Showing Hand

[Lyon]

Now I'm not the best at Texas Hold 'Em but sometimes when there's two people all-in and one not the one who is not all in doesn't have to show his hand. Is that some sort of way to fold? I thought you'd always have to show your hand in that scenario, why do they sometimes have the choice not to? Does anyone else see this kinda stuff?

[Texas_1836]

Not always. But I would like to hear the DEVS take on how they set this game up.

In most cash games showing your hand is an option, not a requirement. The rules arent hard and fast and can vary from room to room (in the real world). If you think about it the ALL IN has to show their hand as they cannot win otherwise.

Tournaments are different but still can allow for variations though most require both or all hands up for any all-in showdown.

[Lyon]

I get what your saying, but one person is usually forced to show hand no matter what. Then when it says "You win!" the other person isn't forced to show his. I still don't understand how I was determined the winner?

[Vendetta]

I believe if you have only one opponent and no more betting can occur, both hands are shown. If there are more than 2 players in on the hand who can still bet then no one's hand is revealed until the end of betting. Then the all-in and the winning hand for the side pot are revealed and the losing side pot hands do not have to show as technically for them its not an all in hand.

[Kormega]

You talking about the muck?

[Lyon]

I just don't see how it works. I was playing with a friend, and he is way better at knowing the rules than I, and he yelled out. "WHY ISN'T HE SHOWING!? HE HAS TO!" multiple times. I mean we could both be wrong tbh, but it seemed a bit weird.

[Vendetta]

tbh - I have played in brick and mortar casinos as well as some real money online sites pre govt. crackdown. The scenario I outlined is the accepted norm. 2 players- one all in - both show. More than that with multiple chipstacks not committed, only the all in and the side pot/winning hand have to show. A losing hand who still has chips maintains the option to muck or show.

http://www.learn-texas-holdem.com/questions/required-to-show-losing-hand.htm as a follow up reference states tournament director sets the rules.

[Lyon]

Maybe that was it. I like Poker, but the rules escape me. I just played casually with family and learned the rules from that. I do remember that there were times where people didn't show when there wasn't an all-in. Or I could be fabricating that in my memory. I'll have to play more today and find out.

[darkprozac]

Cash (ring) game - you don't have to show your hand even if all in. Tournament - you have to show at showdown.

[Portuguese_Heat]

If your both in of course you have to show your hand. How else would they know who won? They take your word for it?. It's a bug that is peer me off majorly

[Paradox]

Originally posted by Vendetta:

I believe if you have only one opponent and no more betting can occur, both hands are shown. If there are more than 2 players in on the hand who can still bet then no one's hand is revealed until the end of betting. Then the all-in and the winning hand for the side pot are revealed and the losing side pot hands do not have to show as technically for them its not an all in hand.

I think you are partially right. If the winning hand of the side-pot was not the player who "Called". If it was the player who called, then both side pot hands will be revealed and then the all-in players hand will be revealed.