Showdown hopefully explained
The Showdown explained.
I am now going to try and explain the showdown rule, and give examples of other rulings in the same situation. Let me first tell you the varying rules I have seen.
1)Some house rules state that anyone at the table is allowed to ask to see players cards at showdown.
2)Some house rules state that only active players involved on the turn can ask to see players cards at showdown.
3)Some house rules state that only the players that called the last bet are entitled to see the aggressors cards at showdown
4)Some house rules state that no one is entitled to see anyone’s cards if asked and leave the players to turn cards over in order.
Let me go through 1-4 one at a time and explain my thoughts
-
Endorsed by Roberts Rules of Poker, in my opinion he fucked up on this one, why should anyone have the right to see a players cards. The only reason people do this is for free information, yet some petty players insist all cards must be shown. The amount of times I have heard players argue saying “all cards must be shown at showdown” that’s why it is called a showdown …… bollox. The reason it is called a showdown is that to win a pot a hand must be shown if there is no betting into it. Then the players say how do you know players aren’t passing chips? Grow some balls and call for the floor if you think someone is cheating, tell the dealer etc. But just don’t tell us because you want to see cards to see what they played as you will end up on the wrong side of a penalty for bad etiquette.
-
Another load of bollox, if you want to see, stay in until the end, why should the whole table get to see the cards you were playing against. It hinders action and causes bad feeling. Why do you want to see someone’s cards? For information? That costs money in my book, unless playing by example 1, that’s why it is stupid.
-
Points 3 and 4 look completely different, however they are one in the same really. Of course, if you have called to see a players cards then they should be shown, although by calling and asking to see you are giving information to the whole table that you have paid for. The other controversy is if you ask for the cards to be shown should they be live. This is where point 3 and 4 differ. Some rules state that if you have tabled your cards then ask to see the bettors cards, then the cards should touch the muck (effectively killing them) and then turning the dead cards over. Other house rules state that if you ask to see someones cards then they are live, and that is the penalty for asking to see a players cards.
In points 1 to 3 in every situation it is still bad etiquette to ask to see a players cards. Also in my opinion a bettor should never be able to request to see a callers cards, this is where point 4 kicks in
-
There is an order of showdown, if no one has bet on the turn or river then players should show in a clockwise direction from the button. If there was aggressive action on the flop, but nothing on the turn and river, those cards have changed the situation that dramatically that the order of showdown from the button is the fairest way. At any point players can pass cards face down and not show once they think they are beat. The biggie and the one that causes the most confusion is if someone bets and gets a caller on the turn or river, in this situation the person who made the last aggressive action ( ie bet, raised or reraised and was called by the other player(s) ) Is committed to show first in showdown order, and the caller can insist they show before he turns his/her cards over (this is not bad etiquette, this is the correct order) The bettor can if he wishes throw his cards into the muck, the caller was probably right and the bettor was bluffing. If the cards are retrievable the caller can still ask to see (this is now bad etiquette) Even still, the caller must now expose his cards to win the pot. If the bettor shows his cards when asked, and tables a winning hand then the caller can muck, his cards are not retrievable. If for some reason the caller exposes his cards first, the bettor can now muck, and the caller cannot ask to see his cards as he has just forfieted the right and upset the order of showdown, by his hastiness. Although it is also good etiquette, if you believe you have the best hand to table your cards if you do not wish to see the opponents cards. The reason why this system works well, is there can be no bad feeling, and it also induces action and allows players to bluff more often unlike the other points, which inhibit action.
I hope this has cleared the showdown rule up a little, reading it back to myself I will be amazed if anyone actually understands it lol, put basically simple if you follow a showdown order there will never be a reason to ask to see cards.
Advice to everyone……….. if in doubt ask the cardroom you are playing in, what rules they use.
Comments
2 Responses to “Showdown hopefully explained”
Got something to say?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
So which are you saying should be the correct one? I think No 4 is personally the best here. But at the end of the day, if I have paid someone off on the river, I would expect to see what I had paid for.
Number 4 is the best IMO, if you have paid to see someones cards on the river, if you use option 4 they must show first anyway, so you get to see, if done properly.