarily relinquish claim to any part of the pot.

[baggins]

i don't see a problem. you ARE first to act, correct?

as long as you are the first player to act on each street, i see no problem folding to no bet. you are giving ALL the players still in the hand the same information, at the same time - before any of them have had to act.

i.e. UTG now proceeds to act with the same information that the button has. he can now check-raise the button if he thinks your fold may give the button a more clear-cut bet. he can now call the button's bet more confidently than he could if the button had to bet into 2 players. and so forth. but the button has the same information, and should now adjust to what UTG might do since you're out.

it would be slightly unethical if you were 3rd to act with 2 players behind you. UTG might be waiting to checkraise YOU and seeing as you are out, the rest of the players have information before their turn that the other 2 didn't have before their turn to act.

that being said, players with late position generally have that EXACT advantage - knowledge that early position players don't have.

it's certainly not wrong, in any case. it might help somebody unfairly every once in a while, but it's certainly not against the rules, and i certainly wouldn't ever worry about it unless somebody really made a stink.

[TMTTR]

Months ago I argued that it was "OK" -- I have since modified my opinion to "discourteous." In most cases, you should wait until you are facing a bet. "Checking out" shifts the balance of information in a way that it shouldn't. The one time you should definitely do it is when you know you will piss off a late position nit. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[SellingtheDrama]

Even if you check, 90% of the time your body language gives it away when its this obvious.