Checking on the showdown...

[BankyEdwards]

A big argument broke out this week at the weekly home game. Seven stud, all cards out, three players. Pair of aces checks, pair of nines checks, last player (can't remember what he had) folds. The nines says "I can't beat the aces" and mucks. The folder throws a nutty, claiming you can't check if you can't beat what's showing (at the end, of course). I've never come up against this situation, and could see both sides. Is this an official rule (casino rule, say), or just a sneaky play that gets old men worked up?

[SevenStuda]

Checking is the correct move, folding to no bet is actually poor poker ettiqute. The reason being, you give valuable information to people in late position, especially if checking and raising is allowed.

-Dimitri

[mistrpug]

The folder is wrong.

[Big Country]

You always have the option to check, bet(or raise) or fold, regardless of what cards are out there.

Yes, folding to a check is poor etiquette, but it is not against the rules. However, as the guy was on the end, I would assume he was basically saying I check and can't beat the board of the other player.

To answer your question, there is definitely no rule that saysa player can not check if he can not beat the board of another player.

[ohgeetee]

thats like saying you cant raise if you are unable to beat the board of another player. What if someone wanted to check raise the river and bump someone off a winning but weak board?

Sounds like the guy is taking normad chads advice of "when you can't beat your oppenents board its time to fold" as if its the rule or something.

[BankyEdwards]

The problem was that the guy on the end folded the winning hand. It turned out that the pair of aces had nothing else, same with the nines. According to his "rule," the nines should have folded, and he read the check as indicating at least two pair. Figuring he was against two pair twice, including aces up, he mucked his own two pair.

I argued what you all are saying - a check is a bet of zero, and there's no need to fold to a non-bet. This guy also believes that there should be a rule against check-raise, and in fact no one does it to him for fear of an argument. Hell, he's a grizzled WWII vet so we try to treat him gently. But I wasn't sure if there really was some kind of rule that forbids a check if you can't beat the board. But I didn't think so.

[Big Country]

His fault for mucking a winner to a $0 bet.

[Nick_Foxx]

im thinking he transferred this "rule" from 5-card stud - i put rule in quotes because its not a rule of 5-card stud, just that you usually bet/raise or fold on the end and there are very few checkdowns if any (because of the nature of the game, one player pretty much always knows if he has an "immortal" - unless you're steve mcqueen in cincinnati kid)

mike

[BankyEdwards]

The Kid's got him! Great movie.

Thanks for the advice everyone.