Additional Questions:
a: At a home game..where normal rules don't apply
b: At a casino, or any serious game
c: Absolutely bat-shit crazy...you were just getting some good publicity for your awesome TD post.
Last night on a $5-$5 No Limit cash game.
On the turn...
Villain bets out.
Player 2 raises.
Player 3 re-raises and is all in.
Villain angrily folds.
Player 2 calls.
River card is dealt.
Villain immediately yells "I want to see both hands. Dealer, protect the muck! I want to see all of those cards!".
First guy shows his hand. All in player mucks his cards. Dealer grabs the mucked hand, looks at the villain and asks "Do you want to see this hand?".
As I was watching the game and saw all of the action from turn card on, I instructed the dealer to muck the cards and NOT show them. Villain begins vehement arguement.
Without any further information, was I right or wrong to do what I did?
Wrong... If villain has actual collusion concerns that he got snookered here, then he has every right to see both hands, or anyone else that was dealt in. Both hands in question were called hands, and everyone has a right to see them, as the rule is written. Certainly this rule (IWTSTH) is the most over-abused thing going... but you should have at least ask villain why? before you rule.
I usually don't chime in on rule arguements because I am not too familiar with them, but AFAIK doesn't everyone involved in a pot has the right to ask to see all hands if called and went to showdown?
Without any further information, was I right or wrong to do what I did?
Depends, does your room have a stupid IWTSTH rule (anyone can ask to see any hand that gets called at showdown)?
I'd likely take the villain aside for a moment and ask the villain if he's indicating there's some sort of collusion going on between those 2 players, and what proof he has if he's sure there is. If he's got nothing, I'd let him know that asking to see another players hand especially while not in the hand for information is bad form.
If I was flooring in any card room anywhere, I'd always rule against a IWTSTH attempt , just because I think they are mostly used in spite and for free information gathering, usually by people not even in the hand.
If there was collusion, player 2 wouldn't have to call the all-in as villain already folded.
The thing I hate is the players who always muck when they're caught bluffing, yet always demand to see both players cards when it's not them. They won't let others muck, yet they do it the most.
If there was collusion, player 2 wouldn't have to call the all-in as villain already folded.
Exactly, but since the 'purpose' of IWTSTH is to 'catch' collusion, by invoking it you are saying that's what you suspect both parties of. By pulling the person aside, you are not embarrassing someone YET you are educating them to the purpose and true intention of the rule.
Last night on a $5-$5 No Limit cash game.
On the turn...
Villain bets out.
Player 2 raises.
Player 3 re-raises and is all in.
Villain angrily folds.
Player 2 calls.
River card is dealt.
Villain immediately yells "I want to see both hands. Dealer, protect the muck! I want to see all of those cards!".
First guy shows his hand. All in player mucks his cards. Dealer grabs the mucked hand, looks at the villain and asks "Do you want to see this hand?".
As I was watching the game and saw all of the action from turn card on, I instructed the dealer to muck the cards and NOT show them. Villain begins vehement arguement.
Without any further information, was I right or wrong to do what I did?
In what circumstance would I be right to do so?
In what circumstance would I be wrong to do so?
Am I crazy to turn this loose on this forum?
The rule is there to stop collusion.
The rule is *not* there for players to gather information on how others play their hands.
You should allow "I Want To See That Hand" (IWTSTH) where it's reasonable to suspect collusion.
You should not allow spurious IWTSTH when it's being used by players for the sole purposes of gathering information.
IWTSTH is saying you are accusing the other player of cheating. It's not to be used lightly.
I think it's a good idea to turn this loose at the forum, so many players don't understand the rule that it will be good education.
Maybe Im way off here, but the guy that wants to see both hands can ask when the hand is over. Not yelling and screaming at the dealer on the turn or whenever. Plus the dealer shouldnt be the one 'volunteering' to open the hand. "Do you want to see these cards". When someone folds, a player can ask to see the hand. The dealer taps it on the muck to kill the hand and then opens it.
It seems that the villain was squeezed out of the pot by the other two players. Maybe he had noticed this before and actually had concerns of collusion. Based on how you describe his tone I think he had some suspicion.
I remember watching Live at the Bike and the commentators pointed out two guys who would squeeze out others to get heads up and then soft play each other and check it down.
I would have shown the cards because he has the right to see them. I would have then explained the intent of the rule. Hopefully the 2 other players would have legitimate hands. If it was collusion and one or both had junk, it would be difficult to prove that they were squeezing and not just pulling an outrageous bluff.
There is a rule in Robert's Rules of Poker that states that any player dealt into a hand has a right to see any other hand that was eligible for showdown. As previously mentioned, this is the commonly referred to as IWTSTH.
Most major cardrooms I have played in allow this rule to be invoked and most dealers know how to do this. However, if a player is consistently using this rule, the floor will speak with him and most cardrooms will not allow abuse of this rule.
In other cardrooms and at home games, the application of this rules varies locally so you never really know unless rules are posted or you ask the floor what the rules are (and this is a good idea any time you enter a new cardroom). Most homegames I play in have a rule where all cards eligible for showdown must be turned over.
However, there are several other higher games I play in where all players are competent and we don't even need to apply this sort of rule. In this game, we play with honor and do things like not asking a guy who bluffed the river and was called to show his hand first.
You are basically making an accusation of cheating by invoking this rule. This is the point I don't think most players understand. So when somebody tries this on me, I ask very directly why they are accusing me of cheating. This usually catches them off guard. I will then call the floor over and tell the floor I have been accused of cheating and explain the situation. The floor then usually explains to the table what the rule is for and there 's nothing like educating nine poker players at once.
If I had my choice to run a cardroom, I would apply this rule as follows. I'd instruct dealers to keep cards out of the muck face down when a player wants to see a showdown hand. I would then come to the table, pull the accuser aside and explain that he has just made an accusation of cheating which I take seriously. I would tell him that I would look at the cards myself, show them to the dealer and record all the cards involved, the betting sequence, and the players involved for the hand and keep it on record. I am fairly certain this would put the brakes on any collusion (in that fairly unlikely event). I am also fairly certain it would stop players from using the rule just to see cards.
@ Brooks:Why does the guy who asked get to see the hands? He's not in the hand, he didn't pay to see the cards, why shouldn't be able to ask UNLESS he suspects something funny. At that point, he should be going to the brush (or roaming floor supervisor) and relaying his fears to a supervisor. The supervisor should then assess the situation and monitor it (from a distance even) for the next couple of orbits. The brush (and this is why I shouldn't be a card room supervisor, I'm all about the customer service) should then revisit the situation with the player to see how they feel about things. If there continues to be concern, then the supervisor should pick a hand or two (where this occurred) speak to the dealer and have them pulled aside for review by him.
@ Quimby: If that's the case, then the player should be communicating his concerns to the floor. Asking to see every hand that two players are in isn't going to prove anything, and at some point the floor needs to be involved anyway.
If there was collusion, player 2 wouldn't have to call the all-in as villain already folded.
This fact does not prove that it was not collusion. It just means that the would be colluders are dumber or smarter than average!
The thing I hate is the players who always muck when they're caught bluffing, yet always demand to see both players cards when it's not them. They won't let others muck, yet they do it the most.
@ Quimby: If that's the case, then the player should be communicating his concerns to the floor. Asking to see every hand that two players are in isn't going to prove anything, and at some point the floor needs to be involved anyway.
If you suspected someone of cheating (which I hope never happens) would you inform the dealer first to make sure the cards are kept identifiable?
Is the rule written "anyone can see cards at showdown" or "anyone who suspects cheating can see cards at showdown"? Until that gets clarified there will be issues.
Maybe the guy knows he has the right to see the cards. I don't know.
Maybe he thinks they're cheating. I don't know.
Maybe he just wants to see the cards. I don't know.
I like Pantsonfire's solution. Etiquette is a part of poker. A lot of players don't realize that.
The thing I hate is the players who always muck when they're caught bluffing, yet always demand to see both players cards when it's not them. They won't let others muck, yet they do it the most.
It is common poker courtesy to show a winning hand. If a player bluffs into you and you call (i.e. snap off his bluff) and he says you got it, then show the hand. I love showing a bluffer that I called him with bottom pair or even A high. You think he's going to bluff me again anytime soon? If you want to get technical, then ask him to muck first and then show the hand. If there are three players in the hand, then only the winning hand should show.
If he ever says "you got it" then you show your hand and then he shows a hand that beats you, all bets are off against this clown and you now have every right to throw courtesy out of the window for this one player.
Why is this issue so difficult and/or controversial for so many players? I find it's mostly the intermediate players who now think that any info they can get they can now adjust their game somehow and start crushing their opponents. I'll happily show every one of my hands at showdown but you can be assured I will not be playing them the same in the future. Yes, I gave away information but it's information that I know they know and I can use that just as well.
Edit: Here is a rule in Robert's Rules of Poker
General Poker Rules-The Showdown
7. ........... In order to speed up the game, a player holding a probable winner is encouraged to show the hand without delay. ............
This isn't really a "rule" because there don't appear to be consequences but it certainly describes the spirit and sportsmanship of the game.
So, instead of instructing your Dealers how to deal with this kind of request properly, you just arbitrarily decided to remove this option altogether. I so detest these kinds of simplistic solutions. Either your Dealers are too stupid to understand the rules as practiced by so many other card rooms, legal and otherwise, or you do not trust them enough to act in accordance with those rules. Either way, it is not a good situation for the players.
In the last three days at work, I have revoked the privilege of players asking to see others' cards at showdown. In all instances, players made comments that they wanted to see what they were playing/raising/bluffing with. Not once, were they trying to accuse the other player of cheating.
Good... that's what you are supposed to do.
I off this tidbit: WPA: Rules - Tournament Rules Rules Relating to Final Action/Showdown
40.See Cards in a Showdown. No player may ask to see the cards of a losing hand in a showdown. The winning hand (whether it is called or checked) MUST be shown. A floor person can always be consulted to check any cards on request of a player. [Source: WPA]
So, instead of instructing your Dealers how to deal with this kind of request properly, you just arbitrarily decided to remove this option altogether. I so detest these kinds of simplistic solutions. Either your Dealers are too stupid to understand the rules as practiced by so many other card rooms, legal and otherwise, or you do not trust them enough to act in accordance with those rules. Either way, it is not a good situation for the players.
Actually, calling the floor over to explain why they won't be seeing any mucked hands is fine IMO... no sense getting the players pissed off with individual dealers who are working for tips... and after the dealers push, they'd just try again with the next dealer anyway.
I personally like this WPA rule, but the most important goal is to have a uniform set of rules and interpretations, so players will not keep getting burned at Niagara, CNE Casino, Casino Rama, WSOP, home games, etc. because of the widely varying house rules and which floor person happens to make the ruling.
Comments
Additional Questions:
a: At a home game..where normal rules don't apply
b: At a casino, or any serious game
c: Absolutely bat-shit crazy...you were just getting some good publicity for your awesome TD post.
Wrong... If villain has actual collusion concerns that he got snookered here, then he has every right to see both hands, or anyone else that was dealt in. Both hands in question were called hands, and everyone has a right to see them, as the rule is written. Certainly this rule (IWTSTH) is the most over-abused thing going... but you should have at least ask villain why? before you rule.
Depends, does your room have a stupid IWTSTH rule (anyone can ask to see any hand that gets called at showdown)?
I'd likely take the villain aside for a moment and ask the villain if he's indicating there's some sort of collusion going on between those 2 players, and what proof he has if he's sure there is. If he's got nothing, I'd let him know that asking to see another players hand especially while not in the hand for information is bad form.
If I was flooring in any card room anywhere, I'd always rule against a IWTSTH attempt , just because I think they are mostly used in spite and for free information gathering, usually by people not even in the hand.
The thing I hate is the players who always muck when they're caught bluffing, yet always demand to see both players cards when it's not them. They won't let others muck, yet they do it the most.
Exactly, but since the 'purpose' of IWTSTH is to 'catch' collusion, by invoking it you are saying that's what you suspect both parties of. By pulling the person aside, you are not embarrassing someone YET you are educating them to the purpose and true intention of the rule.
The rule is there to stop collusion.
The rule is *not* there for players to gather information on how others play their hands.
You should allow "I Want To See That Hand" (IWTSTH) where it's reasonable to suspect collusion.
You should not allow spurious IWTSTH when it's being used by players for the sole purposes of gathering information.
IWTSTH is saying you are accusing the other player of cheating. It's not to be used lightly.
I think it's a good idea to turn this loose at the forum, so many players don't understand the rule that it will be good education.
I remember watching Live at the Bike and the commentators pointed out two guys who would squeeze out others to get heads up and then soft play each other and check it down.
I would have shown the cards because he has the right to see them. I would have then explained the intent of the rule. Hopefully the 2 other players would have legitimate hands. If it was collusion and one or both had junk, it would be difficult to prove that they were squeezing and not just pulling an outrageous bluff.
Most major cardrooms I have played in allow this rule to be invoked and most dealers know how to do this. However, if a player is consistently using this rule, the floor will speak with him and most cardrooms will not allow abuse of this rule.
In other cardrooms and at home games, the application of this rules varies locally so you never really know unless rules are posted or you ask the floor what the rules are (and this is a good idea any time you enter a new cardroom). Most homegames I play in have a rule where all cards eligible for showdown must be turned over.
However, there are several other higher games I play in where all players are competent and we don't even need to apply this sort of rule. In this game, we play with honor and do things like not asking a guy who bluffed the river and was called to show his hand first.
You are basically making an accusation of cheating by invoking this rule. This is the point I don't think most players understand. So when somebody tries this on me, I ask very directly why they are accusing me of cheating. This usually catches them off guard. I will then call the floor over and tell the floor I have been accused of cheating and explain the situation. The floor then usually explains to the table what the rule is for and there 's nothing like educating nine poker players at once.
If I had my choice to run a cardroom, I would apply this rule as follows. I'd instruct dealers to keep cards out of the muck face down when a player wants to see a showdown hand. I would then come to the table, pull the accuser aside and explain that he has just made an accusation of cheating which I take seriously. I would tell him that I would look at the cards myself, show them to the dealer and record all the cards involved, the betting sequence, and the players involved for the hand and keep it on record. I am fairly certain this would put the brakes on any collusion (in that fairly unlikely event). I am also fairly certain it would stop players from using the rule just to see cards.
@ Quimby: If that's the case, then the player should be communicating his concerns to the floor. Asking to see every hand that two players are in isn't going to prove anything, and at some point the floor needs to be involved anyway.
If you suspected someone of cheating (which I hope never happens) would you inform the dealer first to make sure the cards are kept identifiable?
Is the rule written "anyone can see cards at showdown" or "anyone who suspects cheating can see cards at showdown"? Until that gets clarified there will be issues.
Maybe the guy knows he has the right to see the cards. I don't know.
Maybe he thinks they're cheating. I don't know.
Maybe he just wants to see the cards. I don't know.
I like Pantsonfire's solution. Etiquette is a part of poker. A lot of players don't realize that.
If he ever says "you got it" then you show your hand and then he shows a hand that beats you, all bets are off against this clown and you now have every right to throw courtesy out of the window for this one player.
Why is this issue so difficult and/or controversial for so many players? I find it's mostly the intermediate players who now think that any info they can get they can now adjust their game somehow and start crushing their opponents. I'll happily show every one of my hands at showdown but you can be assured I will not be playing them the same in the future. Yes, I gave away information but it's information that I know they know and I can use that just as well.
Edit: Here is a rule in Robert's Rules of Poker
General Poker Rules-The Showdown
7. ........... In order to speed up the game, a player holding a probable winner is encouraged to show the hand without delay. ............
This isn't really a "rule" because there don't appear to be consequences but it certainly describes the spirit and sportsmanship of the game.
Good... that's what you are supposed to do.
...and this is related to your OP... how?
Actually, calling the floor over to explain why they won't be seeing any mucked hands is fine IMO... no sense getting the players pissed off with individual dealers who are working for tips... and after the dealers push, they'd just try again with the next dealer anyway.
I hate the constant IWTSTH at low limits.
Do the other floorpeople at Fallsview/Niagara rule the same way?