From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lee@piclab.com)
Date: Tue Feb 11 2003 - 11:14:21 MST
> (Brett Paatsch <paatschb@ocean.com.au>):
>
> One thing seems likely, though, the "artificial player" would
> have a pretty unreadable "poker face" and would hold up
> well in the long sessions.
>
> Anyone know to what extend the mix is numbers and
> memory and to what extent its the capacity to read the
> cues as opposed to the cards?
In over-the-board play, reading people is definitely a skill
that makes a difference, especially at the high levels and at
no-limit play. Just this Sunday I was watching the final
table of a no-limit Hold'em tournament at San Pablo (because
I had busted out of it earlier), and watched my friend Steve
Landrum make some fabulous reads: at about five players he
opened for a raise, a player moved all in, and he folded,
showing a pair of jacks--a huge hand in Hold'em. Sure enough,
the other player showed kings. At three players, he opened
with a raise, and an opponent pushed all-in with about 35% of
the chips on the table. Steve called relatively quickly,
risking his own similar stack, with a pair of threes. If his
opponent had any pair at all except deuces or threes, Steve
would have been more than a 4-to-1 underdog, but Steve was so
confident that he had no pair that he called, risking the
prize money difference of about $7000. But this time he
called with his threes, and his opponent showed no pair, and
Steve went on to win.
But that advantage is eliminated online, even for humans, and
pros still make money online. Though it should be pointed out
that there are almost no no-limit games online. Limit poker is
more a game of math than balls. The two programs I mentioned
earlier only play limit poker.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 11 2003 - 11:15:55 MST