7 ms·

I think it took the community a while to come up with the right algorithms. So much of early AI research was focused on beating humans at chess and later Go. Bu

I think it took the community a while to come up with the right algorithms. So much of early AI research was focused on beating humans at chess and later Go. But those techniques don't directly carry over to an imperfect-information game like poker. The challenge of hidden information was kind of neglected by the AI community. This line of research really has its origins in the game theory community actually (which is why the notation is completely different from reinforcement learning). Fortunately, these techniques now work really really well for poker. It's now quite inexpensive to make a superhuman poker bot.

amelius 7y ago
So will this be the end of online poker?
- joaomacp 7y ago
  It must be. It is way too hard to prevent humans from using an AI. Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect", but in poker that's harder to do, and there's way more money on the line.
  - chance_state 7y ago
    >Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect" [...] That's interesting, could you share an example? Most of my search results are anecdotal Reddit threads about how many people cheat in online chess.
    - MikeHolman 7y ago
      All the major online chess websites have anti-cheat mechanisms. They don't publish details of how they detect cheaters though, and I don't know how good they are. From what I've read, they work by comparing the player's moves against chess engines, and if the player is picking engine's choice too often in positions where there are multiple roughly equal moves, they get flagged.
      - meruru 7y ago
        I always found weird that someone would want to cheat in a game like online chess. I mean, what's the point? Does anyone have insight on what's going on in the head of cheaters?
        Jach 7y ago
        A few reasons come to mind. One is simply that if you have any metrics (ranking, win/loss ratio, greater site access..) it's going to feel nice to see them improve. Another is that losing at anything can be ego-hurting (similar reason good players sometimes sandbag with new accounts / lower ranks they can't possibly lose to, they need to 'win' more). Or reverse sandbagging/trolling with a bot might be amusing. Another is the cheater may justify it as a self-teaching game, and might not always play the strongest move but see if their move is even in consideration or try to improve ability to see the better moves by having them always pointed out -- but why not just play the bot, or save that for post-game analysis? I like to run my go games through gnugo's annotated analysis at the end (as I'm very weak I assume even the weak gnugo can teach me things), it'd be too troublesome to use it in a live game.
        sakarisson 7y ago
        Other players justify cheating by convincing themselves that everyone else is cheating.
        root_axis 7y ago
        People enjoy the the feeling of having power over others.
        baq 7y ago
        it's where the enjoyment comes from. cheaters don't enjoy the game as much as they seeing their ELO/MMR go up or in the worst case they're psychopaths who just want to mess with other people's heads.
      - soup10 7y ago
        Even so most people don't bother with standard games online since its way too easy to cheat by mirroring the game and basically undetectable if they are good enough to not play lines that look like "computerish" moves.
  - icelancer 7y ago
    >> Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect", but in poker that's harder to do, and there's way more money on the line. Not really. With perfect information you know the correct strict equity plays assuming normal opponents. This doesn't give you the ultimate answer, because a player's reads and inference about another player is definitely an input - especially at the highest level - but it is more than enough to give you a winning/losing player at the small/midstakes. source: worked for an online poker company that had these tools... and far more available to us
    - badfrog 7y ago
      > a player's reads and inference about another player is definitely an input - especially at the highest level I think player-dependent strategy is more important at lower levels because the players are much further away from what you call "normal opponents", so there's far more opportunity to exploit their mistakes.
- ggggtez 7y ago
  No, having losing odds never stopped anyone from gambling.
  - olalonde 7y ago
    That's simply not true... I don't play casino games because of the losing odds. I play poker because of the winning odds. I guess you meant "having losing odds doesn't stop everyone from gambling".
- traderjane 7y ago
  Even with a magical human test, you couldn't know whether it was human + robot performance.
- salty_biscuits 7y ago
  Just bet on bots playing each other.
  - drjesusphd 7y ago
    So... like Wall Street!
- tempestn 7y ago
  It's pretty easy for good players to recognize other good players. And since the house takes such a large cut, the only way for pro players to have positive expected value online is to seek out games with poor players. So even if they couldn't recognize the bots as such, they would see them as tough players and avoid them. That said, I suppose it would be possible for the bots to become so prevalent that all this sort of opportunity is effectively used up, so the return vs time and risk for a human player is no longer worthwhile. (That already happened long ago for most players, as the initial online poker boom faded and most casual players left.) On the other hand, all the major platforms have terms prohibiting using bots, so their numbers might be sufficiently limited to prevent that scenario.
  - oppiz 7y ago
    It's my understanding the big sites have some pretty sophisticated bot detection systems, so in theory a bot that would be successful at beating online poker couldn't be a huge winner, it'd presumably raise too many red flags. However, if it were a near break-even player, with dozens, if not hundreds, of instances running at any given time, it's going to slowly grind out a substantial figure. You'd also have to take into account that the sites are monitoring things like reaction times to bets and raises, hand range consistency, etc. I'm not a coder, but it seems like it'd be a tremendous undertaking to code a bot that would be a substantial threat to players. Then again, maybe I'm naive about the level of scrutiny the poker sites are employing.
    - oppiz 7y ago
      I guess the real threat isn't a "bot" but something in the way of a program that interprets the data on the screen real-time and whose output instructs the player of the "optimal" play, given the circumstances. How the hell would you deter that as a site operator?
      - BigJono 7y ago
        Pretty sure I've read a long time back on 2p2 that large consistant winners on certain sites have been asked to submit camera footage of their play with a clear view of screens and inputs. So this is probably something that companies like Pokerstars have been dealing with for years already.
- MRD85 7y ago
  I'm sitting here considering the possibility of making my own bot to play low stakes online poker ($1.50 sit n go). Run it on 6 tables at once and I imagine it would be facing really poor opponents and would have a steady flow of cash.
  - moate 7y ago
    until your bot gets caught (possibly quickly) and then you're banned from the sites.
- kyleblarson 7y ago
  Even if it is, it means a new live poker boom which is a very good thing

amelius 7y ago

So will this be the end of online poker?

joaomacp 7y ago
It must be. It is way too hard to prevent humans from using an AI. Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect", but in poker that's harder to do, and there's way more money on the line.
- chance_state 7y ago
  >Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect" [...] That's interesting, could you share an example? Most of my search results are anecdotal Reddit threads about how many people cheat in online chess.
  - MikeHolman 7y ago
    All the major online chess websites have anti-cheat mechanisms. They don't publish details of how they detect cheaters though, and I don't know how good they are. From what I've read, they work by comparing the player's moves against chess engines, and if the player is picking engine's choice too often in positions where there are multiple roughly equal moves, they get flagged.
    - meruru 7y ago
      I always found weird that someone would want to cheat in a game like online chess. I mean, what's the point? Does anyone have insight on what's going on in the head of cheaters?
      - Jach 7y ago
        A few reasons come to mind. One is simply that if you have any metrics (ranking, win/loss ratio, greater site access..) it's going to feel nice to see them improve. Another is that losing at anything can be ego-hurting (similar reason good players sometimes sandbag with new accounts / lower ranks they can't possibly lose to, they need to 'win' more). Or reverse sandbagging/trolling with a bot might be amusing. Another is the cheater may justify it as a self-teaching game, and might not always play the strongest move but see if their move is even in consideration or try to improve ability to see the better moves by having them always pointed out -- but why not just play the bot, or save that for post-game analysis? I like to run my go games through gnugo's annotated analysis at the end (as I'm very weak I assume even the weak gnugo can teach me things), it'd be too troublesome to use it in a live game.
        sakarisson 7y ago
        Other players justify cheating by convincing themselves that everyone else is cheating.
      - root_axis 7y ago
        People enjoy the the feeling of having power over others.
      - baq 7y ago
        it's where the enjoyment comes from. cheaters don't enjoy the game as much as they seeing their ELO/MMR go up or in the worst case they're psychopaths who just want to mess with other people's heads.
    - soup10 7y ago
      Even so most people don't bother with standard games online since its way too easy to cheat by mirroring the game and basically undetectable if they are good enough to not play lines that look like "computerish" moves.
- icelancer 7y ago
  >> Some chess services try to check if you're playing "too perfect", but in poker that's harder to do, and there's way more money on the line. Not really. With perfect information you know the correct strict equity plays assuming normal opponents. This doesn't give you the ultimate answer, because a player's reads and inference about another player is definitely an input - especially at the highest level - but it is more than enough to give you a winning/losing player at the small/midstakes. source: worked for an online poker company that had these tools... and far more available to us
  - badfrog 7y ago
    > a player's reads and inference about another player is definitely an input - especially at the highest level I think player-dependent strategy is more important at lower levels because the players are much further away from what you call "normal opponents", so there's far more opportunity to exploit their mistakes.
ggggtez 7y ago
No, having losing odds never stopped anyone from gambling.
- olalonde 7y ago
  That's simply not true... I don't play casino games because of the losing odds. I play poker because of the winning odds. I guess you meant "having losing odds doesn't stop everyone from gambling".
traderjane 7y ago
Even with a magical human test, you couldn't know whether it was human + robot performance.
salty_biscuits 7y ago
Just bet on bots playing each other.
- drjesusphd 7y ago
  So... like Wall Street!
tempestn 7y ago
It's pretty easy for good players to recognize other good players. And since the house takes such a large cut, the only way for pro players to have positive expected value online is to seek out games with poor players. So even if they couldn't recognize the bots as such, they would see them as tough players and avoid them. That said, I suppose it would be possible for the bots to become so prevalent that all this sort of opportunity is effectively used up, so the return vs time and risk for a human player is no longer worthwhile. (That already happened long ago for most players, as the initial online poker boom faded and most casual players left.) On the other hand, all the major platforms have terms prohibiting using bots, so their numbers might be sufficiently limited to prevent that scenario.
- oppiz 7y ago
  It's my understanding the big sites have some pretty sophisticated bot detection systems, so in theory a bot that would be successful at beating online poker couldn't be a huge winner, it'd presumably raise too many red flags. However, if it were a near break-even player, with dozens, if not hundreds, of instances running at any given time, it's going to slowly grind out a substantial figure. You'd also have to take into account that the sites are monitoring things like reaction times to bets and raises, hand range consistency, etc. I'm not a coder, but it seems like it'd be a tremendous undertaking to code a bot that would be a substantial threat to players. Then again, maybe I'm naive about the level of scrutiny the poker sites are employing.
  - oppiz 7y ago
    I guess the real threat isn't a "bot" but something in the way of a program that interprets the data on the screen real-time and whose output instructs the player of the "optimal" play, given the circumstances. How the hell would you deter that as a site operator?
    - BigJono 7y ago
      Pretty sure I've read a long time back on 2p2 that large consistant winners on certain sites have been asked to submit camera footage of their play with a clear view of screens and inputs. So this is probably something that companies like Pokerstars have been dealing with for years already.
MRD85 7y ago
I'm sitting here considering the possibility of making my own bot to play low stakes online poker ($1.50 sit n go). Run it on 6 tables at once and I imagine it would be facing really poor opponents and would have a steady flow of cash.
- moate 7y ago
  until your bot gets caught (possibly quickly) and then you're banned from the sites.
kyleblarson 7y ago
Even if it is, it means a new live poker boom which is a very good thing