The "Check in the dark" move

5starpool

The "Check in the dark" move is something I am increasingly seeing lately in live tournies. What are peoples opinions of it and do you use it much?

In my experience it seems to be mostly used by people who hold less than premium hands and it is an exercise to get some semblance of position back in the hand, and is occasionally used on flop and turn (if they call a flop bet). In a large number of cases this is used by aggressive players I have found.

Do people think there can be certain advantages to this play? What type of players is this most useful against? How do you play against someone who does this (assume decent player)?

Very vague I know, and might not spawn much of a thread, but you never know.

robinlacey

i think there was a thread about this a while ago.

i have never understood this at all,i don't see any advantage to it and am fairly sure people only do it because they think it makes them look cool.

Mellor

At a decent standard I doubt there is any advantage to it, even a disadvantage.
But players who are generally poor (loose passive) will lead out (where they wouldn't previously) if you check in the dark. At any sort of decent level its useless imo.

cooker3

robinlacey wrote:

and am fairly sure people only do it because they think it makes them look cool.

Thats sums it up for me.

Bandara

its a stupid move in my opinion. What possible good can come of it? At a good level of poker its not scaring your opponents, if you have a monster you are missing on the opportunity to build a pot and are handed the driving seat to the other player

If you have nothing your asking for the pot to be taken away from you by an opponent who has just hit middle pair with a crap kicker.

If your playing a random hand your hoping for a miracle to hit it so hard that you can find a way to get into the pot after conceding control. Also if you do hit your miracle flop/card you've given your opponent very chance to take a free card and outdraw you.

I can't think of any reason why you'd ever need to do it, you may as well just refuse to look at the flop all to get and play it Jedi style

DeadParrot

robinlacey wrote:

people only do it because they think it makes them look cool.

Too much HSP for some people

bops

some people check in the dark a lot which is bad
some people check in the dark to look cool (big earphones/shades/ RF poloshirts/from the pale)

others check in the dark (me) on the very rare occasion, when it is the correct play, for very complex reasons which are way too detailed to write about on a monday morning - just lets sat that there is a right time & place for every move in poker

jeeeees i'm v helpful (i just don't like all the "it's all crap" answers)

kakak1

never say never

cannot agree it's a good move and is not to be advocated as a frequent move but it certainly does have it's advantages on a few occassions.

for example you are perceived as a very tight player, you call a small raise on the SB with a small pocket pair and know if an A or K shows on the flop & you bet you will very possibly not get a caller. However if you know the raiser is going to bet the flop a check in the dark is not a bad thing here, ok a check/ raise could be much the same thing. But I feel with a check / raise a tight player will be put on a big hand, not necessarily with a check in the dark to an A/K high board.

Can't understand how you can say "never" different actions are called for different occasions. anyway we can't always play be the book.

semibluff

phil hellmuth uses it alot.

I am not a fan of it because the only time i did it i ended up giving a free card to allow someone to catch up.

If you held 22 and called a raise heads up OOP, bar hitting a 2, you would prob have to check, although by checking blind you should receive a bet - and hence a bit more information. You have told him nothing about your flops strength so you would/could be able to read how strong he is dependant on how he bets. So having still not "acted" on the flop, and if you perceive weakness you could now take control of the hand. (you could also do this by checking after seeing the flop, but dependant on the player your player against, your image, something like this may work alot better)

jus my 2c on why its done


EDIT: agree with you KAKA, u got there first

DeVore

The only time I can think of doing it in any way correctly would be with a hand like 66 or 78s. The thinking behind it would be: if I hit this hand, I'm checking to try and induce a bet... if I dont hit this hand I'm outta here.

Say you have 66 in EP. You've decided to call a small bet in order to try and hit a set and get paid off. If you hit the set, you will want to slow play it probably (you'll most likely get a chance to reraise if its a flush drawing board). If you dont hit a set, you are most likely finished with the hand and checking anyway.

So, if you check in the dark you hand control back to him and most likely induce a bet.

I dont know if this is a good idea, I'm not a fan of the move myself but I have used it on rare occasions.

DeV.

Marq

there are times when it is good to use it.
only when playing stud though.
I think checking in the dark playing hold'em is retarded.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

Chucky the tree

what is "checking in the dark"?

Marq

it's stupid.

kakak1

if you've already decided that if you don't hit your are going to check & if you do you are going to check / raise, so your next move is going to be check anyway, so why not put some doubt in the raisers mind, whats the problem with a check in the dark,

Marq

it makes your intention on the flop painfully transparent and gives away information about the nature of your hand.

Unless you're going to check in the dark with hands that you aren't simply going to check/fold or check/raise with then you're giving something away.

also, any thinking player isn't going to be worried by you checking the dark. If I'm the raiser it's not going to "put doubt in my mind". It always works to my advantage because you have acted without information and I will act with information.

It could help you to set up the image of an unthinking idiot, which might be to your advantage.

Lazare

kakak1 wrote:

if you've already decided that if you don't hit your are going to check & if you do you are going to check / raise, so your next move is going to be check anyway, so why not put some doubt in the raisers mind, whats the problem with a check in the dark,

The problem with it is, there are many ways to hit a flop with any holding. Deciding how your going to play a hand before you've seen a flop is bad.

pok3rplaya

I only ever check in the dark when theres a powercut.

RasTa

I did it once in my bb with about 6 limpers and floped a straight. Check around and a few caught up on the turn. I don't do it anymore

5starpool

Chucky the tree wrote:

what is "checking in the dark"?

It is basically when you are first to act on the flop (or turn, or river even) and you check before the dealer has revealed what the next card is going to be.

Cuban Son

Marq wrote:

there are times when it is good to use it.
only when playing stud though.
I think checking in the dark playing hold'em is retarded.

Je ne comprends pas.

As a previous poster mentioned, there is a time for every move in hold'em. A check in the dark is just another move. And as with everything in poker 'it depends' on the situation.
You can't just come out and say 'it's crap' or 'it's an amaturish move' as the comentators did when Joe Hachem checked blind on the final table of the ME, flopped a straight (not sure of the exact hand), induced a bet which commited a player to the hand and knocked out a serious contender(can't remember the exact hand).
I know i'd use the check in the dark (and have done) if dealt AA in the blinds to induce a c-bet by the pfr- wouldn't you? I must be retarded.

As for checking in the dark in stud- You're avin' a laugh-impossible to do. I must really be retarded. LOL

Move up levels.

Mr.Plough

people who want to look like phil hellmuth should just put on 4 stone and do it properly.

Hitman Actual

Cuban Son wrote:

I know i'd use the check in the dark (and have done) if dealt AA in the blinds to induce a c-bet by the pfr- wouldn't you? I must be retarded.

Hence making your hand fairly transparent, no? I don't' see how it helps you here. If you did that to me I'd be very wary about the strength of your hand, after you calling a raise preflop in the blinds.

semibluff

Cuban Son wrote:

Je ne comprends pas.

I think she is Estonian
.

english only at the tables please

Cuban Son

lenny_leonard wrote:

Hence making your hand fairly transparent, no? I don't' see how it helps you here. If you did that to me I'd be very wary about the strength of your hand, after you calling a raise preflop in the blinds.

I see your point but others have posted that it might be done with the likes of 78s or because they have already invested their blinds in the pot, or to look cool-why not use the move with a big hand to trap?

I'm not saying I'd do it all the time either, but each situation against different players/ranges/bet sizes require different tactics.

Marq

Cuban Son wrote:

As for checking in the dark in stud- You're avin' a laugh-impossible to do. I must really be retarded. LOL

No acutally it's very common in stud. You're on seventh street showing the best hand and you check dark before being dealt your downcard.
It's almost as silly, but there are some situations it's ok.

As for your argument that there's a place for every move in hold'em, fair enough. Perhaps if I was playing against a player who always moved all in if someone checks in the dark to him then I met check the turn in the dark with my flopped set on a dry board.
But until anyone can point to one clear cut example of where a check in the dark is more advantageous than checking having seen the information of the flop, then I will continue to just roll my eyes and thank my lucky stars every time that someone checks dark to me.

Cuban Son

Marq wrote:

No acutally it's very common in stud. You're on seventh street showing the best hand and you check dark before being dealt your downcard.
It's almost as silly, but there are some situations it's ok.

Fair point Marq. I've been playing stud online exclusively recently, and only live game was last week in the fitz on saturday afternoon, couldn't see a spot to do this. I am retarded.:o
But there was no way I was checking my quads dark with the other guy showing four spades on his up cards.:D

Back to hold'em- I was dealing the €50 double chance last night, was quite busy(70+ runners). Down to 12 runners, guy raises to 7000 in the co, folds to Tess(yeah I know) in the sb, she deliberates and flat calls. As I gather the chips in Tess checks dark(I'm grinning inside at the thought of this thread). Flop is A-10-4 with 2 clubs. Original raiser bets about a third of his stack, again Tess dwells before moving all in. Insta fold from other guy. His stack is crippled now and exits about 5 hands later. I just thought 'well played Tess'.:eek:

Marq

probably the same result if she looks at the flop and checks though.

Jesus Wept

Cuban Son wrote:

Down to 12 runners, guy raises to 7000 in the co, folds to Tess(yeah I know) in the sb, she deliberates and flat calls. As I gather the chips in Tess checks dark(I'm grinning inside at the thought of this thread). Flop is A-10-4 with 2 clubs. Original raiser bets about a third of his stack, again Tess dwells before moving all in. Insta fold from other guy. His stack is crippled now and exits about 5 hands later. I just thought 'well played Tess'.:eek:

You don't know what she had?

It was the check in the dark that did it!

Reminds me of when David Williams called 1/3 of his stack preflop with pocket 5's and checked-dark at the WSOP Main Even final table, flop was A-5-Rag and Josh Arieh went allin with AK.

Then he ran over to Marcel Luske yelping CHECK-DARK, CHECK-DARK!! Like a giddy school girl... (as if the chips weren't going in anyway! )

:o:o

I'm not saying there is no use whatsoever for a dark-check (though, tbh, I'm yet to see it), but it's the way some people who use it/witness it, and then think they are some sort of cosmic jedi master, and the checking-dark was some sort of awe-inspiring genius thing to do that won them a pot/chips that they wouldn't of won anyhow, or that they wouldn't of won more if they hadn't checked-dark.

insafehands

It has its merits.

If you checked in the dark, which is a sign of weakness according to some people, someone bets, you cr, it shows strength.

If you checked in the dark, which is a sign of strength according to some people, someone bets, you call, it will confuse people.

As we all know, there are a lot of mind games in poker, the I-know-you-know-I-know type thing, so how you can completely discount a check in the dark I don't know.

As I said, it has its merits.

5starpool

Tess is known for her strategic ploys I must admit. I especially love her cash game call of 15 leaving 8 behind that she throws in on the flop or sometime even folds for.

Jesus Wept

5starpool wrote:

Tess is known for her strategic ploys I must admit. I especially love her cash game call of 15 leaving 8 behind that she throws in on the flop or sometime even folds for.

metagame or value bluff?

insafehands wrote:

so how you can completely discount a check in the dark I don't know.

The Rigger wrote:

I'm not saying there is no use whatsoever for a dark-check (though, tbh, I'm yet to see it)

SpermManJelly

I see mocking of this move and lack of respect for it.But did not the Great

David 'Check in the Dark' Williams use it to exploit a WEEEEEK opponent in the WSOP???

insafehands

Rigger, apologies, that wasn't a direct response to you, just the thread in general.

Cuban Son

Marq wrote:

probably the same result if she looks at the flop and checks though.

I agree, but then she might see the flop she wants and goes all in and gets nothing out of the original raiser.

5starpool wrote:

Tess is known for her strategic ploys I must admit. I especially love her cash game call of 15 leaving 8 behind that she throws in on the flop or sometime even folds for.

Marq

Cuban Son wrote:

I agree, but then she might see the flop she wants and goes all in and gets nothing out of the original raiser.

This says more about tess than the merit of the "check in the dark".

PokerPissTaker

I think with think with the small pair/low suited connecters etc its a good move for 2 reasons

1. If your opponent if trying to get a read on you it makes it very hard as you have acted before knowing the new value of your hand.

2. You can concentrate on trying to read your opponent ask he reacts to the flop/turn/river.