Computer beats human experts at poker…

No Gravatar

Previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:

  • 48 hours after the launch of the “Prediction Markets” group at LinkedIn, we have already 52 members —both prediction market luminaries and simple people (trading the event derivatives or collecting the market-generated probabilities).
  • The John Edwards Non-Affair gives us an opportunity to look deep into the caldron of the wisdom of crowds.
  • We Plug This British Betting Blog On Midas Oracle Because We Like Its Name.
  • 24 hours after the launch of the “Prediction Markets” group at LinkedIn, we have already 39 members —both prediction market luminaries and simple people (trading the event derivatives or collecting the market-generated probabilities).
  • That was ubber world star Barack Obama in Berlin, during his July 2008 speech at the Victory Column. Spot all the digital cameras pointing to the socialist Messiah. Snatching something to bring at home — “see, I was there”.
  • If you want your affiliation with the “Prediction Markets” group to appear on your LinkedIn profile, then click on “Edit Public Profile Settings”, and check the “Groups” option.
  • If you want to connect with InTrade CEO John Delaney on LinkedIn…

5 thoughts on “Computer beats human experts at poker…

  1. medemi said:

    Anyone who has played bridge at a reasonable level knows how effective duplication is at rooting out luck. The problem with bridge is that there is a bidding round first after which one of your two opponents has to put the first card on the table. Which player and which card is often crucial in determining the outcome of the game, and there are not a lot of guidelines/rules which players have to follow. This adds a lot of variance to the game.

    When you play on the internet or an open tournement you’ll have a mix of good and bad players (mostly bad). This will add a lot of variance as well.

    There isn’t a lot of bluffing going on in bridge because it usually doesn’t pay. And on top of feeling guilty about being reckless you’ll have to deal with your partner who wants to stick a knife in you. That’s bridge, and this will reduce variance. :-D

    Even when you take all this into consideration you’ll notice that after 100 duplicate hands the best players in bridge float to the top.

    I would say, in a one on one poker game with 500 duplicate hands you’ll get a very good indication of who is the best player. It will be different when you play with 8 people at the table.

    I don’t know why people aren’t interested in duplicate poker, it’s exactly what I wanted after I quit for the second time playing ordinary poker. It’s probably because people are unaware of it’s advantages.

    Thanks for the link though.

  2. James said:

    “I don’t know why people aren’t interested in duplicate poker, it’s exactly what I wanted after I quit for the second time playing ordinary poker. It’s probably because people are unaware of it’s advantages.”

    Plenty of people are interested in “duplicate” poker, but the element of randomness that real players bring to the table is far more advantageous than just being able to calculate odds. The mind game is just as important (if not more important) than the actual cards and odds that you’re holding and calculating once you’re at a more seasoned level of play. Being able to bluff is only a small part of this mind game; being able to determine how strong your opponents hand is – that’s where the money’s at.

  3. medemi said:

    James,

    I’m not sure what you’re saying. There is randomness in cards as well as your opponents in bridge. Your cards are simply duplicated and played by others as well. So when you have a bad beat others (the people against who your score will be compared) will have them as well.

    Trying to determine the quality of your opponents (not just the cards) is an important factor in bridge. You’ll also have take into consideration how the rest of “the field” will handle your cards, making bridge a very diversified and interesting game. I don’t know about duplicate poker, but I guess the principle must be the same.

    The problem that remains in poker is that you don’t get to play most hands. In bridge you play every hand, and you can score with every hand (even if it is poor) exactly because of duplication.

    What bothers me about no-limit holdem poker is that after one bad beat you’re out of the tournement. And playing very passively for 2 hours isn’t my way of having fun either. Maybe I should have played cash games. Anyway, I enjoy watching the interaction on the telly more than playing myself these days.

  4. medemi said:

    Oh, and a computer that will beat you at bridge, hasn’t been invented yet, and might never be invented. Which should tell us something.

Leave a Reply to medemi Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *