"Showdown" Question Texas Hold 'Em

I ran into a situation the older day playing at a friends house playing cash game, tournament style Hold 'Em and I would like clear answer, but not opinions because it has caused questions to arise in my group of players as to who is correct according to the rules of poker......i.e. WSOP, WPT, or whoever governs the international rule of poker.

"Player C is DRUNK"

The situation is this: 3 players in hand. Player A has Q5. Player B has "nothing", Player C has QJ. Flop is QK10. Player A goes all-in. Player B calls. Player C calls. Turn is 7. Player B checks. Player C checks. River is A.
Player A is all-in. Player B checks. Player C checks.

Community Cards are: Q K 10 7 A.

What happened after the River:

Player A turns over Q 5
Player B turns over "nothing"
Player C Mucks his cards (he made a straight, but drunk folds)

Situation is as follows. A fellow player next to player C sees his cards and says to him, "you made a straight, what are you doing". Player C has already put his cards face down on top of the Muck. The dealer then turns over player C's cards and awards the pot to Player C.

The player sitting next to player C who said he made a straight, says by rule; "all players have to turn over their cards" because players B and C checked to the River and no one can muck their hand; that it is a showdown scenario. I stated to the group that a player has the choice of Mucking his hand, therefore player A wins with Top pair Q's.

Can you please clear this up for me as I thought that, #1, since there is only one player all-in, players B and C have the option to Muck because players b or c might not want to reveal their cards or bluff. #2, because Player C mucked his cards, he or the dealer is not allowed to retrieve them? Despite the fact that the fellow player obviously shouldn't be looking at another players cards, he said that a showdown is mandatory, regardless if he saw his cards or not. Is this true?

I need a professional answer and not an opinion, please as this is important to the integrity of the game. If you have a reference to this particular rule, that would be awesome.

Thank you so much for your time.

From the TDA Rules:

I'll also note that part of the problem is "cash game, tournament style". In some cases, cash games and tournaments have completely different rules (like this example).

For instance, WSOP cash game rules seem to imply that you can get barred from the poker room for telling someone to turn their hand over at showdown.

Soooooooo, good luck.

This is a little unusual, because only player A is all-in. B and C still have chips, so nobody should show cards before the showdown.

Here is the Robert's Rules of Poker rule that is relevant (Tournaments section):

So I guess by a literal reading of that rule (and the TDA version quoted by OCD, betting is complete after the river checks through, and all 3 players with live hands would have to table their cards.

This rule is there to protect the interest of everyone in the tournament, not just the players in the hand. There might be a situation where player C wants player A to survive, so would prefer to muck the winner. Other players in the tournament would like to see player A eliminated, so the rule prevents C from making that play.



Yes, a cash game is very different here. This would have been a serious breach of the "one player to a hand" rule. Nobody can help a player decide whether to table cards, nor read player C's hand for him.

The professional answer is you're wrong, if this is a tournament. All in and a call, everyone's gotta show.

OP, this is a huge issue that needs clarification if you want an accurate answer. As gedanken pointed out, the dealer's action is generally appropriate for a tourney but very inappropriate for a cash game.

So was this a tournament or not? If by "cash game, tournament style" you mean a tournament where T1 = $1, then it's a tournament and you should play by tournament rules. If not, then please explain.

There are several rules that apply here:

First and foremost, the cardroom makes their own rules. What the TDA says is moot.

However, there was a violation of "one player to a hand" when the other player tells player c what he has.

Since you have decided that it's a cash game, tournament style, well, you've made up your own game and therefore has no rules. You guys need to determine what in the heck you're playing and what the rules are.

As it all played out, fairness would seem to dictate that without the player calling out Player C's cards, would the cards have been flipped? If not, the muck should stand.

Here is the thing. What the **** is cash game tournament style?

The tournament rule is generally that the hands must be shown. But the reason for that rule is specific to poker tournaments ..... it has no purpose in a cash game.

So before we can answer your question you need to figure out if you are playing a cash game or a tournament.

Sorry for the confusion guys. The post should have said, "cash game non tournament style". I re-read my post and realized I omitted a key word. So, in this case since it's a cash game, 2 rules were broken?
1. One player to a hand rule.
2. Dealer turned over mucked cards

Does player C then have the option to muck since player A is all-in and player B and C checked to the river or is there a mandatory showdown?

in a cash game, the showdown goes like this:

1st player shows his cards
next player chooses whether to table his hand or muck
repeat for all players.
best tabled hand wins the pot.

players B and C elected to muck, so A gets the pot.

May as well bring up the controversial "I want to see that hand" (IWTSTH) rule. This rule is NOT universal, but it does appear in Robert's Rules of Poker. IWTSTH states that any player dealt into the hand is entitled to see any hand that was eligible for showdown. In other words, player X who folded preflop could ask to see player C's cards. After the pot is awarded, player C's hand is dead, but exposed for the table to see. If the player who asks to see the hand was winning (ie, player A), player C's hand is NOT dead, and will win the pot if it is the best tabled hand.

You'll have to decide whether to allow IWTSTH in your home game. It's become rather unpopular around here, but it is the more traditional rule and you'll see it in a lot of casinos. Most people consider it very rude to invoke the rule. They'll say it's tantamount to accusing someone of collusion. search this forum for IWTSTH for exhaustive discussion.

Whoever is running the game can make whatever decision they want. This applies for both home games and casinos (the 3 things that usually stop casinos from making unusual rulings are that (1). No one would play at their casino if there wasn't a supreme sense of fairness, (2). Casinos often have rulebooks to ensure fairness that the players have access to and it would be horrible business to not follow their rules and (3). Sometimes the state or federal regulations will dictate some of the rules). The idea that there is a set rule for any given situation that on any level should be assumed for a home game just isn't logical. Situations regularly exist in home games that could never exist in casinos.

In a home game, a player could pick up the cards from the muck of every single player who folds and everyone could be ok with it.

In a home game, two players could be playing an entire tournament together openly because they aren't that good and are just having fun and everyone could be ok with it.

In a home game, players can get far more drunk than a casino would allow them and nothing would happen if they wanted to keep playing.

In other words, it doesn't surprise me at all that player C was awarded the pot, and because it's a home game, it doesn't bother me in the least. If it happened in a casino and player C was awarded the pot, I would personally decide not to play at that casino, but a home game is a home game.

If you want to make your home game more like a casino, then what gendaken and some others before him said would be the way to rule hands like that in the future, but generally speaking, going to a home game with the expectation that it will be run like a casino game usually results in unnecessary confrontation, people being pissed off, and sometimes the game dissolving.

I do admire your passion for poker though!

You sometimes should agree to things you are mildly against in a home game to keep the players coming and the MONEY coming!

The player sitting next to player C who said he made a straight, says by rule; "all players have to turn over their cards" because players B and C checked to the River and no one can muck their hand; that it is a showdown scenario]

This is dead wrong. Showdown would start with player A showing their hand, the next two players can muck. They are not required to show.

That was originally said when the understanding was it was a tournament, not a cash game. In a standard TDA/WSOP rules tournament, everyone has to show when there is an all-in and everyone reaches show down (it's a anti-collusion rule, just like the WSOP 'must bet the nuts on the river if you're the last to act' rule). As I've told players before, you do have the option of mucking when it's your turn on the river, but if you check and get to show down, everyone has to table their hand.

However, it was clarified this was a cash game, which means you can muck or show depending on your personal decision at showdown. Jumping someone for a comment that was made before the situation was clarified should be avoided.

It was my understanding everyone has to table there hand if they are all in but in this case Player B and C were not all in. Would they not be able to muck?

If B and C did go all in on the turn, then yes, they would have to table their hands

In a cash game, no, you do not have to show even if someone is all-in. What you are stating is a tournament rule. It is however, considered poor etiquette to not turn over your hand (or at least tell your opponent what you have) if there is an all-in and all betting is done before the river.

I don't see why C shouldn't win the pot. He has the beat hand with what no one disputes are his actual cards. Yes, it was a rule violation for someone else to tell him to show his cards, but that doesn't change his hand. Doesn't RRoP have a rule about a clearly identifiable hand being retrieved from the muck still winning if it's best?

Here we had someone who saw the hand before C mucked and helped C read his hand. This is a violation of OPTAH. The ruling for a situation can be a live hand if C tabled his hand. A warning would be issued to the "helpful" player for the OPTAH violation. This did not happen here.

Here, C mucked on to the muck, person D said it was a winner, the dealer, on his own initiative, took C's cards out of the muck and tabled them which is a second violation of OPTAH. There are a lot of things wrong here which can happen in a home game especially a friendly rules-lax home game. I can see a ruling going either way here about a live hand vs dead hand. Having not been there to see and hear all the nuisances, I, for one, cannot offer an opinion as to the best solution to a live vs dead hand. I feel it is 50-50 based on the facts we were given.

And just to clarify the rule from RRoP, it says that a mucked hand CAN be retrieved if it is clearly identifiable. It is at the discretion of the "floor". This is definitely a case where it could be decided to not retrieve the hand.