Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How A.I. Conquered Poker

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 188 posts

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#121

Post by VirusNewbie »

splonk wrote: post #104
sillysaurusx wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how much have you won and lost in total? I don’t have any knowledge of poker, so I don’t know how to ballpark this. And the impersonal questions are boring after seven lifetimes, so I thought I’d ask. It would be interesting to see a GitHub style graph of poker activity, with won and lost corresponding to added lines and removed lines.

6 figures. Turns out there's a lot more (and less risky) money in software development than there is in poker. I gave up the professional poker life pretty early and actually made quite a lot more as a talented "amateur" with a Silicon Valley software dev salary that took away the risk of ruin constraints I had a pro. Plus I didn't really enjoy playing professionally anyways - it's pretty mindnumbingly boring to play…

Are you Paul P?

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#122

Post by achenatx »

>

I wrote probably the first online texas holdem game, played on IRC, around 1994. Back then in rec.gambling blackjack teams were forming and instead of joining a blackjack team I started to play poker, because it was more fun than counting cards. I wrote the game so I could play against other people and was immediately a winning player in low limit games of the time in lake charles and vegas. However even in the 90s, it was about statistics.

I do regret not allowing people to play for money (people were constantly asking).

Even back then the primitive bots were mostly killing human players.

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#123

Post by [deleted] »

magixx wrote: post #116
splonk wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

6 figures. Turns out there's a lot more (and less risky) money in software development than there is in poker. I gave up the professional poker life pretty early and actually made quite a lot more as a talented "amateur" with a Silicon Valley software dev salary that took away the risk of ruin constraints I had a pro. Plus I didn't really enjoy playing professionally anyways - it's pretty mindnumbingly boring to play…

I imagine that for pro players to play at their best can be taxing and wouldn't be surprised if some just wanted to play less costly games for more what they could deem to be more fun.

[deleted]

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#124

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

bloodyplonker22 wrote: post #91
splonk wrote: post #52

(Former pro and high stakes player, occasional solver developer) This is actually one of the best poker articles I've ever seen in generalist media. Not too clickbaity, reasonable high level overview of game theory, a (very accurate IMO) quote from old pro Erik Seidel about the state of the game just 15 years ago, a discussion on variance vs. EV and results, and most importantly, an emphasis on math, randomization te…

> Probably the one biggest misconception people have is that pros have sick reading abilities since TV likes to emphasize staredowns, when the actual single biggest skill long term pros have is the ability to lose hand after hand for hours and still play their best game. This is absolutely true, but let me add to this: live pros like Phil Ivey, who have played the game in person virtually their entire lives, do have…

I think old school pros like Ivey and Dwan are very good at reading the entire table. Dwan emphatically and correctly states who had the best hand against his bluff [1]. Ivey emphatically and correctly basically calls a guy a liar at the end of a hand over what the guy said he folded [2]. They have amazing "situational awareness".

[1] https://youtu.be/dS_uv88YuPs?t=179 [2] https://youtu.be/IN1bW4jo4i4?t=72

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#125

Post by pretendscholar »

dwohnitmok wrote: post #111
runnerup wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alphastar also didn't play with the same limitations that a human has. Even after removing its ability to see the entire map and finally forcing it to scroll around, alphastar never misclicks (so its APM==EPM) and can still blast nearly unlimited APM for short bursts as long as its "average APM" over an x-second period matched human's APM. I believe Alphastar would generate more interesting strategies if we limited a…

> Alphastar also didn't play with the same limitations that a human has. Even after removing its ability to see the entire map and finally forcing it to scroll around, alphastar never misclicks (so its APM==EPM) and can still blast nearly unlimited APM for short bursts as long as its "average APM" over an x-second period matched human's APM. > I believe Alphastar would generate more interesting strategies if we limit…

Why is it far worse with Terran and Zerg?

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#126

Post by garbagetime »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #119
throwaway_Aef8 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC it's "solved" for heads up but not really multiway like 3+ to the flop. I believe in a recent Bart Hanson Youtube he points out that mutltiway is not solved.

It's not solved for multiway in the sense that the optimal move in each situation isn't known, but there are AIs like Pluribus that have superhuman performance.

Superhuman performance in a very constrained version of no-limit hold'em

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#127

Post by JKCalhoun »

howdydoo wrote: post #115
bloodyplonker22 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, that is the obvious step that bot makers have taken. When bots were barely at the online poker scene, nobody cared to even check. Of course, there are still other ways to check for bots such as a user playing for an unreasonable amount of time or an extraordinary amount of tables, or simply not answering to chat.

The natural next step is adding ELIZA-like chat responses to your bots

"Tell me about want to kick my ass."

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#128

Post by wallawe »

tunesmith wrote: post #75
soferio wrote: post #39

What teaching or training tools are out there for a very average player at no limit Texas hold’em who just wants to get at bit better to a respectable level at a modest time commitment , and does not need to be a pro-level player?

Yeah, really I just want an open-source poker solitaire that asks me what I should do and then shows me the odds after I answer.

ask and you shall receive: https://gtowizard.com/ (go to the "practice" section for what you are looking for)

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#129

Post by jeffreyrogers »

garbagetime wrote: post #126
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not solved for multiway in the sense that the optimal move in each situation isn't known, but there are AIs like Pluribus that have superhuman performance.

Superhuman performance in a very constrained version of no-limit hold'em

Those constraints don't seem that strong to me. The algorithm could've just been retrained with different stack sizes if it ended up making a big enough difference.

Re: How A.I. Conquered Poker

#130

Post by dabei »

bluecalm wrote: post #9

I am the solver programmer mentioned in the article. I think it came out pretty decently. Maybe not all the details are right (I was late answering fact checking email) but I think it's a decent read and the author has done a good job!

Great job! What makes PioSolver much more popular than the other solvers?
Post reply on HN