My biggest pet peeve in poker involves the following situation:

Player A bets river (is bluffing). Player B calls. Player A mucks his hand... Does Player B need to show his hand?

I strongly believe that Player B should not need to show his hand, but even in the same casino, I'll get different answers from different dealers on whether or not he needs to show. Poker is a game of incomplete information, so when Player A mucks, Player B and the rest of the table don't get to see his info, so why should Player B have to show?

But outside of my strong opinion, I also just wish a consistent rule was applied and that dealers would understand why I care. It seems like I always get the "Oh whatever man you won the pot and I don't really know the rule forsure" vibe. What is the rule at the casinos you all play?

I can already hear the 2+2 consensus saying that it's -EV for me to be making this an issue, but for some reason this really bothers me. I just like clear rules and ones that make sense.

The standard is that, once his opponent's hand(s) are fully mucked by the dealer, he doesn't need to show as the only one left with a live hand at showdown.

There are rooms that require it (mostly in NJ and PA), mine included, likely because of poorly written state gaming regs that are ambiguous and seem to require it. No amount of "strongly believe" matters, the rooms have to follow the gaming regs.

There may be rooms that require it because of bad room rules or some such, but I don't personally know of any. There may also be dealers/floors who require it because they don't know better.

Personally I prefer that rule as a player. It gives all the other players more information, and I feel I can use the extra information better than most players are able to.

He doesn't have to show. Should be standard, but it's not.

Our rule is that one player has to show on a called bet.

When I become king.....

I think it makes sense either way. It should be consistently applied within a room, but I don't feel that it is a rule that has to be exactly the same in every room. Having a rule that a player has to show to claim a pot if there is a showdown on the river may make the game go faster if it discourages people from trying to outwait their opponents because they hope they don't have to show.

When dealers disagree on what a rule is, I end up having a conversation with the floor to clarify.

If someone bets the river and mucks because he's too embarrassed to show what he bluffed with, most rooms don't require the winning hand to show. It's just like when it's heads up on the flop, and before you do anything your opponents just mucks and says "you got it I missed my set again", should you have to show? Of course not so why would anyone have to show when their opponent mucks his hand on the river? If he refuses to show in rooms that say he still has to show, who gets the pot?

It's not just like that, because it's at showdown. You might want to take a closer look at that word. "showdown"
Half of it is very important here.
Originally everyone had to show their cards at showdown, that's why it's called that.
I have played lots of hours in rooms with this rule; everyone knows the rules and it doesn't cause a problem. If the player claiming the pot doesn't show his hand, the dealer will flip it over after bringing it in. If the player somehow irretrievably mucks his hand so he can't win the pot, I believe it will stay in the middle for the next hand. Although I've never seen this happen because no one in these rooms is stupid enough to do this.

I've often wondered the same thing. When I've been told by some dealers that I need to show my hand in order to claim the pot I think well who's going to get it if I just muck my hand?

No need to show in SoCal. Players are bad enough here that we don’t want to tap the glass.

In a room where you must show your hand to the claim the pot, the floor was called over and he said he would give everyone their money back from the pot if the player refused to show.

Good thread. I'll be playing live $1/2 for the first time this summer and I need to know things like this. I'm in the Hudson Valley, north of NYC currently and will also be seeking out threads like this to see what the best casinos/times are for me to get acquainted with the live game's flow.

Think he'd still drop the rake?

No.

In Seattle it'd be a 3:1 favorite that the rake was already down the slot. To save time, yanno.

I prefer not having to show. I think that should be the rule in cash games.

In tournaments there should be no mucking when you are called. If you do, a small penalty should be attached, and the winner required to show. If the last to muck does not show, he gets the pot but a penalty can be attached.

In tournaments the TDA rules (which are used by most rooms that host tournaments) no longer require a hand to be shown at showdown if all other players muck. The exception is when any player is all-in. Then all players at showdown must show their cards. It looks like they are trying to prevent players from dumping chips by going all-in. So chip dumpers will now have to spread out their dumping over several hands...

At Foxwoods the winning hand must be shown in cash games. This was a trade off for FW no longer allowing IWTSTH. Recently I was at a table where this came up in a 2/5 NL game and I said that I had heard that if all players mucked the pot was held until the next hand. I was told I was wrong about that. In practice the pot is awarded to the last player to muck (as in tournaments). I'm guessing a warning is issued if a player is abusing this on a regular basis. But I doubt FW would ever do more than give a 24 hour ban if a player did it in the face of a Floor warning. And they probably would do less and care less. I hope that this rule goes away as well.

Thanks for the feedback. Sounds about right for what most casinos would do if they had that kind of rule.