All in Blind

[Bacon]

Something that happened last night...

Bloke (Player 3) goes all in Big Blind. And he gets two callers.

Flop is a pair. Player 1 bets, and is called.
Turn nothing... Player 1 bets, and called.
River makes 2 pair. Player 1 big bets, and Player 2 folds.

Player 1 mucks his cards, and Player 3 takes his side pot, without showing.

I think that Player 1 should've been made to show his bluff, and seen if Player 3 legitimately won his hand.

if he folded, he can muck his hand coz it was them 2 playing 4 that pot and not the the person that was all in.

But that was the side pot...... the main pot was won with no cards being shown.

[Rickster]

I don't have a problem with that - the side pot must be considered a separate pot. If you think about it, that player effectively won the side pot (by the opponent folding) and lost the main pot by folding.

If the two pots were in separate hands, there can be no demand from the losing player of the side pot for the hand to be shown. While the winner of the main pot (the all-in player) can technically ask for the hand to be shown, why would he or she risk having the cards speak for themselves in case it is a better hand?