Checking in the dark
 

I was watching the WSOP main event and thought I saw Howard Lederer check in the dark during a hand (I forget the circumstances). I know I saw Phil Hellmuth do it at least twice during the main event also. They sat at tables full of amateurs . Given that ESPN shows only a fraction of the hands played by top players, I wonder if Lederer and Hellmuth checked in the dark more frequently than what I saw.

During Hellmuth's commentary for CardPlayer magazine's live coverage of the main event final table, he briefly mentioned inducing bluffs from amateurs. This was after Mike Matusow induced a bluff from Steve Dannenmann, but Dannenman spiked a jack with AJ to beat Matusow's pocket tens, if I remember correctly.

Lederer was overheard discussing the amateur players and their propensity to put all their chips at stake on any hand. All of this raises a question: are pro players trying to induce big bluffs from amateurs with automatic in the dark checks, and is this going to become more prevalent in tournament poker where pros play amateurs?

Checking in the dark is something that, as an online player, I never see because of the lack of such a function in the software. I suppose you could say I'm in the dark when it comes to checking in the dark.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

I often think of checking in the dark as something designed to slow the other player down. It suggests:

1. You have a hand that is so good the other player can catch a card and still be given a free card.

2. You have a fit or fold hand where either you'll hit a great hand or else you'll have a hand that will be behind a bluff.

with 2 being more likely than 1. The player in position knows this is the case (or at least this is what is implied) and then is faced with the choice of should I bluff at the pot or not. If either 1 or 2 is actually true than betting isn't attractive as with 1 you'll be behind and lose and with 2 you'll often be ahead and win the pot (but in these case you generally would have been able to check it down and win the pot) or else he'll of hit and you'll get beaten losing at least your bet.

Now if a tricky player or pro does it who knows what reverse-reverse-reverse move it might be supposed to represent, but I'd think it more often than not slows the opponent down rather than induces bluffs.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

When you think about it basically whenever Phil "dark checks" he is really planning on checking anyway, no matter what comes on the flop. so it doesn't really matter that he "dark checks." he's just trying to intimidate people, but honestly I laugh to myself every time someone dark checks. i think it's pretty silly.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

I'm pretty sure the hand you're referring to with Lederer was a dark bet. I think he had 66 or something and his opponent had AQ. He had raised preflop and the guy called, leaving himself with only 600 chips or so (the call was 7200 or somesuch). So Ledere bet the guy's last 600 chips in the dark, and the other guy called in the dark.

Bill Fillmaff does some pretty fun imitations of Hellmuth's checking style though.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

When people check in the dark to me, I sometimes fold in the dark.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

IMO, I think the dark check saved phil hellmuth from getting knocked out when he had the AK and the other guy had AA and flopped a full house. he probably would have led this flop and gotten into a lot of trouble.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, I think the dark check saved phil hellmuth from getting knocked out when he had the AK and the other guy had AA and flopped a full house. he probably would have led this flop and gotten into a lot of trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. Doesn't make it a good idea though.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
IMO, I think the dark check saved phil hellmuth from getting knocked out when he had the AK and the other guy had AA and flopped a full house. he probably would have led this flop and gotten into a lot of trouble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. Doesn't make it a good idea though.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, the dark checking got to be ridiculous.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

I think the main purpose of the dark check is to switch betting positions. Checking in the dark makes the guy with the better position act first. It can be effective if used correctly.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
Checking in the dark makes the guy with the better position act first.

[/ QUOTE ]

It also allows him to take a free card from his "first position" if he wants it.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

Sometimes I check in the dark so that people don't get to see my immediate reaction to the flop. Instead I can watch their response. It's more dangerous in no limit. It has a tendency to induce bluffs.

When I check in the dark in 6-12, people sometimes still call my raise. Heh.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
I suppose you could say I'm in the dark when it comes to checking in the dark.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol....

Re: Checking in the dark
 

In the main event, a player on my left (affectionately named "Card Rack" by myself) would repeatedly check in the dark. Every time he did so, he had a drawing type hand (JT, small pair, etc), and if he did so on the turn or river, he was on a draw. Very easy to figure out.

Unfortunately, he kept hitting his draw over and over and over. Hence the nickname.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

You're right, but you shouldn't check in the dark with Aces or Kings or any "real" hand. The dark check, in my experience, ussually earns a free card on rag flops and flops your opponent might be afraid of. If your opponent checks behind you, and if you get a nice read on him, you can lead on the turn and take the pot with no pair or draw. Who knows, you might even win with the best hand.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

There's a lot less hostility in this thread for dark checking compared to when David Williams did it a year ago in a hand against Josh Arieh.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot less hostility in this thread for dark checking compared to when David Williams did it a year ago in a hand against Josh Arieh.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a sweet dark check. It induced Arieh to make a mistake and go all in with no thought really and it ended up trapping him. Nice play Williams.[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot less hostility in this thread for dark checking compared to when David Williams did it a year ago in a hand against Josh Arieh.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a sweet dark check. It induced Arieh to make a mistake and go all in with no thought really and it ended up trapping him. Nice play Williams.[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a retarded dark check with a small pair and he got damn lucky that his opp. hit TPTK and he hit a set.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's a lot less hostility in this thread for dark checking compared to when David Williams did it a year ago in a hand against Josh Arieh.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a stupid statement, all the money was going in on that hand dark check or no dark check.

Williams put half his stack in and then dark checked with a pocket pair. How would you feel about this play if the flop had come 8 9 J. Arieh checks it through and then hits a A on the turn.

What does williams do on a flop that he dark checked which doesn't give him a set such QJ8 where Arieh pushes All In with his AK. Does he get pushed off his best hand.

This was a time that David Williams tried to use a play taught to him by his mentor Luske. However, I would bet even Luske would state that was not the time or place for that play given the chip stacks and blinds.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

in tournament play when people check to me in the dark i have said "im all in in the dark."

ive done it three times once the dude flopped the joint and the other times they folded.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

checking in the dark did not begin w/ David Williams

Re: Checking in the dark
 

i like dark checks, it can throw people off...it trapped a guy one time when i had KK made a preflop raise and was called. hit set but checked in dark, opp thought i was stealin preflop and lost my gull and he moved in...lucky hand dark check isnt always a success and is mostly drawing hands like said earlier.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

I like the dark check because it's fancy and when you do it people tend to think "Whoa, I better watch out for this guy. He seems pretty advanced." [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
I like the dark check because it's fancy and when you do it people tend to think "Whoa, I better watch out for this guy. He seems pretty advanced." [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This only works if you're wearing sunglasses

Re: Checking in the dark
 

This only works if you're wearing sunglasses

[/ QUOTE ]wrong, it only works when wearing poker specs...Duh

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the main purpose of the dark check is to switch betting positions. Checking in the dark makes the guy with the better position act first. It can be effective if used correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly why it is a powerful tool when used in the correct situations. Most internet players cannot grasp how useful it is making your opponent react to the flop first and picking up that information before you must make a decision on what to do AND the flip side is that your opponent does not get this information from you.

In the right situations this is much more valuable than the potential free card for your opponent.

Being that the majority of my play is live I am a huge fan of this move when used correctly. Some of my craftier opponents whom I have played against multiple times have even thrown in the 'dark check behind' when I dark check.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

[ QUOTE ]
it trapped a guy one time when i had KK made a preflop raise and was called. hit set but checked in dark, opp thought i was stealin preflop and lost my gull and he moved in

[/ QUOTE ] How can you 'hit set but check in dark'? When you dark checked you wouldn't know whether you hit the set or not yet. If you 'lost your gull' then that would mean you checked after you saw the flop. I don't get it.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

oh my god for the amount of people who claim to be poker masters on this site, why is it so full of idiots..i have KK. when the flop comes im going to be udg. i check in the dark. when flop comes there is a K in it, so I hit a set on the flop. if i had crayons i would draw a picture of the whole event but it seems pretty clear to me.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

Here's what David Williams said.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

wow, what an immature post.

[censored] get over it.

I can see the technical merit of what he did, and he makes a good case for the dark check... but calm the [censored] down. god.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

That wasn't the real David Williams.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

Well, I half assumed it wasn't, although he discussed upcoming final tables, and things like that.

Either way... stupidity.

... I dunno, rereading it, I could be convinced it was.

But I shall bow down to the great kahuna's wisdom.

Re: Checking in the dark
 

I can't believe that no one has yet mentioned Sklansky's article on dark checking in "Getting the Best of It."

Re: Checking in the dark
 

The couple of times someone checked dark to me, I checked behind in the dark.