I don’t see how a blind system can take those factors into account to algorithmically select a single winning bid.
Often the best bid is obvious - for example an unconditional offer at the highest bid. Sometimes the best bid is not so obvious, and the vendor chooses the bid that suits their situation the best, or they renegotiate price or conditions with the highest bidding buyer(s).
A vendor that doesn’t really need to sell and that believes prices are still rising, might accept a high price with a long settling date, or other conditions that might cause the sale to fall through.
A vendor than desperately needs the money might accept a lower price with immediate settlement, or if they know their house has problems they will accept a lower bid if it reduces their future liabilities (e.g. zero inspection, as-is clauses, etcetera).
There's a theorem an auction design that says that, under some vaguely reasonable assumptions about bidder information, it doesn't matter what form you use for the auction. Open auction, sealed auction, even second price auction should all give the same winner and same final price: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickrey_auction#:~:text=Revenu...
It doesn't work with open bidding, because then you could bid artificially much as long as the 2nd highest bid was at your real valuation or below.
But yes my intuition when selling my house was "surely I'd get more if this was open bids"
Though psychology comes into play in a bidding war, at least it's happening because the asset for sale is highly desired. It's efficient.
Blinds bids prevent bidding wars. They use them in Scotland. Not sure if buyer or seller is better off using them.