1. Player A makes some verbal announcement, Player B mucks without showing any cards. Player A need not show his cards to claim the pot.
2. Similarly, Player A makes some verbal announcement, Player B responds without showing any cards. Player A mucks. Player B need not show his cards to claim the pot.
3. Player A makes some verbal announcement, Player B shows one card. Player A mucks. Player B need not show his other card(s) to claim the pot.
4. Player A makes some verbal announcement, Player B shows one card. Player A verbally responds (or not) without showing any cards. Player B mucks. Player A need not show his cards to claim the pot.
I assume that my interpretation is correct in the above scenarios.
Hi K-Lo: In general I would say that in each of your scenarios, the hand you identify as the winner is indeed the winner, BUT...
A: Ultimately the best thing is for all players who have paid to be in the showdown to table their hands and have them read by the dealer (and other players), to best ensure that the best hand wins, that's really what we want to have happen in poker: all cards speak at showdown. Note that the rule encourages players to table their hands, even if they feel they are beat, so as not to lose their right to ask to see the winner. If all players in the showdown muck without fully tabling their hand leaving the last live hand as the winner, then those who have mucked without tabling lose their right to ask to see the winner. Any player at the table who wasn't in the showdown still has the right to ask to see the winner (whether that request is granted depends on whether it is an express right to always see the winner of every hand contested or uncontested, or whether house policy is that a request to see is a privledge that may be accomodated or denied).
B: To the point that "the hand need not be shown". At the current time this depends on house policy. See Rule 15 "express right to see a hand". Some houses may require that every winning hand be shown, whether the pot is contested or not, some may have it as an express right (must be shown if asked), and some may have it as a privledge. This is an issue for standardization at the next Summit. In the meantime it is up to the house policy whether the hand must be shown, and if it must be whether the hand must be turned up routinely or only pursuant to a request.
C: I would add parenthetically that in each of your examples one player has said something to the other player via a "verbal announcement". At the 2011 Summit the deceptive trashtalk between Reinkemeir and DeWolfe was reviewed in the Situations and Procedures session on Day 2. This was generally seen as very undesirable to have players "talking to each other" during the showdown when cards should be tabled and read. I would expect further discussion and perhaps some rules or procedures to come out of the next Summit addressing showdown management so that this trashtalking at the showdown is minimized.
However, the Rule does not appear to be strictly a "last live hand wins" rule, since the Rule makes reference to all of opponent cards being mucked without being revealed. Am I correct to interpret this Rule as saying that when cards have been mucked that HAVE been revealed, that all hole cards must then be shown to claim the pot (per New Rule 13)?
This may need some slight language clarification in a Version 2.0., thank you for asking the question. What is intended is: if all opponent(s) at the showdown have mucked without fully tabling their hand. In holdem for example, every opponent at the showdown has either: mucked both cards face down, or mucked having shown just one card (i.e. has not "tabled their hand" so cards can speak.
When this happens, only one player is left ("the last live hand"). Again, whether that hand has to be tabled or not at this point depends on house policy per Rule 15. But if it's house policy that the hand is only shown by player request, those players who mucked at showdown lose the right to ask.
5. Player A shows one card. Player B shows one card. Player A mucks. Should the dealer ask Player B to turn over his other card(s) when claiming the pot since not all of A's cards were mucked without being revealed? I would say this is up to house policy, player A has not shown his hand thus it is an uncontested showdown
6. Player A shows one card. Player B shows hand and then mucks his hand. Should the dealer ask Player B to turn over his other card(s) when claiming the pot? I think you mean to ask should dealer ask A to turn over his other card..... I would say this is a contested showdown... B has shown his full hand and the hand should not be mucked without seeing Player A's entire hand and letting cards speak. The dealer cannot kill a winning hand (Rule 16), and all hole cards must be revealed to win a contested showdown (Rule 13), so A must show his entire hand.
7. Player A tables his hand. Player B shows one card, which is sufficient to win. Player A mucks. Should the dealer ask Player B to turn over his other card(s) when claiming the pot? Yes, this is same situation as 6.
If the answer to #5-7 were "yes", then what happens if the winning one-card shower, for whatever reason, mucks his hand too? E.g. if the player continuously refuses to show the second card. He has to show all hole cards in a contested showdown, there's no such thing as refusing to show if he wants to win the pot, otherwise he's mucking without tabling all his hole cards in a contested showdown
K
Thanks alot for the great questions !
