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

[Assani Fisher]

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?

[Nate.]

It just is. I don't mean to be dismissive or to imply that the etiquette is inappropriate or misguided.

The convention is old and (largely) honored, and it's just impolite to ask to see the hand just for information.

If it's your last hand at a casino before you move to a different city, and you bet and the opponent agonizes and folds, it's bad etiquette to reach into the muck to grab his hand and look at it (even though no recourse will really punish you). Just is.

--Nate

[jively]

The only reason the "I want to see the hand" rule exists is to prevent collusion - 2 comrades raising and reraising junk hands to steal money from a 3rd player. If you bet heads up, and your opponent folds (or calls and mucks), you are not entitled to the info of what they had.

-Tom

[mikech]

[ QUOTE ]
Can anyone explain to me the basis behind the etiquette here?

[/ QUOTE ]
the golden rule. if you get caught bluffing with a busted draw would YOU want to show your 9-high? or, if you get sucked out on by a gutshot against your top set, would you like it if he says, "what'd you have anyway? aces? kings? a set? i wanna see the hand, dealer." as he's dragging a $10k pot or something, no less; how would you like that? not so much? ok then.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
It just is. I don't mean to be dismissive or to imply that the etiquette is inappropriate or misguided.



[/ QUOTE ]

Or to be more direct: "You won; he conceded." Why do you want to risk making him feel like you are rubbing it in by asking to see his cards?

[Howard Beale]

Making everybody show their hands at showdown is going to cause many players to play better. They often know that they are making bad plays but comfort themselves with the knowledge that only THEY know it. Making them embarrassed in front of the table is not a good idea.

[DirteAA]

[ QUOTE ]
Making everybody show their hands at showdown is going to cause many players to play better. They often know that they are making bad plays but comfort themselves with the knowledge that only THEY know it. Making them embarrassed in front of the table is not a good idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed

[Nate.]

Just pointing out: everything in this thread (only use IWTSTH if you suspect collusion; Golden Rule; etc.) is well and good, and I'm glad people pointed it out, but doesn't really get closer to the issue. Why do you only use IWTSTH if you suspect collusion? Why wouldn't you want it done to you (plenty of actions within the rules and within standard etiquette, like waiting for a called bettor to expose his hand first, are things you wouldn't want done to you)?

Because it's impolite, just as spitting (non-maliciously) in the immediate company of a stranger is impolite. Poker society at large dictates so. It might be different some day, but that day isn't today, and it's probably not tomorrow either.

--Nate

[tom10167]

Everyone, even a 2p2er makes a bad decision, and it sucks when you have to show everyone that you played THAT(!)

Like calling a bet on the flop and two bets on the turn with Q6 on an AKKTx board, river check check, pocket twos good, IWTSTH........ I don't wanna show [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[mikech]

"politeness" is essentially the same reason as not embarrassing your opponents/the golden rule. i think it's more than that, actually. quite simply, it's the rules of the game--example:

if i go all-in on the river with the nuts, and get called, i must show first. after i show, my opponent can show his hand too if he wishes (some guys will do that in a "look, i also had a big hand" sorta way), but usually he will just muck. if he chooses to muck, then--according to the rules of the game--I HAVE NO RIGHT TO SEE HIS HAND UNLESS I SUSPECT COLLUSION.

i think calling it "etiquette" is a mistake; it's not etiquette, it's the RULE. having the option to withhold information, even at showdown, is the rule in live poker. the opposite is true on the internet: for the integrity of their games, it's a necessity for online poker sites to display all showndown hands in hand histories. that online rule has in turn created misunderstanding with the live-game rule.