"Let me see his cards"

[Warik]

Every couple of hands where things ended up with a showdown between two or three players, a player would muck his cards after seeing that he was beat. Another player involved in the showdown (the same player each time) would tell the dealer "let me see his cards" or "I want to see his cards" and the dealer would flip over the mucked cards.

What gives? I thought once the cards are mucked they are never to be seen. Is this allowed? Can the player who is mucking his cards say NO and make the cards stay mucked?

[mmanne]

It is allowed to ask to see a person's cards, if he/she went to showdown. However, the point of the rule is to discourage and stop collusion. The only reason most people use it in a casino is to gain information, which is not at all the reason it's out there. I consider it "cheaping", not technically against the rules, but against every spirit of the rule

[Warik]

[ QUOTE ]
It is allowed to ask to see a person's cards, if he/she went to showdown. However, the point of the rule is to discourage and stop collusion. The only reason most people use it in a casino is to gain information, which is not at all the reason it's out there. I consider it "cheaping", not technically against the rules, but against every spirit of the rule

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, whoever violates the courtesy of not asking to see mucked cards will have all of his mucked cards seen by me until I win a pot off of him... bwahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!

[LetsRock]

The only way you can win a pot in a show-down is to show your cards. If you choose to forfiet your right to pot by mucking your cards, it is your right and they should stay mucked once mucked.

You typically won't get "collusion mucks" at a showdown (one of the players usually folds before the showdown), so there's no real reason to dig into the muck pile for discards.

I don't have a problem with being asked to see them, but it's my right to not show you if I choose to forfeit my chance at the pot.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
In that case, whoever violates the courtesy of not asking to see mucked cards will have all of his mucked cards seen by me until I win a pot off of him... bwahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I had this problem in AC a few weeks ago with one player - Your solution is the one I used. It was amazing how upset this player got when I started asking to see their cards EVERY TIME.

[Dante]

Typical casino rules are on the river, anyone who calls the final bet, their hand can be shown if someone asks (even people at the table not in the hand anymore), since they called the final bet.

As others stated, the goal was to be a tool used to help prevent collusion, but it's usually used to embarrass someone or get a line on their play. Typically if you start doing it more than once a session, people will start doing it to you.

So yes, it's not against the rules, but it's a jagbag move that will cause other people to do it to you. It usually just accomplishes making people play harder at you, which is not what you generally want..

Bill

[ninja please]

it's also interesting to note that, at least at foxwoods, if the winner of the hand requests to see a caller's mucked cards, the hand stays live and he/she can in fact lose if the mucked hand turns out to be better. can't imagine this happens that often, but given that i disagree with these "information viewings" i can't wait to see it happen.

if a player who was not involved in the hand requests to see mucked cards (again, at least at foxwoods) the cards are first made dead by the dealer, then shown down, so a better hand would not win in that case.

[Mike Gallo]

Another player involved in the showdown (the same player each time) would tell the dealer "let me see his cards" or "I want to see his cards" and the dealer would flip over the mucked cards.

If you want to find the psychological reason behind the players actions, post this in the psychology forum.

[Lawrence Ng]

The rule of "showing all hands" at showdown is a contradiction itself, because if there really is any collusion one of the players is sure to muck and not call the final bet.

Often times, two players are raising and reraising because obviously one hand is made and/or another hand is drawing very live and all the other players are sandwiched with their 4 or 2 outers which might be dead outs.

Surprisingly I've been asked many times to see my hand at showdown because some player who bluffed me, mucked his hand and some other player who wasn't even involved in the pot wanted to see it just so he could see how I played my hand.

That really got me ticked off because the game of poker is after all to reveal as little information about yourself and to gain as much about others as possible.

So I started up a good conversation with the man saying that he was taking unfair advantage of this ruling and that his calling to see my hand had absolutely nothing to do with collusion whatsoever, but more so to take a free shot at seeing my cards.

Needless to say I demanded to see his hand at showdown whenever he was in it. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[scrub]

Most dealers dislike the angle shooters. In my experience, they don't like enforcing the rule. If you make sure that you toss your hand INTO the muck every time you muck on the river, most dealers will not fish it out, claiming that they can't be sure which cards are the hand in question. This probably doesn't work if you're obnoxious to dealers, but it's always worked for me.

And it drives the angle-shooters NUTS. I've seen some of them spend more energy trying to make sure that the dealer protects the muck than paying attention to the game.

scrub

[Rams_Law]

I agree that the rule is hardly useful, and more often misued that used for its orginal intent. I also agree witht he setiment of applying it harshly to angle shooters. However, two fossils were pissing at each other in a Trop 2/4 game I played one time and it really slowed things down. Made me almost want to get up if the table wasn't so soft.

My point is maybe you should use it agreesively once or twice to see if the offender gets the point, than let the game continune. Tossing in the muck with a cooperative dealer is a good solution too.

[RydenStoompala]

I've noticed a consistency in the quality of players who continually want the cards flipped. They're tight, snarly, usually older, stupid, angry, lonely, screwed-up and generally a**holes. Maybe the tactic is just consistent with their vow to continually be the biggest jerk in the room, a pledge they never want to break. Watch the behavior next time and see if the same dork(s) asking the dealer to flip cards is the guy giving open criticism of everyone else's play. The last vegetable doing it at my table was coaching the player next to him to play q-2 agressively because "it is the best starting hand in hold'em." Case closed.

[jedi]

And if they happen to fish out the wrong 2 cards, then great. More mis-information for your opponents.

I have to confess that I've been guilty of asking to see a player's cards after they've mucked. I've never done it more than once a session, and a few times it was someone who was actually obligated to show the hand, but decided not to.

[ QUOTE ]
If you make sure that you toss your hand INTO the muck every time you muck on the river, most dealers will not fish it out, claiming that they can't be sure which cards are the hand in question.

[/ QUOTE ]

[McMelchior]

To my dismay at The Trop, Atlantic City, I've witnessed Alan Schoonmaker, Ph.D. and guardian of ethics in poker, request to see mucked cards in a hand he even never was involved in (in a situation where collusion never could have been an issue). So obviously the idea that this practice is a kind of angle shooting is not universally shared.

By the way, half a year ago I requested to see the rule book at Foxwoods' poker counter and was told they had no such thing, but relied on the knowledge of floor persons & manager ... I find it very surprising, can anyone confirm?

Best,

McMelchior (Johan)

[CrackerZack]

I once got a rulebook at Mohegan Sun and they took it from me and asked me to point out who gave it to me. When I didn't they were none to pleased.

[M.B.E.]

There are lots of threads about the IWTSTH rule (sometimes called IWSTH on the theory that "wanna" is a single word). A lot of people think it should be eliminated, but it persists.

Click here for an article by Tommy Angelo (http://www.tommyangelo.com/articles/i%20want%20to%20see%20that%20hand.htm)

Here are some links to prior discussion on 2+2:

http://www.twoplustwo.com/digests/holdem_arch_mar01_msg.html#68614

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=37480

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=40711

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=58633

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=82062 (by Tommy Angelo)

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=93242

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=165242

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=170761

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=genpok&Number=174846

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=holdem&Number=222432#Post2 22686

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Number=278693

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=340699

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=392715

[wontons]

ANGLE SHOOTERS???? how is asking to see sumones cards so u can gain knowledge about there play be angle shooting? My definition of angle shooter is doing sumthing corrupt or morally wrong to gain money...im just curious and not attacking u but how is this angle shooting?

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
There are lots of threads about the IWTSTH rule (sometimes called IWSTH on the theory that "wanna" is a single word). A lot of people think it should be eliminated, but it persists.

[/ QUOTE ]

It persists for very good reason. Just tonight, myself and another player at my table invoked it to expose two jerks who were clearly working together.

SpaceAce

[sfer]

My interpretation of angle-shooting is taking advantage of rules that in a manner unrelated to the intent of the rules. Making showdown cards viewable was intended to fish out collusion, not to gain insight as to how people play. Using an anti-collusion rule for personal information about someone's playing style seems like angle-shooting from that perspective.

[2000Flushes]

Online (at least at party) if your opponent called the river but mucks his cards will still be in the hand history, but only the one that is e-mailed to you, not the instant one available at the table.

It's a huge profit boost for the better player when you get to see what types of hands people not only play, but are willing to call you all the way with and you don't have to ruffle any feathers.

Personally I think everyone who calls the last bet should have to turn their cards up and not even have the option of mucking. If you don't want your cards seen then fold before that point, but if you're willing to take a stab at my pot then I feel you forfeited your right to muck.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
It persists for very good reason. Just tonight, myself and another player at my table invoked it to expose two jerks who were clearly working together.

[/ QUOTE ]
How did that happen? Usually colluders can easily defeat IWTSTH by having one of them fold (either on the river or earlier). I'd be interested to hear what happened in your case; was it merely that the colluders were very unsophisticated? Or did they simply not expect anyone to invoke IWTSTH against them?

What was the house's reaction? Were the players barred?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
Online (at least at party) if your opponent called the river but mucks his cards will still be in the hand history, but only the one that is e-mailed to you, not the instant one available at the table.

[/ QUOTE ]
I wish they did not do this. I think that hand histories emailed to you should show players' hole cards only if they were exposed at the table for everyone to see.

Has anyone compiled a list of each site's policy on which hole cards are included in hand histories?

[baggins]

[ QUOTE ]
ANGLE SHOOTERS???? how is asking to see sumones cards so u can gain knowledge about there play be angle shooting? My definition of angle shooter is doing sumthing corrupt or morally wrong to gain money...im just curious and not attacking u but how is this angle shooting?

[/ QUOTE ]

its angle shooting because the intent of the rule is to protect against collusion. if you call somebody down, and then get shown a winner, you have the right to muck. you called, you didn't get called. conversely, if somebody calls YOU on the river, they have every right to see your cards.

basically, you didn't pay for information. you bet, and got called, and showed a superior hand. your reward is the pot. you shouldn't need to see exactly what you were called down with - you should know it is less than your hand. and you should have a good enough read to know just about what the caller had anyway...

[LetsRock]

[ QUOTE ]
Personally I think everyone who calls the last bet should have to turn their cards up and not even have the option of mucking. If you don't want your cards seen then fold before that point, but if you're willing to take a stab at my pot then I feel you forfeited your right to muck.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. If I choose to forfiet my chances at a pot, I have every right to muck. It's often foolish not let the dealer award the pot (I could have misread my hand), but I have every right muck if I want unless the dealer is shoving the pot to me.