Showing one card

[hoosier418]

 Two players are in the hand. The hand goes all the way to showdown. Player 1 tables his hand and shows middle pair. Player 2 tables one card , an ace for top pair but keeps the other card in her hand. The dealer says "pair of aces"  . Player 2 then throws both cards into the muck. I immediatly agued that mucking one card is the same as mucking the hand and that player 1 should get the pot.
 I was of the understanding that with a contested pot at showdown both cards must be shown. Because one card doesn't constitute a hand. Am I wrong ?

[Stuart Murray]

hi hoosier418, you are correct, player 2 should have tabled both cards because he was in a contested showdown, if player 1 had mucked his hand after player 2 showed the Ace that would of been fine as the showdown would not of been contested and player 2 would of won the hand by having the last live hand. because an inferior hand has been tabled in full, any further players must table both their hold cards in order to claim the pot by having the high hand.

In your situation player 1 gets the pot as player 2 has mucked his hand and has failed to lay claim to the pot by not tabling both his cards.

Regards
Stuart

[hoosier418]

 Is there a rule that spells it out that both hole cards must be shown ? The only rule I see that is close to this is rule 13 which specifies both hole cards be shown to play the board. Maybe some wording about contested pots should be added to rule 13 .

[Nick C]

hoosier418 and Stuart,
 If the dealer did his job, the situation you describe wouldn't happen. We need to train the dealers. When Player 2 showed one card, the dealer should have told her that she must show both cards. The fault lies with the dealer.
 
 There are some easy fixes for many of the mistakes that are made, especially in tournaments. If you insist that all hands are tabled at the showdown, you wouldn't have these problems. Why must all hands be shown only when a player is all-in? I've mentioned this on other threads and there was never a logical answer from anyone.

 Yes, both cards must be shown to win the pot, and yes she was wrong to muck her hand. However, the dealer is at fault for not protecting the player that had the best hand. IMO, there are far too many that follow the rules without considering what should be in the best interest of the game, your players and your card room.

 One warning to that player should have been enough. If she does it again, she loses.

hoosier418, is that really the way you want to win the pot?

[Stuart Murray]

Hi Hoosier

13.   Contested Showdown / Playing the Board. All hole cards must be shown to win a contested showdown, even if playing the board.

Applies in simple English to that situation.

Regards
Stuart

[K-Lo]

The other hand must be tabled to be entitled to win the pot, since only the first hand has been tabled at that point and it does not appear that the first player mucked his cards after seeing the Ace.

I agree with Nick C that the dealer should have intervened here.

Stuart - the Rule that you stated has now been removed from the current version of the Rules.  In another thread, I think it was explained that the rule was removed to accommodate house rules. 

[DCJ001]

I'm sure that you've all seen players show their hole cards to players, or even the dealer, before mucking their hands. What if a player were to make the best hand without noticing it, bluff the river card, get called, show his hand to another player, then make an effort to muck his hand. Is it okay for a player or dealer to tell the mucking player that he should table his hand so that he can win the pot?

Isn't this the same as a player or dealer telling a player who only shows one card at showdown to table his hand?

[Nick C]

No.

[hoosier418]

 Stuart I appreciate the help , but rule 13 is not stated that way . Only mentions playing the board not contested hands. I was really looking for something in black and white that spelled it out.
 
 I agree with the dealer problem part of it . But this is at the local Eagles with volunteer dealers that really just sling cards and don't know the rules very well. Get what you pay for situation.

 And for those who are wondering , no I was not involved in the hand. I was playing but I had also been asked to "oversee" the game. We were down to 6 players and it paid 3. It was a huge pot and crippled the other player. Also she had been warned about it before but when I said the hand was mucked she denied ever being warned. Then some of the players started whining about it being "a friendly game" , and how it was just a mistake blah blah blah. It became obvious that the only way I was getting it done right was me physically pushing the pot from her and to the other player. I figured that would cause me alot more trouble than it was worth.

 Funny thing was a few hands later the dealer exposed a card and they all looked at me and asked what to do. I just sat there and shrugged my shoulders. I just wanted to make sure my call was correct before I tell them that I will not be helping run any more tournaments.

[K-Lo]

OK... How about the rule on Showdown in Robert's Rules:

THE SHOWDOWN
1.   To win any part of a pot, a player must show all of his cards faceup on the table, whether they were used in the final hand played or not.

[Nick C]

hoosier418,
 It's unfortunate that you had that experience. I suggest that you sit down and write a basic set of house rules and make a point to go over a few situations that cause the most problems. For example, No Smoking....Act in turn....Protect your own hand....No splashing the pot....Check raise allowed....Three raise limit.....Verbal bets are binding....All cards must be shown by winner at showdown. All of these simple rules would keep you in compliance with the TDA, Robert's Rules, or any rulebook that's ever been written.

 I always tell my student dealers to insist that the complete hand is shown before an accurate reading can be made. When the player showed one ace, the dealer should not have said, "a pair of aces," he should have insisted both cards be exposed. I know that you are aware of that but it's so important, it's worth mentioning again.

While I was writing K-Lo added just what you are looking for.

Robert's Rules makes reference to showing all cards face up but, I always felt that rule, could be better written. Exactly what is meant by "whether they were used in the final hand played or not?" I can only guess that all cards must be tabled, even if they are not part of your best five card hand, is what they meant.

 I'm in favor of adopting a rule for tournaments that demand all called hands be tabled at the showdown. Why is this rule only for showdown situations with all-in player's only?

Hoosier418, it sounds to me like someone trusts you and respects you to run those tournaments. Don't give up, just take a firm stance and they will realize that your decision will be in the best interest of the game.

[Stuart Murray]

Whoops me bad K-Lo apologies! I am thus sufficiently out of date atm, I missed the discussion re. removal of rule 13.

Hoosier sounds like you either need to take total charge or let the tournament go to the dogs, by having nothing to do with it, as that is what will happen when players get sick and tired of rules being inconsistently implemented, with no consistency.  I run a pub poker league, self deal (the button deals the hand) and would not tolerate this type of laxness at my tables.

With regard to showdown's being mandatory for all hands, I am against this Nick.  I did a few events for a casino in Aberdeen, Scotland, and they enforced a showdown all hands rule, it seemed to be the way 'up there' it was quite nice from a floor aspect and made the game a lot easier to run, however poker is an individual game, other than making it easier for us I have never saw any other real excuse for show all hands at showdown rule, for me, the less hands that are tabled the better, I don't want to show my hand if I am loosing, neither am I that much interested in seeing my opponents hand, I want the chips in the middle if i'm winning or to muck my hand face down if I'm loosing, even when all-in chip dumping really is a rare issue, although I enfore TDA rule 'Face Up For All Ins' I'm not a fan of it, and would be quite happy to allow mucking hands when all-in.

Stu

[Nick C]

Stuart,
 Nice post. You are leaning towards the standard for cash games, and I prefer that myself. Who wants to see the hands after you've lost? Who cares? Throw the hand away, I don't care. However, if I want to see your called hand, I have that right.
 Stuart, you've made your feelings very clear, I find it very interesting that you support a rule that you don't agree with, rather than lobby for a change. Yeah, I feel that way too and I'm glad that you voiced your opinion.

 Hoosier418,
 I'd like to offer reasons for the "must show complete hand rule"  that you could pass along to your dealers and player's. Telling them why, should be enough.
            #1 reason is: Proof that every player has the required number of cards, no more, no less.
            #2 The only way to properly read the hand, is to see all of the cards.
            #3 Prevent a player from holding back one card, and not showing it, unless it's needed. (very unethical)

[hoosier418]

 Thank you all for the advice and suggestions. I especially liked Nick Cs suggestion about posting house rules . I had a copy of the latest TDA rules at the game. But as said earlier it doesnt really spell it out. It may be best to use the TDA rules as a base and add or eliminate as needed for this particular game. Thanks again.

 One story to let you know wht level of player and dealer I am stuck with. Same night 3 or 4 hands into the game . A hand goes to showdown with 2 players. The board plays out with 5 diamonds on the board. The players show their hands , I take a quick look and see no diamonds. OK chop it I"m thinking to myself. The player to my right says "pair of queens". Player at the other end says "pair of kings". I just sat there to see what the dealer would do and sure enough. She started to push it to the other end. I stopped her and explained the flush on the board . Both players and several others just staired at the board , saying "wow I didnt even see that."

[chet]

Hoosier418:  Your idea to adopt some "House Rules" is definitely the way to go.  You mentioned starting with the TDA Rules and adapting them to your local game.  The TDA Rules are intended to supplement (Note DCJ001 I did not use caps) existing house rules.  For that reason, I suggest you start with Robert's Rules of Poker, Google the Internet for the latest version which I believe is V. 11.  You can then apply the TDA Rules and go from there. 

Chet