Hey guys.
3 people get to showdown, all play the board.
Do they need to show to get their 1/3 of the pot,
Or just declare they are playing the board?

Depends on house rules. But usually, yes you need to show.

RROP says you can just say it, but in practice many rooms require you to show.

At Bellagio you're not required to show, as long as you declare you are playing the board before mucking your hand.

However, I think this is a terrible rule. There are other rules saying you must show all cards to claim a pot, to make sure you don't have 3 hole cards, or don't have two Aces of Spades, whatever. But then in this case, playing the board, it's suddenly alright if you had too many hole cards, or otherwise had a fouled hand or were cheating? It doesn't make sense.

I think it is written that way to make sure the floor gets to the right ruling. Someone that says "playing the board" should show their hand. However, rulings are not required when everyone does what they should do. When a player says "Playing the board" they are making a claim for the pot and then they might make a procedural error of throwing their cards in. They read their hand correctly and made an assertive claim for the pot. If the absence of a rule that they could win without showing, they would get a ruling in the interest of fairness that they could win without showing. These rules were written long ago and this one was written to make sure that a casual player that doesn't know you have to show never receive a ruling of "too bad" and driven from the game.

There are still casual players who only turn over one card making top pair, sometimes even mucking the other one, and we don't give them the pot. It's still silly to protect them in one instance and not others. A real newbie wouldn't know to say "I play the board" before mucking anyway.

Negreanu has an anecdotal story of turning over his hand (which played the board) and yelling "straight". His newb opponent thought about it, and mucked.

Personally, I am not touching or mucking anything until it is clear what is going on. 20 seconds of clarity versus being an idiot, lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's kind of the point, we do but by floor ruling if it is the fairest thing to do. If someone is saying "hey look, I have the best hand" (prior to discarding their hand) and they do in fact have the best hand, they should receive the pot. When Bob Ciaffone wrote that rule (almost all rule sets can be traced back to a set he worked on) he codified how rulings were being made when someone discarded their hand. He was emphasizing that the claim for the pot needed to be made before discarding the hand, not after. Not that it was ok to not show to get the pot.

Well, players who are at Bellagio nearly every day and have played holdem for at least 20 years still will say "I'm playing the board" and then immediately deliberately muck their cards. I don't like the rule.

Similar thing happened this week in my local room here in Detroit. Two players in the hand by the river (pretty decent sized pot for a 2-5 NLHE game...$1400-1500). Board shows a straight. Player in early position shows KK and player in late position shows his neighbor his hand (QQ), but never tabled his hand and throws them in the muck. No one at the table (player or dealer said "Straight," but most of the table and the dealer knew there was a straight on the board except the player with QQ.

In our room, hands must be tabled to ship a pot (two cards, face up, on the table) so the dealer shipped the whole pot to the player with KK.

That is not the intent of the rule (at least not my understanding of it that was formed about 20 years ago).

Yeah..I guess I'm trying to understand the intent of the rule. Why not force people to show at showdown to get their portion of a chopped pot? It helps the integrity of the game and also proves that the hand was dealt properly (each player has 2 and only 2 cards).

What benefit is there to letting people declare that they're playing the board and muck and still get paid?

So, it is the rule, that you can play the board and not show cards, unless the casino says otherwise?

Is this Nevada? I thought Vegas required a winner to at least show one card?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think RR is saying that the intent of the rule is to not overly punish newcomers who don't realize that they have to show their cards to play the board. i.e. the rule is a formalization of the fact that a floor can use rule 1 to allow a noob player to get his part of the pot if he mucks his hand believing that he didn't have to show to play the board (perhaps he comes from a home game where this is the rule).

He was there and I wasn't, but this interpretation doesn't seem all that plausible to me, or at least I have lots of doubt that this is the whole story. I can't think of any other rule in RRoP which says something is allowed, but has this purported subtext of "but still, don't do it", while not having any language at all to support the subtext.

Furthermore, as mentioned above, there is no similar rule saying that it's also OK to show only a single card and still win (or chop), even though that is pretty much exactly the same situation, with exactly the same intent to protect a noob player who doesn't know any better.

I agree with everyone, though - it's better if you're forced to show both to make any claim to the pot, even if playing the board. I am also ok with using rule 1 to give a single warning to a new player who perhaps doesn't realize this and is able to verbalize his claim to the pot in a reasonable way.

It varies by room. Most rooms require you to show both. Some rooms, like Bellagio, follow the RRoP standard and allow you to muck your hole cards as long as you declare you're playing the board first.

You definitely do not need to show any cards to take down a pot at showdown in Nevada. If all your opponents muck and you're the only one left with a hand, you get the pot and don't have to show in at least some NV rooms. Plus, as noted above, you can play the board without showing in at least the Bellagio.

So, as the takeaway learning point, would you say it is wise to announce "play the board" BUT NOT MUCK, in any room anywhere and wait for the dealer to act?

Sounds like the Nash solution, lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Specifically, in this thread, it says Bellagio does not make players show once they've declared they're playing the board verbally before mucking their cards. I'm trying to understand why any card room would ever declare this.

I do understand dinesh's point that it helps protect tourists and non-regulars who might not understand it's a chop pot or understand that they have to show cards to win.

I guess I'm just playing too much in the local Michigan casinos. For the 3 casinos in Detroit, you have to show all your cards to win a contested pot (obviously don't have to show if it doesn't go to showdown). They do this because their rules are written in such a way that the winning player at showdown needs to have 2 and only 2 cards in their hand for Hold 'em or 4 and only 4 cards in their hand for Omaha.

I disagree with even this; I don't think the rule helps newbies at all, because they are extremely unlikely to declare "I'm playing the board" before mucking their hand.

Agree with this. They're more likely to hold onto their cards face down and declare the board.

The benefit is keeping people happy who are obsessed with hiding information about their hands.

Is there really much benefit to disallowing this in a cash game? The cards in your hand are irrelevant if you are playing the board. You can never benefit from having an invalid hand because if it is discovered your hand is fouled. It is an enormous disadvantage to never be able to win at showdown and there are no advantages. It may help discover some types of cheating, but then why don't we all show down all hands all the time for the same reason?

I will even go further and say that the rule should be that mucked hands at showdown automatically play the board without having to declare it.

^ that is certainly a valid perspective, but in that case you should also be allowed to show only one hole card to claim the pot, if that is all you need to beat the other players.

I agree completely...someone else in this thread said it was to help the casual player. I guess I can see where their argument comes from, though I'm not sure I agree either. I'm with you

I was going to show it how it is shoe-horned in like it was put in as an after thought, but Bob has removed it from his rules that he keeps updated. I have some old computers in the garage I am sure one of them has an old copy of it somewhere. The rule always felt out of place because it was a single line obviously added after the main part was written, and in conflict with the previously stated rule that you must show your entire hand to win.

When these rules were written new comers were a lot different than newcomers today. There is one floor call that sticks out (I was in the room but not working, so I didn't make the ruling) A player bet, and then a regular tanked for a bit a threw in a call and said "your full house is good" the bettor threw his hole card away (this was a stud game) and started reaching for the pot. It didn't occur to him that he needed to turn up his cards since his opponent apparently knew what he had and told him he won.

You can count face down cards as easily as you can count face up cards.

That doesn't show that you don't have a joker.