Quote:
Originally Posted by Playbig2000
Well the dealer isn't a mind reader, idk how she can know he's tryna claim the pot. It looked like he was beat and was asking if he still needed to show.
The other situation is a lot different, since there was a claim being made for the pot. The dearer should just say "you gotta show two to win". A dealer saying no then killing his hand is horrible.
It looks like a player who calls a pot size bet on the turn and the river is beat when opp says "good call" and tables king high? The only way the player is beat is if they called pot size bets on turn and river to literally play the board. If they aren't playing the board they have a pair, a straight, or ace high.
Again, the dealer can get there on autopilot, but to say right now that it looks like the player lost to king high and thinks they must table the losing hand is just disingenuous.
I don't know why showing one card silently is a "claim for the pot" but this other situation requires mind reading. The other player asked the same question "do I have to show the other card?" Why isn't saying "no" the exact same as this? They don't have to show the card unless they want the pot.
Which is why clarifying intent without advising is the way to go. Dealer shouldn't say "turn both your cards face up" without qualifiers but can/should say "To win the pot, need to see two cards that beat those" or ask "are you mucking or making a claim for the pot?" or whatever.