[djames]

[ QUOTE ]
My statement assumes both chess and poker computers are using the strategy that has the best chance against experts.

...

In the chess case it means that it will assume the bad player will find the best move against it.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not how chess programs work. They choose the best move at every decision point contemplating "all" possible future moves of their opponent. These decision trees are weighted, and the highest score wins. Then the next decision point comes and a new tree is constructed. The opponent need not choose the "best" move for the computer's previous choice to still have been the best. Perhaps there would have been a better choice against the particular move the opponent will choose, but that's not the point. The computer picks the best possible move at each time. If the opponent then blunders, the position presented at the next decision point may alter the computer's planned action (based on its prior move) since the blunder opened an even more exploitable line.

Chess computers can *crush* opponents, weak & GM alike, way better than the top GMs can. The top rated chess engine rates over 200 Elo points more than the highest rated human. Fritz is over 3,000 while the highest rated human was near 2,850 for a short time.

Perhaps you don't intend to imply that a player rated a lowly 1,000 will be tougher to beat by Fritz than a player rated 2,500 .. but that's what you've implied.