Rules question on showing cards

I played in a live MTT this weekend. I had AA and led the betting all the way to the river at which point the river card gave a straight on the board, and I checked. I was called by one player, except on the river when the straight card came up and I checked he bet and I called. He showed 88 and was playing the board. I declared that I was playing the board. He said that he wanted to see my cards. I said fine, but I would ask to see his the rest of time if that's how he wants to play. Someone at the table said that I cannot collect on the pot unless I show my cards. I disagree since I declared I was playing the board. What is correct by the rules in a situation like this?

[Lloyd]

Nothing in the TDA rules but in Robert's Rules of Poker it says:

[ QUOTE ]
A player must show all cards in the hand face-up on the table to win any part of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the information and the source. I was told correctly at the table.

Maybe I have mis-understood but surely all cards in "the hand" are the 5 that you're playing (since a hand consists of 5 not 7 cards). Therefore the board cards are enough to collect your money from the pot.

Alternatively, I could be way off!!!

[tdomeski]

Thing is your not playing the board unless it (the 5 community cards) make the best hand among your 7 cards. This can't be determined until you show your other 2 cards. . . .

[Lloyd]

Think of this (unlikely) possibility - the hand is between two friends. One actually has a higher straight but winning will hurt his buddy while just chopping the pot doesn't make a huge difference to his own stack.

I think the main reason for this rule is to allow players who've lost a hand information about how their opponents play. For example, say you have QQ and the flop and turn are undercards and there's a lot of action on both streets. Then an A comes on the river, your opponent bets and you call. If your opponent flips over an A and refuses to show his other card, you don't get to know if he's a total donkey who overplayed a missed AK or if he's got AA.

Since the rules can't really specify when this should be enforced and when it shouldn't, the rule becomes that you must turn over both of your cards if you want any piece of a contested pot.

[ QUOTE ]
What is correct by the rules in a situation like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey P,

It is house rules that rule. Typically, in the case of disagreement with a player, you have a right to consult the dealer (if the dealer has already made a decision). If you have a conflict with a dealer decision, then typically have the right to ask for the floorperson. The floorperson's decision is always going to be final.

I can't speak for the rules at the casino you were playing at, but I know at Foxwoods and AC (and probably most bigger places out west), the cards "speak" but you have to show them to have them "speak." There is no declaring a hand. The dealer will make you turn them over, in order to make a decision on which player or players get the cheese.

Throwing your cards down, or refusing to turn them over, could be interpreted by a dealer or floorperson as a muck, and could cause them to rule you out of the hand.

In the UK where the ring games and small MTT tourneys are player dealt, the players at the table make the initial ruling. From my experience, the players tend to be very fair but also knowledgeable and strict on the rules interpretations. If you are going to show down a hand, then you have to show it down. If you're going to push the cards into the middle face down, or make any move that remotely looks like a muck, then players will make a case that the hand is dead, and rightly so IMHO.

In this case, I don't see the big deal other than trying to conceal how you played your Aces, unless it is already apparent that the opponent has the board beaten, in which case you just muck 'em. I wouldn't worry about showing them down. Next time you get a big pair, maybe you adjust and play them slightly differently.

Sounds like you had fun and made out ok there. Congrats.

Spee

[Black Aces 518]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the main reason for this rule is to allow players who've lost a hand information about how their opponents play. For example, say you have QQ and the flop and turn are undercards and there's a lot of action on both streets. Then an A comes on the river, your opponent bets and you call. If your opponent flips over an A and refuses to show his other card, you don't get to know if he's a total donkey who overplayed a missed AK or if he's got AA.

Since the rules can't really specify when this should be enforced and when it shouldn't, the rule becomes that you must turn over both of your cards if you want any piece of a contested pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding has been that the main point of the rule is to show you don't have, for example, two Aces of Spades in your hand. Not many rules exist so you can see if your opponent is good at poker or a donkey.

[jubeirm]

Here in Seattle at the card rooms I play in there are two rules that would apply in this situation:
<ul type="square"> [*] Any player (in the hand or not) can request that another player show his cards so long as the player being asked was still in the hand at "show down". In other words when all the betting is done and it comes time to show, if someone asks you MUST show.
[*] In the event of a split all players must show all their hole cards.[/list]Both rules, it was explained to me, exist to prevent collusion and/or other types of cheating. The first is rarely exercised and considered bad etiquette to abuse. The second is just a "must do" if you want part of the pot.

--Jubei