B&M Rules - My Mucked Hand Was Turned Over! Who's right?

GrunchCan · #1 01-11-2005, 01:46 PM

Recently, I was heads-up on the river against an opponent I had been sparring with all night. He was first to act and bet, and I folded. The pot went to the Villan.

I mucked my cards to the burn pile, and the villan called the entire burn pile to be flipped over. I complained that I didn't call his river bet, so he couldn't insist that I reveal my cards. The dealer disagreed however, and flipped over the burn muck. It was quite clear which cards were mine.

I think the dealer was wrong to flip over the burn pile. What do you think?

IsaacW · #2 01-11-2005, 01:57 PM

You didn't call the river bet, so the other player has no right to see your cards, unless there's some exception for this when heads up.

As for the burn pile, I think that one depends on the cardroom. At Foxwoods there is a "No Rabbit Hunting" rule on the Poker Room Rules sign that explicitly states that the viewing of unexposed burn cards is prohibited.

Rick Nebiolo · #3 01-11-2005, 01:59 PM

I've never seen a dealer retrieve a mucked, folded hand when head up. The dealer was wrong.

~ Rick

GrunchCan · #4 01-11-2005, 02:01 PM

That's what I figured. Thanks.

steamboatin · #5 01-11-2005, 02:04 PM

Dealer was wrong.

andyfox · #6 01-11-2005, 02:05 PM

The Commerce rule book says any hand that is "called" must be shown, upon request, at the showdown. What does that mean? Recently, there was river action between me and one opponent that went check-check and my opponent mucked, conceding the pot. Another player wanted to see my hand. Since the guy is a jerk, I objected, and called the floorman over, who ruled I must show. (I had pocket jacks, so there was no embarrassment involved. Maybe I'm a jerk now too.) I know the floormen think that a hand must be shown to any requests to do so when the river action is checked around, but is that really the rule?

GrunchCan · #7 01-11-2005, 02:08 PM

One point of view could be that you did indeed call the bet - it just so happens that the bet was zero.

TiK · #8 01-11-2005, 02:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The Commerce rule book says any hand that is "called" must be shown, upon request, at the showdown. What does that mean? Recently, there was river action between me and one opponent that went check-check and my opponent mucked, conceding the pot. Another player wanted to see my hand. Since the guy is a jerk, I objected, and called the floorman over, who ruled I must show. (I had pocket jacks, so there was no embarrassment involved. Maybe I'm a jerk now too.) I know the floormen think that a hand must be shown to any requests to do so when the river action is checked around, but is that really the rule?
[ QUOTE ]
One point of view could be that you did indeed call the bet - it just so happens that the bet was zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case, wouldn't the other person's hand be the "called" hand? I think the "called" hand referred to by this rule refers to the callee, not the caller. I don't think AndyFox should have to show his hand in this situation, being the caller of the zero bet.

andyfox · #9 01-11-2005, 03:06 PM

I think it says that any hand must be shown, not just the "caller" or the "callee." I'll post the exact wording tonight.

Rick Nebiolo · #10 01-11-2005, 03:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The Commerce rule book says any hand that is "called" must be shown, upon request, at the showdown. What does that mean? Recently, there was river action between me and one opponent that went check-check and my opponent mucked, conceding the pot. Another player wanted to see my hand. Since the guy is a jerk, I objected, and called the floorman over, who ruled I must show. (I had pocket jacks, so there was no embarrassment involved. Maybe I'm a jerk now too.) I know the floormen think that a hand must be shown to any requests to do so when the river action is checked around, but is that really the rule?

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is the rule from the HWP rulebook, which should be similar to the Commerce's (my hard copy rulebooks are in a file cabinet that is inaccesable due to the fact I've had to move stuff around to avoid the wet spot on the carpet from the giant window leak in my home office [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img])

"44. 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."

I'd say the wording is ambiguous, but it has always been ruled that any live hand must be shown upon request. That said, I'd like to see the whole IWTSTH rule (this is essentially it) eliminated.

BTW, please take a look at Bike Floorman "Von Arx"'s first post in the Josh W "retrieved hand" thread. After reading this, I'd like to see his opinion on the whole subject of getting rid of IWTSTH along with other rules issues. We don't always agree, but he sure is competent and an impressive writer IMHO.

Regards,

Rick