I've seen it reported to the floor. In that case, the dealer had his hand protecting the muck after the IWTSTH request. The player who didn't want his cards shown reached over and grabbed the dealer's hand and pulled it off the muck and then stuffed his cards in. The dealer actually wrestled with the player for control of the muck for about 5 seconds. IMO the player should have been ejected. Alas, he was not.

Robert rules of poker...
Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that was eligible to participate in the showdown, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

I'm pretty friendly with 95% of the floor/dealers I play with regularly, and I tip well, so I would never see this happening to me. I wouldn't wrestle a dealer either, but that would be funny to see. I agree if the player was wrestling with the dealer he should be ejected too.

First, if I have not made it clear that I agree it is bad etiquette to ask to see the hand, I do feel it is rude.

But what I have a hard time understanding is why VvsKing is different from everyone else and doesn't have to follow the same rules that others do?

Whether the request is considered rude or not, it is a legitimate request and any dealer who receives such a request should reveal the hand.
Except for VvsKing.

But apparently at the Commerce, if you tip well, you can ignore certain rules.

Does anyone else find this wrong or agree with the concept that tipping well should allow you to ignore certain legitimate requests?

For the millionth time, I understand the rules. I chose not to follow that particular rule because I do not agree with it. I do so at my own risk. Just like if you drive 90mph on the freeway, if you understand you will get a ticket, and are content with that, that's your risk. Maybe a bad example you could hurt someone (I guess if you wrestle the dealer you could hurt him too lol) but you get the idea. I'm pretty sure you just want to argue with me at this point so I'm going to leave it alone. And as a dealer, you're telling me someone who is constantly nice with you, jokes with you, talks with you like you're a normal human being, and tips when he should, instead of throwing cards at you, blaming you for the cards, etc. you wouldn't be more inclined to side with? There have been times when its one of the idiots who throws cards at dealers asked to see my hand, and the dealer and I have a good table relationship, and he mucked my hand when he could of showed it, and I'm pretty sure if I was a typical moron who did that stuff he would have showed it. So is he following the rules? No. Is he a good dealer in a general sense? Most definitely.

You really believe this tripe, don't you?

Wow, players throw cards at dealers, treat them like sub humans, blame them for bad cards and you LIKE that casino?

You think because you can buy a dealer's loyalty for a few chips that makes that's a GOOD dealer?

Honestly, the vast majority of players I deal to don't throw cards, or blame me for bad cards, The players I deal to treat me and my co workers like normal human beings, as we do them.

I don't play favorites and I don't single out players who make the personal decision not to tip. They all get the same treatment from me and my fellow dealers.

I've been doing this for over 5 years, I make a damn good living and I thoroughly enjoy my job.

I show cards when I am asked it, if the rule requires it, because I am supposed to enforce ALL of the rules and be an IMPARTIAL observer. I do my job the way I am supposed to do it, within the rules, not showing favoritism to ANYONE.

if you think you can buy the loyalty of a dealer for a few chips, then clearly his loyalty is for sale and one day you might just get outbid.

What will you do then? Complain to the floor that the dealer you thought you had in your pocket didn't stay bought?

You have just confirmed what I suspected about you in the first place, no big surprise BTW.

Your right, this conversation is over, you have nothing of interest to say.

If you were the one who won the pot and ask to see the losers hand the hand that was mucked is now a live hand and if it is a winner you relinquish the pot.

I'm not cheap, but I can be had.
Dealer-Guy is obviously right here... but.

I'm dealing, big pot, board has 2 big pair and an ace.

Nice guy/good tipper bets. Jackass/stiff calls.

Bettor shows small pair (playing the board).

Caller looks at the board, looks at tabled hand, looks at the board,
looks at tabled hand, barely tosses his hand 2 inches forward face down.

I muck that hand faster than you can blink and push the pot.

Honestly if the roles were reversed I might have hesitated a bit before mucking the hand.

Thank you sir.

OP, I agree with posters - its bad etiquette to ask unless collusion is suspected. But what reason was given by the player for folding the winning hand?

He didn't realize he had the flush.

Most (should be all) rooms the hand is dead unless the winner asks to see it.

One more example of why players should just table their hand in similar situations because EVERYONE is capable of misreading a hand.

Just ask Phil Ivey.

Don't you think it's also bad etiquette to show a hand to your neighbor and then muck it? I hate that.

I think two different things are playing in here 1. player showed other player his cards this is under the show one show all rule and situation, the collusion rule is not applicable here If that player showed no one and mucked and then somebody wanted to see them hand should be dead and the floor comes and shows not the dealer, as stated its used to stop cheating and very bad ediquite

I like the way the Venetian handles it. If you ask to see a hand, they call the floor.
You have to explain what "collusion" you suspect. That is the ONLY reason the rule was
originally put in place.

I don't suspect collusion, he showed his neighbor, it's only fair that the whole table sees now.

You're thinking of a different rule, "I want to see that hand".

This is about "show one show all".

Really? Can you give us a source for this claim? (In before palimax)

it's a dumb rule and regardless of why it was originally put into place, helping prevent collusion is the only reasonable explanation as to why it's still used.

Yeah I don't really like it either, but generally when they do that you have an idea of what they have. The longer they sit there, the bigger their hand was. Ace comes on river, they show their neighbor and shake their head for 30secs, they had KK, etc. I dunno I'm pretty adamant on someone asking to see my hand, and talking about the hand when it's still in play. Other than that I'm a pretty happy poker player who gets along with everyone.

I think its not right that a player should have to ask to see cards and risk being berated for bad etiquette to get the same information that everyone else at the table gets. IMO casinos should enforce the SOSA rule by forcing the dealer to automatically expose the cards when someone shows a player at the table what they held. This would protect the players.

IMO if you dont have the self control to just muck your cards without showing your neighbor or anyone else then you deserve to have your cards exposed.

Enforcement would be an issue. Dealers are already watching a lot of things happening at once, they don't always see one player show their hand to another.

But you are correct, asking to see a losing hand is much different than invoking SOSA and no one should be upset with it. TBH, I can't recall anyonme getting too upset with it anyway.

I agree that SOSA is much different than IWTSTH. I have invoked SOSA a dozen times and I don't think I've ever invoked IWTSTH (mostly because if I call a bet on the river I wait to show anyway).

Reason I hate the SOSA situation is it feels a clique-y to me, like the guys at the other end of the table are teaming up against me.