You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Home cash game. Two left on the river, player 1 (1st to act) & player 2(last to act).
Player 1 Bets
Player 2 Snap Calls
Usually, the last aggressor shows first. However, player 2 was happy with their hand. Player 2 decides to show before player 1 has a chance. Player 1 sees he/she is beat and attempts to muck. Player 2 requests to see what player 1 had saying the last aggressor must show. Player 1 argues he/she is beat and doesn’t have to show.
So, does player 1 have to show here?
I’ve seen some people say player 1 can muck here as it’s an info game and you shouldn’t give away any. Also argued player 2 acted out of turn and so player 2 is in the wrong. (I don’t think this is the case. Wouldn’t there be a lot accusations of slowrolling if this was true?)
I’ve seen others say player 1 has to show if any player at the table requests and this is to prevent cheating.
I thought player 1 should show in this situation. If player 2 had waited for player 1 to show, I'm sure player 1 would've been somewhat annoyed that player 2 never showed quicker (due to the strength of player 2's hand). If this is the case, player 1 should show their losing hand whether it was a bluff or thin value gone wrong.
What I'm trying to say is, if player 2 was slow, player 1 would've said show quicker. In this situation that is what player 2 did to prevent being slow, so surely player 1 should show. He should probably be showing as soon as the chips go over the line and the hand is over?
Comments
If player 2 chooses not to show, technically he can ask player 1 to show first, although this would make him a massive knob!
Haha
Cheers for clearing that up for me
Cheers for the reply