To show or not to show.

Double As posted in his blog about a hand where he semi-bluffed with a king kicker with two pair on the board against a very LAGgy player. At the end of the hand he showed his cards.

Someone named Pete Birks posted this in comments:

Ask yourself this question.

Why do you really think you elected to show your opponent your hole cards after winning this pot?

Was it:

a) a rational play that could well put him or her on tilt.

b) something that made you feel good because it showed the rest of the table how you had outplayed your opponent.

If (a), did you subsequently check to see whether it had the desired effect?

If (b), you should have no need to shout "look how good I am!" Winning the money is proof enough.

I never show cards, whether I have a hand or I do not, because I usually find that information that another player gives me that he does not have to disclose (usually a good hand in a freeze-out and a poor hand in a cash game) is useful ammunition for when at a later date the player does not disclose his hand.

BTW, my usual comment when someone shows cards as in the above situation is "you just couldn't resist showing it, could you? ". Alternatively, I may say "you were winning" (whether this is true or not).

Tends to turn any intended tilt back on the card shower, and I haven't had to disclose any cards to do it.

I took issue with this comment, for several reasons.

The number one reason is that this is strippers argument. Anytime someone says that a certain move in poker, whether it be playing 72o or showing cards is ALWAYS wrong, they are full of shit.

Some people will not grasp the fact that there is never a play that is "always right no matter what the circumstances are."

But number two, this guys contention seems to be "The only reason people show cards on a bluff is because they are assholes."

This is naive, not to mention pointless. Not only is putting people on tilt possible, with a LAGgy player to begin with it is PROBABLE.

Showing a bluff gives information, yes. But showing bluffs causes people to make adjustments. When people make adjustments, you are taking them out of their game. Like Mike Tyson says "Everyone has a plan until they get hit." Showing a bluff is a hit. It's an assault on a person's ego.


But what if he is only doing it to "make himself feel good." So the fuck what? If it is successful in making the other player look like a fool, what is so wrong with that?

It's healthy to be exposed as a fool sometimes, especially when you ARE a fool, but even when you are just acting like one.

P.S. EVERYBODY says "you were winning" when a bluff is shown. This guy has a HUGE talent for stating the obvious. Everybody knows that when you talk about your cards without showing them, YOU ARE LYING. Get over yourself, you can't put someone on tilt this way.


P.P.S. Don't go read this guy's blog unless you want to know what movies he watches and what he eats for dinner. GOD DAMN I fucking hate blogs that are nothing but narcissistic bullshit. I know I think a lot of myself, but even I'm not so self-centered that I think everybody wants to know what color my shit is.