Showdown time (cash game, NLHE), heads up. Player A mucks.

Does Player B win the pot at that point and can also muck? Or Player B still has to show both cards to win the pot?

It depends on the casino. Some places player B has to show, others he doesn't.

i would say more will make player b show as equal action on the river means someone has to show.

IMO it's in the best interest of everyone to have the winning hand shown at showdown in that spot.

Why?

as already stated casino dependent. If you're not sure ask the dealer. If you are at a place that allows you to not show, WAIT TIL THE POT IS PUSHED TO YOU BEFORE MUCKING YOUR CARDS. Really cannot stress that enough.

When only one player has a hand, it's no longer showdown, push the pot.

OK, in your scenario everyone folds to player B, all other cards are mucked & irretrievable. Pot has not been pushed yet. If B (only person with cards) doesn't show their hand, what would happen? Does the house keep the pot?

Barring a house rule to the contrary, B can muck without showing now after receiving the pot.

Where I play, B definitely would not get the pot, (were it actually at showdown, and not if people folded before it went check/check) if for some reason he absolutely refused to show (though why anyone would do that is sort of beyond my imagination). Since it has never made it to that point, I can only speculate on what would happen to the money. My guess would be the pot would carry over to the next deal, such as under the irregularities section of RROP:

"If there is extra money in the pot on a deal as a result of forfeited money from the previous deal (as per rule #5), or some similar reason, only a player dealt in on the previous deal is entitled to a hand."

The rule #5 doesn't apply, that deals with a guy betting knowing that the deck is fouled; but I would think a guy refusing to claim the pot per house rules would fall under "or some similar reason"

edit: We do every now and then get a guy who refuses to believe the dealer when he tells him he has to show. So he calls the floor, and refuses to believe the floor. Then the floor says "if you don't show your cards now, you forfeit the pot" and he shows. Never seen anyone stick to their principles enough to say "**** it, you keep the pot, I'm not showing!"

This.

If your at a place where a player has to show and dose'nt then I belive its a chop between everyone at showdown.

I guess some places the floor could also get involved and pull cards out of the muck and stuff to determine the winner.

At some point, player B has to give his cards back to the dealer who then proceeds to table them. If player B refuses to give his cards back, he prolly gets the pot and is asked to leave.


True, but that's one of the more common house rules.
A few years back, a dealer at the Bellagio forced me to turn over my hand after the other player mucked at showdown, but I never bothered to question if he was right in doing that.

Yes, and not just speculation.
I once actually saw a drunken player at Foxwoods ejected for this. Other hand had been mucked, but he refused to show. After arguing strenuously for 10 minutes with the dealer, floor, and shift supervisor, he tried to forcibly muck his own hand facedown into the pile. The dealer and floor both grabbed his wrist, wrestled his cards away, tabled them (he had two pair, no fouled deck), awarded him the pot, and then had him escorted out... (I've posted this story before, but I still think it's hilarious.)

He probably should've mucked immediately after the villain mucked. Then good f luck to Floor + Dealer retrieving his cards from the bottom of the muck.

almost always has to show his hand still to take the pot

Equal action means someone has to show, in most places. Definitely in the mid atlantic (ac/philly) I'm pretty sure someone has to show in vegas but not 100%. I'd venture a guess more casinos than not make someone show a winner with equal action on the river.

Turbo mucking a loser doesn't absolve the other player from showing.

it keeps people from having to ask to see hands, it keeps people from suspecting collusion. It shows information, which I think is to everyone's benefit.

It will also keep people from doing the " sneaky show" if the two players are in sitting next to each other.


Also might affect high hands and promotions.

-why not?

I don't see the merit of well if I made a hero call I don't want to show or give off information. The times your the giver of info will be less than the times you are the receiver.

If you're the only one with cards then you win. No need to show.

House rule dependent.

If I were that determined, and I'm not, I'd wait for the pot to be pushed and make an effort to turbo-muck.

If the pot hasn't been pushed, you subject yourself to having 1/2 the pot shipped to the first mucker on your turbo muck.

Really not sure why it would be a big deal to anyone personally, but I think there is almost always someone on the other side of obvious actions.

IMHO if the other party has conceded the pot by mucking, I should win it right there regardless of anything. Should I have to show in that case? In my humble opinion, no. Why? Because the pot winner has already been determined by the other side conceding. Then what's the point of forcing the winner to show? To provide the table with free info? I'm not a fan of that.

But as well explained in this thread this is rather house-dependent. I personally played a hand recently where heads up on the river I called someone, they mucked, I asked the dealer if I can win the pot without showing cards, he said "yes", and I mucked and dragged the pot.

silly hypothetical that would never happen.

river btw a & b. a bets, b calls. both players simultaneously muck. who wins the pot?

They'd probably chop it.

If I were a floor, I'd rule both their hands dead and declare it stays in the middle for the winner of the next pot.

And Gaming would probably come down hard on you.

Callipygian's House of Pleasure and Degen Gambling Saloon is located in international waters and answers to no one.

Wasn't there an awesome Foxwoods angleshoot about announcing playing the board and mucking hands to win pots, hoping that the other player would mistakenly believe he had the only live hand and release his face down also...

• Two players to the river.
• Board runs out non-flush Broadway.
• Villain says, loud enough to be heard by the dealer, "I play the board."
• Villain releases his cards face down into the muck.
• Hero, holding the only *seemingly* live hand, then releases his cards.
• Villain then attempts to claim pot, having been the only one savvy enough to say, "I play the board" since Hero threw his cards away without making such an announcement.