Must a winner hand must always show to claim pot?

Example A: Player A bet, player B call. Player A folds. Does player B have to show?

Example B: Player A check, player B bet. Player A call, player B folds. Does plater A have to show?

(both examples are a none all-in pot on river)

I know there are difference in 'house rules' and procedures and looking for standards from the larger casinos in LV.

Not looking for a discussion on the IWTSTH as there already are many threads about it.

It comes down to house rules and whether its cash or tournament. I'm not an LV native but my experience there was you didn't have to show if you were the only one with live cards. From what other people have posted on here there are markets where you need to show your cards to win.

Not where I play

Its defined in WSOP but not TDA rules.

In the room I work in, if it's equal action by all players on the river - check-check, bet-call - then a hand must be shown to win the pot. This would be true in the scenarios you described also since there was equal action by the remaining players in the hand. Being the only player with cards doesn't matter, you still have to show to claim the pot. The biggest reason for this is to prevent collusion.

It has nothing to do with collusion. It is most likely because of poorly written state law. At least, that is the case in NJ and PA.

I know there are places where the house rule is that you dont have to show the last live hand to claim the pot. This is because when last agressive muck hes hand without giving up info you can do the same. Only problem can as mention be collusion but in general if similar events occurs and someone suspects anything floor will be called and hands will be tabled ect. Just like if someone claim IWTSTH.

Neither case requires a show at our 'typical' table (even tournament). Only if there is an implication of a made hand would a player be required to show. ANY verbal comment about a hand ... "one pair" .. et requires 'proof'. Had a kid (first time playing live poker) say "two pair" to a reg trying to get him to muck at a c/c showdown. He had Queen high and stated that they do this 'all the time' at his home game. We promptly told him the parking garage isn't very well lit up. He got the message.

A "you got me" is not enough to force a show.

This rule only applies after a player has 'clearly' mucked and the dealer has pulled in the cards. GL

not where I play either. If the other player folds then the pot is yours & you do not have to show.

In most rooms I have played in you don't have to show, and IMO this is the best interpretation of the rule.

At other places like Borgata they make you show. Out of spite I always want to force them to turn over the losers hand also but I don't because you know, spirit of the game and all but it always tilts me when they make you show even if an opponent mucks. Pretty sure this is a recent rule there as well but I could be wrong.

There is no standard, it is room dependent I have played in my fair share of rooms and some you have to show and some you don't. If you are in that situation in a room you are unsure of just ask dealer before releasing cards.

I play in rooms where you don't have to show to claim the pot. This makes a lot of sense, since it's heads up, player A bets, player B calls and player A mucks. Last hand standing wins.

So what would happen in rooms where you have to show your hand to claim a pot? What if you refuse to show? Who gets the pot? The guy who mucked? The house? The dealer?

So what happens if there is only one player left with cards (other players mucked) but the last player refuses to show (or then mucks)? Who else could possibly be awarded the pot?

River, check, check, check.

If Moe and Larry muck, then if Curly refuses to show his hand, each stooge gets 1/3 of the pot.

In that situation equal action hasn't occurred since those players mucked instead of checking or betting. They folded before the last player had a chance to act so he wouldn't be required to show his hand.

Only in situations where everybody checked or there was a bet w/calls would a hand be required to be shown to win the pot.

but what if moe bets 100, larry mucks and curley calls followed by a muck by moe because his bluff got picked off and curley won't show?

I've seen the 'winner' of a hand refusing to show. Floor gets called and tells him that he won't get the pot unless he tables his hand. Everytime that happened, the player showed his cards, collected the pot and play moved on. No clue what would happen if the player keeps refusing to show.

I've also seen a player stick his winner into the muck instead of showing. He received the pot anyway but floor told him he's out of the game if it happens again.

Must show (both cards)) to win is a rule in some places I have played. I have seen short arguments with the dealer over this , by new players to the room, but I have never seen anybody NOT show eventually and be awarded the pot. I am not sure why some rooms have this policy , but they do.

In my experience, this definitely varies from room to room.

I had a new (to me) experience about a month ago in a PH tournament. On the river, Player A bets, Player B calls, Player A mucks. (No one is all in). Dealer calls the floor and they penalize Player A for mucking (had to sit out a few hands IIRC). They did make Player B show to get the pot even though he was the only one with a hand.

Seemed like a weird rule to me at the time. The floor said they do it to protect Player B's IWTSTH rights.

This isn't actually what happens btw.

I picked off a bluff at Mohegan a few weeks ago. My opponent mucked then reminded the dealer that my hand should be shown, and the dealer tabled it.

Not a big deal (I almost never mind showing my hand) but it got me thinking about how stupid the rule is. I don't believe the rooms themselves know why they have it.

I've seen a dealer stick his hand over the muck almost like it was a reflex to prevent a player from sticking his hand in the muck.

Especially if it is a reg who knows what the house rule is, I would support the floor telling him that the pot will be removed from play and the money returned to the players after observation reports back on the hand if the dealer can't reconstruct the betting.

I was just wondering what the rest of the world are doing on the topic, specialy LV rooms. I like the no show rule, my local room use this + last agressor from turn. You dont get info, you dont give info and the IWTSTH is very rarly used, if used only floor personel turn over a hand (if there is a good reason todo so). I personaly feel this is how tournament poker is played best, you dont 'punish' people when bluffing or stabbing but you dont give them an advantage either when they are betting turn in position and checking out on river.

In the wsop (as I understand) winning hand had to show to claim pot since 2007, however there is reports that they gonna change for 2016 WSOP. Which i think is good for the game.

The 2015 version of the TDA rules, due to be published very soon, have been revised:

https://twitter.com/TabDuchateau/sta...68497148149760

borgata makes you show
awful rule