Multiway to the flop, BTN goes all in. Gets two callers. Turn and river are checked down. Who shows first? The all in player or the first position player?

Rules are different in different rooms. In most rooms the player who went all in shows first, but not all of them.

in most rooms the last aggressor is first to show (or muck). That would be the button.

(a) As above, room dependent. Whatever the room rule is, that's what you need to do.

(b) But IME "most" rooms rulebooks will make you show by position in this case, contrary to what is stated above, because they are based on RRoP and that is the RRoP rule. Whether the floor who gets called over knows this rule or not is another thing entirely, though.

(c) But it usually doesn't matter because the guy who went all in will almost always show first of his own volition if there is no side pot.

(d) And in any case, don't be the douche who is part of this staredown. No matter which of the three people you are in this hand, just show it and get things moving.

(e) Of course, this all assumes a cash game. In a tourney under TDA rules, everyone must show because there was an all-in that made it to showdown, so order doesn't matter at all.

Technically, rules are room-dependent, and the previous posters have outlined them pretty well.

Honestly, the more mature player shows first if there's any kind of dispute.

I do.

But....but....but....if I wait, I might gain a piece of information about one hand that the villain might play in a given situation, and that will allow me to unlock their entire range in all situations.

I think the best hand will win the pot usually despite what order the hands are shown. Unless there is a house rule that he who shows last wins the pot. Yeah , not serious. Just showdown your cards and ......next hand.

I'm not sure about that. Not that my experience is comprehensive in any way or that I've seen that situation occur even in half the rooms I've played in, but I think dinesh is right in saying that the majority of rooms apply RRoP here and make players show based on position.

That said, just table your hand and move on. Or muck if your 5-high flush draw missed.

The one that isn't a D-Bag.

I'm in the camp where most rooms IME in this situation will go by position. First to act is first to show by rule if there was no river bet.

5-high is an excellent candidate to table immediately, assuming that being at showdown with 5-high is an extremely rare occurrence for you. You want to reinforce the +3 and -3 sigma events. Like you should always unnecessarily show when you flop a royal flush or when you go runner runner, so people think, "gawd, that moron is the luckiest SOB" or "gawd, that chode has 5-high all the time."

5 high is an impossible poker hand (unless playing 1-5 low)

likewise a 5 high flush is an impossible poker hand......

at least if playing 5 card poker

5 high in your hand. Yes, that's technically not what you have when including the board, but if you're going for the "I'm the fish" look, that's what you should say.

If there is AKQJ of hearts on board and I have the 5 of hearts...that's a 5 high flush in my book.

Just like the 2-pair (a pair of black Aces and a pair of Red Aces)

five high is a straight and a five high flush is a straight-flush

N'est-ce pas?

Whatever you call it, if you missed a draw and have a hand so unlikely to win that you would rather open fold than wait for someone else to show, that hand is a good hand to unnecessarily show.

Who cares, just show your G****** cards already.

There are no cameras. You are not on TV. Nobody is watching, nobody cares if you were semi-bluffing, nobody will be impressed by your antics, but many will think you an idiot because of your posturing. Just get on with it and stop wasting my time.

Last aggressor on river but there was no river aggression. Historically this would be by position with btn last. But more recently rooms are using last aggression period. So completely room dependent.


Now imo using aggression from earlier streets is a poor rule. It has been debated here ad nauseum the pros and cons of both.

In my room, if there is a side-pot between the two callers, it would be first to act to show (between to the two) if there was no action on the river (for the side-pot, as side-pot is shown first).

If there is no side-pot, then still it is first to act to show.