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

Teach your kids poker, not chess

momentofdeep.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 242 posts

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#191

Post by ThomPete »

LewisVerstappen wrote: post #127
HPsquared wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chess is logic, poker is rhetoric.

This is not true in the slightest. Poker is far, far more mathematical than chess. The idea that poker pros are only going off "reads" is completely ludicrous. They have a set game-theory-optimal style of playing, and then use an opponents flaws/"tells" to deviate from the GTO style to exploit those tells. An example of a flaw could be if the opponent is playing shitty hole cards. If the opponent has played in every…

Any normal chess player can beat the best poker player in the world with a little luck.

No poker player can beat the best chess player in the world unless they aren't at their level already.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#194

Post by dwringer »

ThomPete wrote: post #191
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true in the slightest. Poker is far, far more mathematical than chess. The idea that poker pros are only going off "reads" is completely ludicrous. They have a set game-theory-optimal style of playing, and then use an opponents flaws/"tells" to deviate from the GTO style to exploit those tells. An example of a flaw could be if the opponent is playing shitty hole cards. If the opponent has played in every…

Any normal chess player can beat the best poker player in the world with a little luck. No poker player can beat the best chess player in the world unless they aren't at their level already.

I believe over multiple poker hands that advantage from luck would quickly diminish and then disappear. I would be very surprised if any normal chess player, a total novice at poker, would be able to beat the best poker player in the world if they sat down to play for a couple of hours straight.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#195

Post by oneoff786 »

abaldwin99 wrote: post #172
oneoff786 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fancy deep learning poker bots that beat pros don’t even consider past opponent behavior.

If the bot is playing a Nash equilibrium then it doesn't need to devise the opponent's strategy. It's guaranteed to tie the opponent in the worst case (the opponent is also playing Nash equilibrium) or else win. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium However, if the opponent is playing sub-optimally you can win _more_ by deviating from Nash equilibrium to take advantage of their specific strategic shortcoming…

On its face that seems impossible to be true. Given any bet you could calculate the probability that the bot would fold given an all in raise if you had perfect knowledge of the bot and abuse it

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#196

Post by wlesieutre »

richardw wrote: post #186
matwood wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you choose poker instead, you'll just breed a gambler. Huh? Chess is fun, but deals in perfect information at all times. Poker teaches a person how to make decisions with imperfect information, which is how most life decisions will be made.

It’s nowhere near perfect information because we’re limited. We have no idea what an early decision will mean later in the game. If anything it’s a game where the truth emerges slowly as options reduce to those that fit in our brain. However, it is a closed system and all participants are visible, whereas poker has hidden surprises. It still has known rules. In real life (eg business, investing) the game rules are va…

Chess is the classic example of what perfect information means

> In game theory, a sequential game has perfect information if each player, when making any decision, is perfectly informed of all the events that have previously occurred, including the "initialization event" of the game (e.g. the starting hands of each player in a card game)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_information

I don’t disagree with your point about our capability to use that information, but that’s what the game is about. If you have perfect information and perfect capability to predict what a move will mean in the future, what’s the point of playing at all? Anyway just wanted to point out exactly what the comment you replied to means by perfect information.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#197

Post by elboru »

hackernewds wrote: post #140
LewisVerstappen wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true in the slightest. Poker is far, far more mathematical than chess. The idea that poker pros are only going off "reads" is completely ludicrous. They have a set game-theory-optimal style of playing, and then use an opponents flaws/"tells" to deviate from the GTO style to exploit those tells. An example of a flaw could be if the opponent is playing shitty hole cards. If the opponent has played in every…

The strategy you suggest seems too simplistic and predictable to even trick a beginner to be honest

No, total beginners have all their mental power focused on trying to find patterns between the cards on the table and the ones they have on their hands, while trying to remember all the combinations of poker hands. They also need to pay attention on which turn is next and how much they need to pay to keep playing and figure out if it’s worth it, they also need to learn the common poker language, a lot of things going on for a beginner. Once you have all that in memory it becomes easier, your processor power is free from those memory tasks and you can start reading people’s intentions.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#198

Post by jasode »

richardw wrote: post #186
matwood wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you choose poker instead, you'll just breed a gambler. Huh? Chess is fun, but deals in perfect information at all times. Poker teaches a person how to make decisions with imperfect information, which is how most life decisions will be made.

It’s nowhere near perfect information because we’re limited. We have no idea what an early decision will mean later in the game. If anything it’s a game where the truth emerges slowly as options reduce to those that fit in our brain. However, it is a closed system and all participants are visible, whereas poker has hidden surprises. It still has known rules. In real life (eg business, investing) the game rules are va…

>It’s nowhere near perfect information because we’re limited.

Parent is using "perfect information" as a particular term-of-art in economics and game theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_information

It's not perfect knowledge in the sense of Laplace's Demon where future values will be predicted with determinism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace%27s_demon

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#199

Post by cobbal »

opensrcken wrote: post #165

I initially thought the author was being metaphorical. Teaching poker to a kid is a very risky proposition. If they have any propensity for addiction, the dopamine rush of gambling may take hold of their thought patterns before they have the wisdom and mental maturity to counteract such urges. Teaching kids the probabilistic nature of life? Sure, if there is a way to teach a kid such things in a meaningful way. But I…

Not to mention that poker is a game that rewards you for not getting caught lying. Fine for a game, but a problem if you're trying to draw life lessons from it.

Re: Teach your kids poker, not chess

#200

Post by wildermuthn »

I have two kids and actually do what the article concludes with: teach them both types of games (in my case, replacing Poker with Hearthstone and the card game Coup). I’d also recommend Lichess as it is always easy for the kids to find a game and there are some variations to keep them interested in continued play.

Games are really fascinating. I see two elements: 1) making something easy into something hard (by limiting a person’s options), and 2) making something hard into something easy (by proportionally increasing difficulty to the near-max of a player’s current ability).

Example:

1) try to put a ball in a net, but you can only use your feet.

2) split into teams and compete against similar skill level

A good game narrows the scope of your options while having a built-in leveling-up system (self or other play is a great way to do that).

Post reply on HN