"I check dark"

[Admin]

Many players have developed the habit of "checking in the dark" when they are first to act at any betting round.
Checking in the dark is allowed, but players should understand that the dealer will not( or should not) announce "checked in the dark" before the next card is dealt.

Why?
Checking in the dark is an attempt by a player to gain an advantage ( in theory) on the rest of the field by acting before they know what the card(s) will be. This "discredits" the check( because the player didn't check based on the card(s) exposed for that round) and opens up the rest of the field to a possible check raise and may prevent a bet from being placed.
If the dealer announces "check in the dark" the dealer is ASSITING the player who checked in the dark in making a "play" by affirming the "move" to players.

Check in the dark is BINDING (when stated in turn) and the dealer will simply state check and direct the action to the next player to act.

[that_pope]

Seems fair enough.  I am probably one of the few players who never uses this, and thinks it handcuffs your play.  So you have pocket 2s in the BB and want to be deceptive if you flop a set, you can still do that by checking after gaining the knowledge you hit your set.

[AllYourChips]

Interesting.  I play 5/150 regularly and check in the dark every single time that I'm first to act on the flop.  I can say for the most part that the dealers do not announce my dark check, but there are some that certainly do.  I'm going to be interested to pay a little more attention to this now.

Pope...I don't understand how you feel dark checking handcuffs you.  The only time it really hurts you is if you flop a mediocre top pair and it gets checked around and an over hits the turn.  (And honestly, how often does the flop get checked around in a 20/40 game?)  Other than that, it allows you to gain some information on every player's hand before releasing any about your own. 

I will check dark with any 2 cards.  A lot of players will make the mistake of checking dark with their mediocre hands, but won't do it when they have a semi-strong holding.  They probably don't realize how much information they are giving away.  Of course their logic is, "I'm not gonna check dark here because I have AQ, what if I flop an Ace?!" 

But I guess the dark check might be a little more useful in no limit games because you do have the ability to protect your hand after a dark check, whereas in a limit, you're almost always gonna get called for 1 extra small bet.  But this is something I do regularly and have had great success in doing so.

[CAAZs #1 Card Slinger]

Correct blue-haired avatar admin!  So don't get annoyed at me when I ask you to "check or bet" again once the new card(s) is out!

[Alizona]

Seems fair enough.  I am probably one of the few players who never uses this, and thinks it handcuffs your play.  So you have pocket 2s in the BB and want to be deceptive if you flop a set, you can still do that by checking after gaining the knowledge you hit your set.

I'm with you on this Pope. I see so many players using "I check dark" and have NO idea why they are throwing away one street of potential value.  But then again, I don't play cash very often.  Perhaps it has strategic value in the split limit game (where getting value on any individual street is not such a hindrance and the deceptive value of the move can be a plus on later streets when the big money goes in), but I see players do this in tourneys all the time and to me they're just wasting a street of value. I've never ever checked dark and I doubt I ever will.

[CCremain]

There are some players (a large number actually) who check if out of position to the aggressor 100% of their hands.  Also there are players who check 100% of their holdings when first to act if there was no aggressor on the prior street just because they are out of position.  I always chuckle a little when these 100% check players announce "check dark".  Thank you master of the obvious. 

Players who dark check to gain relative position are just fooling themselves.  You usually already have good relative position if you are first to act no dark check required.  Also these guys usually fall in the 100% check "Master of the Obvious" category anyway so enjoy your dark check Mr. Clever Guy.  No one saw that coming.

The only time a dark check is interesting is when its done by the aggressor of the prior round or done by someone who leads into an aggressor (or just leads out in general) from time to time.  To me that just limits their play.  They lose that play right out of their playbook.  If you are the type of player to make a leading bet with certain holdings you are (as Pope said) handcuffing yourself to just checking when you the check dark.  Now if you had the lead out play in your playbook why abandon it?  Did you suddenly have an epiphany reevaluate your whole game in an instant and turn into a 100% check guy?  Hell no.  You just handcuffed yourself.

Unfortunately I cannot read well a player's hand who sometimes leads but now dark checks.  I can't narrow down whether they have the types of hands they would lead with or check with.  It gets even worse if I don't hear them say "check dark" and the dealer doesn't announce it.  Now I'm not aware the player is in the dark so I limit his holdings to the types of hands he will check-fold, check-call or check-raise with.  This isn't too terribly bad.  Usually there is no card in the deck that will come that will give them the type of hand they will lead with that's why they chose to check dark.  But sometimes I can get surprised at showdown when I'm not aware of the dark check and they do have a lead out type hand. 

I feel the dealer helps me out more if he were to announce a dark check of another player just in case I didn't hear that player say it originally.  That way if the dark player isn't  one of those 100% check guys I can be aware that he may be holding any lead out, check-call, check-fold, or check-raise type hands and not just the check type hands.

It's good to know that dealers don't or shouldn't announce "check dark".  In the future I will pay more attention to players that are first to act.

[CCremain]

Check in the dark is BINDING (when stated in turn) and the dealer will simply state check and direct the action to the next player to act.

Correct blue-haired avatar admin!  So don't get annoyed at me when I ask you to "check or bet" again once the new card(s) is out!

Is it in turn when action is complete but the new card is not out yet and first to act declares "check in the dark"?  Meaning the dealer can just say check for the first to act player once the new card is out rather than ask?

[that_pope]

Now that I think about it, checking dark usually slows down the game.

Player A bet flop and Player B calls.  Player B announced 'check dark'.

Turn is dealt.  Player B stares and Player A and Player A in his headphones stares at Player B.  

After 5-10 seconds the dealer will confirm a dark check and pass the action onto Player A.

Player A will then take off his headphones and ask "what happened"

Another 5-10 seconds pass before Player A realizes it is his action and then does whatever he was going to do.


It seems that almost all checks are with a visible hand motion EXCEPT for dark checks, which is what adds a lot to the confusion.

[Nidociv]

Check in the dark is BINDING (when stated in turn) and the dealer will simply state check and direct the action to the next player to act.

Correct blue-haired avatar admin!  So don't get annoyed at me when I ask you to "check or bet" again once the new card(s) is out!

Is it in turn when action is complete but the new card is not out yet and first to act declares "check in the dark"?  Meaning the dealer can just say check for the first to act player once the new card is out rather than ask?

I would interpret what was posted to answer yes, that once action i s complete for the round and UTG checks  "in the dark" that is considered "in turn"even if the card isnt out yet ( hence "in the dark") because in fact UTG is the next player to indicate an action.
If the second to act said "check in the dark" prior to the card coming out, that action wouldnt be in tuen because the UTG hadnt acted yet ( in the dark or otherwise).

I have seen this...only three players remain after flop action which is now complete..
dealer start s to rap table right before burning....
UTG  "I check dark"
second to act, "well then i check dark to !"
third to act "i check dark also !"

the dealer burns and brings the turn card...
dealer announces "three players" "check, check, check"
burns and turns the river card

all binding actions in my opinion because they all acted in turn...

[QueenOfSpades]

I use the "check dark" strategy against mediocre players to get a read on their hand, or what they think of their hand.  Of course it doesn't always work, no strategy ALWAYS works, but it does work for me a large amount of the time.  I don't ever use this strategy against aggressive or weak players because I don't gain anything from it.  Aggressive players are going to be aggressive whether I check or bet; and weak players will check or call unless I bet my entire stack and even then they may still call to chase the one card in the entire deck that can help them.