Dear
Mark, In poker, what are your thoughts about a player
requesting that the dealer to show the next card,
even if the hand is officially dead? The group of
a dozen or so I normally play with has three players
who want to see the next card or cards that could
have made their hand. I, on the other hand, believe
once the hand is over, it's over, and if a player
really wants to see the next card then that player
should have bet. We'll go by your ruling. Melvin G.
I'm
with you, Mel. "What if" players should
shove their chips in the middle if they want to see
whether they would have hit their straight, flush,
four-of-a-kind, etc. In gamblese, it's called rabbit
hunting, where you ask a dealer to show you the next
card(s), even though a player has already won the
pot without a showdown, and the hand is over.
Most
card clubs, casinos and poker tournaments prohibit
rabbit hunting, although I have played in a few
games where rabbit hunting is permitted, once
all live hands have been surrendered to the dealer.
I have found that when you permit a look-see at
the "next" card(s) of an unmatched wager,
the privilege is always abused. Solution for your
kitchen table game: allow it, but, if a player
really wants to know whether he/she could have
won by staying in the hand longer, a contribution
is called for - one, possibly two additional betting
units to the next pot. That should keep those
curious sorts from having a dealer deal the flop,
turn or river cards to see what would have, should
have, could have been.
Good
Casinos Home
