When is it correct to check blind?

[Bill King]

i agree. this is such a situational game, especially when you're playing holdem with only 4 betting rounds. I think you are losing an edge by being someone who reads hands well and value bets certain situations when you check blind because it takes the pressure off of your opponent in thinking that every move he makes is just as, if not more important than the last.

[cpk]

I don't think I ever check in the dark. I like sometimes betting in the dark, because a lot of players around here bet in the dark as a bluff. So I'll bet in the dark with an uber-strong hand and get paid off. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[BenA]

[ QUOTE ]
I like sometimes betting in the dark, because a lot of players around here bet in the dark as a bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I could see the value of this. There are some hands you are going to bet on the flop regardless of what comes. This may throw opponents off and have the effect of them paying you. But its rare that I have a hand that I checked in the BB and know that I'm going to bet a flop, unless maybe its HU, I'm holding a pocket pair OOP, and I know my opponent well.

[Gorby]

Checking blind sometimes will work, with a LAG. You can then raise them with any 2 cards, and sometimes take down the pot. I do this sometimes in a home game I play in, but not very often and only when I have 1 of 2 opponets in the pot. If they always make a continuation bet, it sometimes, once again not very often works. Not worth doing alot, if at all ever.

[AKQJ10]

That still doesn't explain why you wouldn't want to look at your cards first, having decided to check. In fact, since you're against an incorrigible LAG, pretending to care about your cards then check/raising would make it less likely that he'll catch on because it looks more natural. Checking blind -- essentially saying, "Hey, watch this move! Pay careful attention to how I'm going to outplay you," -- should be tipping him off that you're on to him, although he doesn't sound smart enough to take the hint.

check blind != autocheck

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
That still doesn't explain why you wouldn't want to look at your cards first, having decided to check.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the situation is you look at your cards, you're in the SB and you are going to check no matter what the flop is. I think the most common scenario is a raise by one opponent, you call in the SB (or BB) and you are heads up. Normally, you would check into to the raiser if you flopped nothing or the nuts. So by checking blind (i.e. before the flop) you are saying Ok let's see what you do and then I'll go from there.

[AKQJ10]

No doubt you're saying, "Ok let's see what you do and then I'll go from there." Why does saying that benefit you?

[DaveTheClueless]

[ QUOTE ]
I've always wondered about this.

I see players such as Phil Hellmuth check in the dark and have the other opponent do the bidding.

When should I do this and what are the advantages of checking in the dark?

[/ QUOTE ]

When a camera is on you. You might get to co-host a bad poker show on Bravo.

[PantsOnFire]

Against a skilled player probably nothing.

Against a less skilled player and you may actually throw him off and prevent a continuation bet and be in a better position to steal.

As well, you can build up an image if make this play again later, depending on what you did the first time (e.g. checkraised).

PS: if you said it was a stupid, unneccesary play I couldn't really diagree with you.

[Red_Diamond]

I will often check in the dark during the later stages of a tournament when someone is all in for obvious reasons. In a cash game, I wouldn't advice it unless that sort of thing is known to mess with one of your opponents.