4 ms·

Honestly, this doesn't look to be a true test of who is better at poker. Poker is not like chess - a lot of emotions are involved in reading another players' cu

Honestly, this doesn't look to be a true test of who is better at poker. Poker is not like chess - a lot of emotions are involved in reading another players' cues (if he is touching his face, whether he is talking nervously, how quickly does he call all in etc.). Making all this computerized seems to take the spirit of poker away. It is like playing online poker which is an entirely different ball game vs. real poker.

asher_ 10y ago
Why is it unfair? Both the human and computer players are unable to make reads on the other based on physical cues.
- jat850 10y ago
  If it's unfair in any regard (and I disagree with GP that it's unfair on the merit of physical reads), it's that humans get fatigued and computers do not. Having played poker for stretches of 16+ hours I know that the number of mistakes I make late in the day drastically outnumber the ones I make when I am fresh. And breaks only do so much to counter this fatigue. I'd have to say that playing poker for long stretches of time is at least as, and possibly more so, than grinding for 12-16 hours writing code. Even still, it's a stretch to call it unfair. It is brains vs. AI, after all, and that will always be true of brains no matter the task - fatigue is a factor, and this is where AI will have important advantages in the future.
  - cdelsolar 10y ago
    is at least as what?
    - jat850 10y ago
      At least as tiring (physically, mentally). Like my brain obviously was when I wrote that post :)
- keldaris 10y ago
  It's not that it's unfair, it's just a considerably different game than human vs. human poker. It would, however, be very interesting to see if the software can reveal exploitable tendencies in the players' behavior that even other top players would be unlikely to discover.
  - iopq 10y ago
    > It's not that it's unfair, it's just a considerably different game than human vs. human poker. absolutely not, these players play online, there are no tells online
utnick 10y ago
I'm not a great poker player, but I read a lot about them. And most great poker players say reading peoples emotions/cues/or tells isn't reliable or a big deal. So in that sense , online poker is very similar to live poker, the strategy doesn't change very much
- oculusthrift 10y ago
  i'm very into poker. you're right about the tells but what is important is knowing the other players. you can tell what type of players and how aggressive or "soft" they tend to be. you know if they would tend to call or raise a weak hand in certain situations.. etc. it definitely matters
  - usaphp 10y ago
    Well a human would know those players by playing against them or watching replays of their games, I am pretty sure AI can do the same and will have a better memory of what are the habits of each individual player it played against or saw their game replays.
- xapata 10y ago
  Acting is a good strategy against weak opponents. I would never try to "Hollywood" against a good opponent, but then I'd never get involved in a big hand against one either. Against a fish, yeah, I'll ham it up and they eat that stuff. If they're on the edge of a decision, some good acting can push them the direction you want. I guess I'm agreeing with you -- a pro would never pay attention to my "tells".
kevinalexbrown 10y ago
> Making all this computerized seems to take the spirit of poker away. It is like playing online poker which is an entirely different ball game vs. real poker. Maybe, but it seems like impressive performance nonetheless.
newmanships 10y ago
Those physical cues are such a small small part of poker. There's a reason the top players are all online players. Poker is a game of math first and foremost.
phaus 10y ago
Physical tells are almost entirely Hollywood nonsense. When a professional player talks about getting a read on someone, they are talking about probabilities combined with the opponent's position at the table and a history (even a short history) of that player's betting/play patterns.
- ProAm 10y ago
  This is not true at all. If you play online vs live then yes. But physical tells are absolutely still thing, and Im not talking the way you crack an oreo.
- maruhan2 10y ago
  Not a poker expert, but I've seen videos of pro-poker players demonstrating their reading ability with random people picking cards.
- patrick_haply 10y ago
  > Physical tells are almost entirely Hollywood nonsense That's true for most any level of serious player, but I see it often in casual games in peoples kitchens with casual players who don't play often or are just starting. Even I can't control myself sometimes when the adrenaline starts pumping. I'd rather say lack of self control is just one of the most amateur things you can do in poker, and what's nonsense is the idea that it's a meaningful aspect of any kind of serious poker game.
empath75 10y ago
Only bad players have readable tells.
iopq 10y ago
> It is like playing online poker which is an entirely different ball game vs. real poker. These are online players. They're playing the game they are best at.

asher_ 10y ago

Why is it unfair? Both the human and computer players are unable to make reads on the other based on physical cues.

jat850 10y ago
If it's unfair in any regard (and I disagree with GP that it's unfair on the merit of physical reads), it's that humans get fatigued and computers do not. Having played poker for stretches of 16+ hours I know that the number of mistakes I make late in the day drastically outnumber the ones I make when I am fresh. And breaks only do so much to counter this fatigue. I'd have to say that playing poker for long stretches of time is at least as, and possibly more so, than grinding for 12-16 hours writing code. Even still, it's a stretch to call it unfair. It is brains vs. AI, after all, and that will always be true of brains no matter the task - fatigue is a factor, and this is where AI will have important advantages in the future.
- cdelsolar 10y ago
  is at least as what?
  - jat850 10y ago
    At least as tiring (physically, mentally). Like my brain obviously was when I wrote that post :)
keldaris 10y ago
It's not that it's unfair, it's just a considerably different game than human vs. human poker. It would, however, be very interesting to see if the software can reveal exploitable tendencies in the players' behavior that even other top players would be unlikely to discover.
- iopq 10y ago
  > It's not that it's unfair, it's just a considerably different game than human vs. human poker. absolutely not, these players play online, there are no tells online

utnick 10y ago

I'm not a great poker player, but I read a lot about them. And most great poker players say reading peoples emotions/cues/or tells isn't reliable or a big deal. So in that sense , online poker is very similar to live poker, the strategy doesn't change very much

oculusthrift 10y ago
i'm very into poker. you're right about the tells but what is important is knowing the other players. you can tell what type of players and how aggressive or "soft" they tend to be. you know if they would tend to call or raise a weak hand in certain situations.. etc. it definitely matters
- usaphp 10y ago
  Well a human would know those players by playing against them or watching replays of their games, I am pretty sure AI can do the same and will have a better memory of what are the habits of each individual player it played against or saw their game replays.
xapata 10y ago
Acting is a good strategy against weak opponents. I would never try to "Hollywood" against a good opponent, but then I'd never get involved in a big hand against one either. Against a fish, yeah, I'll ham it up and they eat that stuff. If they're on the edge of a decision, some good acting can push them the direction you want. I guess I'm agreeing with you -- a pro would never pay attention to my "tells".

kevinalexbrown 10y ago

> Making all this computerized seems to take the spirit of poker away. It is like playing online poker which is an entirely different ball game vs. real poker. Maybe, but it seems like impressive performance nonetheless.

newmanships 10y ago

Those physical cues are such a small small part of poker. There's a reason the top players are all online players. Poker is a game of math first and foremost.

phaus 10y ago

Physical tells are almost entirely Hollywood nonsense. When a professional player talks about getting a read on someone, they are talking about probabilities combined with the opponent's position at the table and a history (even a short history) of that player's betting/play patterns.

ProAm 10y ago
This is not true at all. If you play online vs live then yes. But physical tells are absolutely still thing, and Im not talking the way you crack an oreo.
maruhan2 10y ago
Not a poker expert, but I've seen videos of pro-poker players demonstrating their reading ability with random people picking cards.
patrick_haply 10y ago
> Physical tells are almost entirely Hollywood nonsense That's true for most any level of serious player, but I see it often in casual games in peoples kitchens with casual players who don't play often or are just starting. Even I can't control myself sometimes when the adrenaline starts pumping. I'd rather say lack of self control is just one of the most amateur things you can do in poker, and what's nonsense is the idea that it's a meaningful aspect of any kind of serious poker game.

empath75 10y ago

Only bad players have readable tells.

iopq 10y ago

> It is like playing online poker which is an entirely different ball game vs. real poker. These are online players. They're playing the game they are best at.