A breakthrough in artificial intelligence has mastered the simplest two-person version of the poker game, working through every possible variation of play to make the perfect move every time. When performed without mistakes, just like the childhood game tic-tac-toe, there’s no way to lose. In this case the player is Cepheus, a computer algorithm designed by Canadian researchers.
...
You don’t have to take their word, though, their work is published today in the journal Science. The researchers are calling for poker players to test the program for Limit Texas Hold’em by challenging Cepheus online. The results may cause gamblers to rethink some common moves, Bowling said in a telephone interview.
...
The results apply only to the most basic form of the game, known as Heads-up Limit Hold’em, where there are two players and bets and raises are limited. Even with those restrictions, there are more than 10,000 billion decision points in the game.
...
Solving the game required even deeper control than when the computer-program Chinook took the world championship title in checkers against humans in the 1990s or when International Business Machines Corp.’s Deep Blue beat Garry Kasparov in chess in 1997. While a computer program may one day beat the world’s best players of No-Limit Texas Hold’em, the most popular form of the game, it’s unlikely anyone will ever solve it by identifying the perfect way to play because there are so many more decision points and possible moves, Bowling said.
Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
Moderators: The Preacher, $iljanus, Zaxxon
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82284
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
Business Week
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- coopasonic
- Posts: 20991
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
- Location: Dallas-ish
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
That's the best way they could come up with to express that number? Ten thousand billion sounds like something my five year old would say.Even with those restrictions, there are more than 10,000 billion decision points in the game.
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
Black Lives Matter
-
- Posts: 1545
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:24 am
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
A BILLION KAJILLION
- The Meal
- Posts: 27992
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:33 pm
- Location: 2005 Stanley Cup Champion
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
This seemed inevitable. When it comes to N > 2 participants, however, everything changes. (My understanding of Game Theory is rudimentary, but my research showed that heads-up games are nearly infinitely easier to solve.)
The switch from Limit to No Limit is not a terrific jump. The switch from 2 players to 3 is outrageous.
Science
The switch from Limit to No Limit is not a terrific jump. The switch from 2 players to 3 is outrageous.
Science
"Better to talk to people than communicate via tweet." — Elontra
-
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:46 pm
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
It isn't at all clear to me what this "solving" consisted of. It sounds like it's some sort of optimal strategy for 2-player limit HE. I'm just trying to think through how you would know it was optimal. I guess you could simulate an opponent for 10k hands each with a variety of opponent strategies and make sure you at least broke even against all of them. But, as The Meal said, that doesn't seem to get you very far in larger table sizes.
I suppose it would be nice to know all the criteria they found so I could use them when I got to heads up situations.
(May check that issue at my school library)
I suppose it would be nice to know all the criteria they found so I could use them when I got to heads up situations.
(May check that issue at my school library)
No sig, must scream, etc.
- coopasonic
- Posts: 20991
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:43 pm
- Location: Dallas-ish
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
Dig here:paulbaxter wrote:It isn't at all clear to me what this "solving" consisted of. It sounds like it's some sort of optimal strategy for 2-player limit HE. I'm just trying to think through how you would know it was optimal. I guess you could simulate an opponent for 10k hands each with a variety of opponent strategies and make sure you at least broke even against all of them. But, as The Meal said, that doesn't seem to get you very far in larger table sizes.
I suppose it would be nice to know all the criteria they found so I could use them when I got to heads up situations.
(May check that issue at my school library)
http://poker-blog.srv.ualberta.ca/
-Coop
Black Lives Matter
Black Lives Matter
-
- Posts: 3179
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:46 pm
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
Thanks. I was thinking about it more in the shower after I posted and I got to that thought about trying to learn opponents bluffing tendencies, but I'm quite willing to believe that that sort of analysis is mostly irrelevant, as your link suggests.coopasonic wrote:Dig here:paulbaxter wrote:It isn't at all clear to me what this "solving" consisted of. It sounds like it's some sort of optimal strategy for 2-player limit HE. I'm just trying to think through how you would know it was optimal. I guess you could simulate an opponent for 10k hands each with a variety of opponent strategies and make sure you at least broke even against all of them. But, as The Meal said, that doesn't seem to get you very far in larger table sizes.
I suppose it would be nice to know all the criteria they found so I could use them when I got to heads up situations.
(May check that issue at my school library)
http://poker-blog.srv.ualberta.ca/
edit: I love this bit "Poker players, being rational people, did the only sane thing they could do, which was decline to play anyone who appeared to be of even remotely similar skill"
By far the best poker advice I've ever seen has been "play against people who are much worse than you." Can't be overstated.
No sig, must scream, etc.
-
- Posts: 36420
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
- Location: Nowhere you want to be.
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
Corollary -- don't drink as much as the rest of the table. When I used to play a lot, I'd often have a late rally after everyone else gets stupid-drunk.paulbaxter wrote:By far the best poker advice I've ever seen has been "play against people who are much worse than you." Can't be overstated.
Black Lives Matter
- Pyperkub
- Posts: 23659
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
- Location: NC- that's Northern California
Re: Scientists "solve" Heads-up Limit Hold’em
I've always been better @ heads-up than a full table of hold-em. I think it's because I play (too?) aggressively. I like the action, so I gravitate more towards Craps and Blackjack table games when I'm in Vegas.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.