If I feel the person is trying to slide by, I wait him out. If he's not, I might go first. Generally, I wait.

Just sit there and wait, with your card protector on your cards. If he says "Whatchu got?" just say "I called you, whatchu got?". Most people at the table will be annoyed that this is slowing down the game and the offender usually gets it. I wouldn't say anything about the floor. Just sit there patiently and wait, until he gets it. What he is supposed to "get" is that you understand the rules and you're going to play by them and he's not going to get any free information without giving you what you paid to see. Nothing "hardball" on your part.

I disagree. If he bluffed, I want to see the cards that he played in the manner he did. If he doesn't want to show, he can muck. Nothing mysterious or devious going on here, it's elementary rules of poker.

If you're trying to induce bluffs, then don't make him show. If you don't like being bluffed, then make him show. This isn't rocket science.

It's simple. If you force people to show their bluffs, there's a tendency for them to bluff less often because it's embarrassing to get called and have to show.

If someone breaks a rule, or the dealer makes a mistake, and I have to call the floor..... am I "holding up the game" or is someone else?

I agree in part with your sentiment, but if someone's playing games in this type of situation ("I'm not showing first"), then I'm going to try to squash it.

I've been in Vegas this past weekend and this has been a huge problem in the 1/2 NLHE games. The ones who refuse to show are always younger players who know the rules, and they usually do it against the touristy casual players. In other words, they are constantly angle shooting in order to gain information and doing everything not to give anything away. It's annoying, slows the game down, and scares the fish. It's the dealers' responsibility to enforce the rules in the first instance, but they refuse to do so.

exactly

In a 2/4 or 3/6 limit game you should look for reasons to show hands at the showdown, especially ones that look completely silly to the uneducated eye. This just gives the loosies confidence that other people play silly hands and makes the nits respect your bets less.

One favorite is when you miss a draw and it checks around four or five handed, slam down your hand like it is a monster and say with authority "jack high" or whatever. It moves things along, and helps with the table image. If you try a scary card river checkraise bluff on the rare opponent that will lay down a good hand (some people love to make laydowns) and are called, turn over the bluff, don't look for reasons not to show. When almost all of your bets are for value, you want people to call you.

These things go a long, long way in covering tight play. The more hands you show, good or bad, the looser it makes you look, more like one of the gang instead of a serious player.

Again, this is in a loose low limit game where almost all information is as good as disinformation to most opponents... It is a silly policy in other contexts.

Thanks very much for those thoughts; I'll be sure to share that reasoning with a couple friends of mine that are true n00bs and play only 2/4 LHE when we go to B&M. They definitely play very tight, so I am sure it will help appreciably.

Thanks also to all the others that have shared their thoughts. There's been a lot of interesting discussion on the issue and closely-related issues.

jeffnc...you might want to check you rhetorical question/statement sensor

I always start right in on "I called you, what do you have?" The fact is that this is a game of information. If I called their bet then I PAID for that information. I like to get what I paid for.

Conversely if they called my bet I am inclined to ask them what they have and see if they will show without asking to see mine first. If they do I win extra free information. If they ask after that what I have I won't ******* shove my cards in the muck before they can see them, but often people just show without hesitation.

But you should check your analyzer :-)

You said "Why would you want to embarrass them into tighter play?" My reply, to be explicit, is that I understand of course this is a rhetorical question, so I'm not answering your question. I'm saying you shouldn't be asking a rhetorical question. You generally don't want people playing more tightly. Then again, you very well might want someone to stop bluffing you (assuming you're having a hard time telling when they are and when they aren't).

+1

Why is this so hard? If they say something like "I missed" or "you're good" I just look at them and wait for them to either show or muck.

Certainly within your rights, but i find that it speeds the game along to just show if it's obvious they're indicating that i have the best hand. (I lose information those times they'd show me their bluff rather than shove it in the muck.) Obviously if they ever slowroll me once then they'll show in turn from then on.

It takes a healthy set of nads for a mod to make this admission. Thanks. Probably like you, I'm a total dork for the game, watch it on TV, have several books, and yet...I can usually crush the bar poker games, but whenever there's actual $$ on the line, not so much.

Anyway, I think you should get over this particular peeve. Just show down like you've got the absolute nuts. If he's got ya, he's got ya.

Here's a great reason: What if, one time, in a healthy pot, a villain mis-reads his hand (doesn't see the flush or some wierd straight that got there) and mucks the winner, giving you the pot? Of course, you'll never know it. But still, I bet that would make up for all the tilt you endured.

I suggest not forcing villain to show. Tell him "Show a better hand or muck, while we're young!" Give him every opportunity to fold the winning hand.

And for God's sake, don't call the floor about this. You can't really rightly complain about villain wasting time if you're calling the floor about something so petty. Gripe to the dealer. Keeping the game moving is his job.

Just my two cents. Probably worth exactly what you paid to hear it.

Here's why pfapfap is right.. Playing poker is a collection of watching many hands over an extended period of time, it's also paying attention and learning even when you aren't in the pot.

It's what allows you to hand read effectively. You are not working from an isolated incident, it's from a collection of the past few hours or sessions regarding a person.

If you see a player previously (or in the future) bet big with top pair, he will do that again. The vast majority of players (and I would wager 100% of players at low-limits) are not varying their play. The way they play top pair this time, is the same way they will play top pair NEXT time.

You will also know their bluff frequency based on paying attention.

So knowing a guy who hasn't shown a bluff yet mucks to you showing two pair after you have seen him make similar moves with top pair on the river before, allows you to know it's very unlikely he's bluffed and more likely he had top pair.

As you can see, making a donator show, antagonizing your customers isn't necessary and in my opinion is bad for the game in the short and long term.

And we want our opponents to play solid hands against us and bluff less often???


WAT?

EDIT Frickin' necro-bump.. lol

Well, yeah, except he's rarely vbetting top pair. Maybe occasionally lower two. In general all-in situations are most of the ones where i'm calling to close the action with a hand i expect to beat more than a bluff. Most small stakes opponents bet with ridiculously polarized ranges.

Also, i don't rush to volunteer my hand out of turn. I just call and wait, and if he coyly says "one pair" i'll probably show my two pair just to be nice. Obviously i'm sacrificing info about him turning a low pair into a bluff, but if he says "one pair" coyly i assume he thinks he's no good.

I call and then sit and wait for them to table their hand. If they do not get the hint after 30seconds I just tell them, "I called table your hand or muck please."

You remain polite and he looks like the bad guy. Win/win

I just turn my hand over. Otherwise you will be sitting there for four years.

I used to try to win the information war. I'd never show if I didn't have to, and I'd try to delay showing a crappy hand if I should've been showing first. It was douchetastic.

Now I always insta-show if I should be showing first, even with total rags. I'm (generally) smart enough at the table to know who will modify their game against me based on the cards I reveal and (generally) have a good idea which players won't change their game. The manner in which I insta-show is strong. It is confident. It's a big F. U. to people who think I can't ever bluff. I've missed with the low-end open-ended draws, given the strong insta-show and had my calling opponent muck. Those times (rare as they are) had to (HAD TO) be mistakes, but they misread my hand/board/attitude and away their untabled cards went into the muck.

On the opposite side, if my opponent is supposed to reveal first, I do wait a beat and give them their chance. But after that single beat after I call or check behind, I'll verbally announce the strength of my hand. If that doesn't prompt action, I'm not going to hold the game up any longer, and my cards get tabled. Rare is the case when I think I'm truly giving anything up in that situation, and never is the case when that manner of showdown ends up with the rest of the table thinking I'm the douche or give them specific reason to target me.

Against a true douche who should be showing first but doesn't, I'm tempted to (obviously miss-) call my hand as "deuce-high" to see if that prompts him to show. The entertainment from these mental scenarios powers me to take the high road vs. these true douches and to keep me from tilting myself based on their nature. The worst I've done (in the past few months, at least) is to counter a frequent-IWTSTHtard with a retaliatory IWTSTH in return. I felt bad and in retrospect wish I'd have treated that situation better, but it did have the desired effect both in the short term (he stopped) and in the long term (he had been a regular, and one with some aptitude despite his bullying nature; I haven't seen him in the room since showing him up, though I have to think our interaction had to be tertiary to whatever is primary in keeping him away).

goofy is correct. Usually in these situations, the villain is using non-verbal communication to tell you he believes his hand is no good and that you have the winner. To ignore these signs is rude. Plenty of people like this brand of rudeness though.

If I bet and get called on the river, I show immediately, even if it was a failed bluff. I feel this offsets any perceived rudeness for not turning over my hand when I've called a river bet until my opponent shows or mucks.

When I call, I usually do it this way.

"I call, I have a pair of jacks" and flip over my hand.

Works wonders.