Another Ethics Question...

[kid_surf]

I recently blew up at a player in a live game which is totally not my norm. I was playing low-limit and was up against a run of bad luck. Heads up, i get beat again at the river and proceeded to muck my cards. The lady who had just won the pot then asks the dealer to show her my cards and i briefly lost it. I reached over into the deck and flipped over about 20 of the cards and just said "gimme a break lady, can't you see I was no match for your Q3 off-suit". Anyway, I guess technically since i called her bet she was entitled to see my cards...but it just seemed like bad sportsmanship at the time. My question is...when do you all feel it is okay to request to see mucked cards when you are not in the pot?

[astroglide]

doing it after you've won is a dick move. you're entitled to it if they've making dick moves themselves. the only time i would ask would be if i suspected collusion.

[skunkworks]

I think it's almost never correct to ask to see cards unless you believe someone is colluding. Honestly, if what happened to you happened to me, I would be just as pissed. I hate it when people ask to see my mucked cards.

[deacsoft]

[ QUOTE ]
"gimme a break lady, can't you see I was no match for your Q3 off-suit".

[/ QUOTE ]

That's priceless /images/graemlins/smile.gif. But to answer your question, I agree with the others. Only in cases where you have a strong reason(s) to expect collusion.

[sucka]

I've played with people who constantly ask to see losing hands at the river - even if they weren't even in the hand!

I've politely told them before (only takes once to realize they don't give a [censored]) that them doing so is bad etiquette unless they suspect they are cheating. Clearly, they don't get it - so I just start asking to see their hands every time they are in a showdown and lose.

It doesn't take too many times of doing that and they stop, at least in my experience.

For the folks that just occasionally ask - well, there's nothing you can do about it. The habitual ones, like the aforementioned, it just gets out of hand and something has to be done.

I kinda like your play - even though it's not good manners - it probably made you feel better and there certainly wasn't any major harm done. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Lawrence Ng]

I've never asked to see a hand unless I suspect collusion which is extremely rare in the card rooms I play in. Other players want to see it just because they have the right to due to the stupid casino technicality.

If I were you, I would have swallowed it there but eventually make her show every hand she goes to the river and calls with I would make her show it.

[RydenStoompala]

I would never ask, unless I thought by asking I would throw a strong player into a tilting tailspin and get him chasing me on strong hands. Then I would ask, and probably request a deck change after the next hand, just to see if I could change his face color from blue to purple.

I had the same thing happen to me just a few weeks ago and I never even noticed. I just kept chipping away until Ms. Strawberry Shortstack was playing her last nickel. She had cracked my aces with 7-9 os, then told her neighbors how brilliantly she had sucked me in. So what?

[deacsoft]

You have a striking resemblence to Christopher Walken. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Paul2432]

The consensus seems to be asking to see cards is only OK if you suspect collusion.

So I assume everyone here only requests hand histories when playing on-line when they suspsect an opponent is cheating.

If not, what is the difference?

(note: I rarely if ever ask to see cards in B&M, but look up HHs on-line all the time. So I ask this question in an attempt to resolve a quandry, not to be an ass.)

Paul

[StellarWind]

So how did poker get into this ridiculous situation?

It's perfectly legal and very useful to see mucked hands but almost everyone agrees it's terribly rude in a B&M.

Imagine if the NFL played that way. Suppose everyone agreed that the normal and legal practice of bumping a wide receiver at the line of scrimmage was "rude" and there would have to be a fight after the play?

The real irony is that against many of you, when you finally do ask to see my cards I can assume you think I'm cheating. It doesn't get much more offensive than that.

People who play serious games should be allowed and expected to play by the rules. It's terrible that people have to ask whether perfectly normal and commonplace examples of following the rules are unethical. Obviously the rule need to be changed. Is that an impossible dream?

[Dov]

IMO, every hand still in the pot after the river betting is completed should be required to be turned up. This BS of concealing information because you lost is exactly that.

People have been getting away with it for a long time b/c the winners didn't want to rub it in, but it is still wrong.

In the most extreme cases, you will find someone calling out their hand (sometimes incorrectly), and then someone else showing down a better one, and the hand caller mucks his cards. This is obviously silly. You don't know whether or not he held the hand he claimed.

We also see variations of this with exposing kickers. Example - First player calls out K, second player shows his K, first player shows his kicker, second player shows or mucks depending on whether or not he can win.

All of these things should not happen. All hands still contesting for the pot should be opened at the end. Period.

Just my opinion.

[eagletmr]

if YOU called HER, you do NOT have to show your cards. You should only have to show them if she called you, because you have to show first. The lady had no right to see your cards, and you probably should have not let the dealer show her either, provided that you called her bet.

[astroglide]

poker is a game of deception. forcing everyone to table their hands would do signifigant harm to that, and would also make games way worse in general because players would get laughed at for what/how they were playing. remarkably dumb suggestion.

[Cerril]

Well it is legal (if very rude) to ask, and generally it's polite to show at that point - I recall reading an article but don't recall the standard casino rulebook stance. The thing is, you really can't do it unless you have reason and certainly not often.

[jasonHoldEm]

[ QUOTE ]
The lady had no right to see your cards, and you probably should have not let the dealer show her either, provided that you called her bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

For what it's worth this is not exactly correct. You do not have to voluntarily reveal your hand at the showdown, but once you are asked to show you must comply (or the dealer will/should do it for you).

Robert's Rules of Poker (http://www.pokercoach.us/RobsPkrRules4.htm) is the closest thing we have to an official poker rule-book.

In section 3, regarding the showdown, line 5 states:

[ QUOTE ]
5. Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that has been called, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is a link to a Mike O'Malley article discussing the rule and why it should be modified. (http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/showarticle.php?a_id=13902)

Peace,
J

[Cerril]

Thanks for the article link! That's precisely the one I was referring to in my post but I was too lazy to look it up.