Live Updates of the Laak vs Computer Match HERE

[jah7_fsu1]

[ QUOTE ]
furthermore, NL HU poker has been SOLVED for ~12 BB or less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it has been solved. It was solved a long time ago actually. Royal flush beats a straight flush, which beats four of a kind, which beats a full house, which beats a flush, which beats a straight, which beats three of a kind, which beats two pair, which beats one pair, which beats no pair high card.

All of these obviously beat David Benyamine.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
July 24th - 3:38 PM PST
Phil +$1290 (488 hands played)
Big Hand. Hand 488 sees Laak dealt pocket Kc Kd. Phil raises - Polaris calls. Flop comes Qh 2h 4d. Phil raises again, and Polaris just calls. Ac hits on the turn and Phil pauses. Tilly chimes in from the crowd saying Polaris may know the ace is a scare card. Phil folds his Kings and and his lead is down to $1290.


[/ QUOTE ]
I wonder if this is accurately reported. I mean, really?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe he folded to a some kind of turn raise, but still, WTF

[marv]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


the computer and the human team plays each set of cards against the same set of cards. So one side cant get a good or bad run of cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but for instance, Phil Laak suddenly decided on Hand 250 that he was going to be aggressive for awhile. Presumably Ali is doing his own thing. What if Phil's side gets a good or bad run of cards at that very moment?

Since they have studied this, presumably U. of A. has some reasoning as to why this will not affect things.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think you can think of it like that. I wish that the two people were different (like HU limit specialist), so we could assume that the team would be closer in sync, but testing wise, i think this gives a pretty accurate picture

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont know much about lack other than that everyone thinks hes a tourney donk. ali beats super high live games and deathdonkey said hes a great player. thats good enough for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

In a normal HU LHE match the standard deviation is about 4-6 sbets/hand (but it can be higher if both players are very aggressive).

If you play in duplicate pairs, ISTR it drops to about 2, meaning that if you play 50 hands, then replay then with hole cards reversed you get a std.dev. of about 20 sbets over the 100 hand match.

Over a 2000 hand match, 1 standard deviation in your bankroll is then 2*sqrt(2000) = 89.4 so if the humans were to break even over the next two sessions, they would lose by about 100 small bets, which wouldn't be significant. ('significant' is generally taken to mean at least 2 standard deviations.)

Marv

[disjunction]

Score one for the humans!

[EvilSteve]

I like Phil's strategy of switching into hyper-aggressive mode for short stretches, then tightening up when he thinks the AI has adjusted to him. Then later giving it another dose of hyper-aggressive to mess with it again. Even if the program is very solid from a game theory standpoint, the opponent modelling part of the program might be something the humans can manipulate and exploit, by playing against type.

[uDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
('significant' is generally taken to mean at least 2 standard deviations.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't know there was this general understanding. I guess that explains this otherwise meaningless blog entry:

[ QUOTE ]
4:13pm The final match results are in. The humans did win by a margin of $820 which is statistically significant.

[/ QUOTE ]

[TSchauenberg]

For those curious, Poker Academy put some graphs up and a couple of hands from each session: Match Graphs and Hands

[threeonefour]

2+2 should really dissect these research papers that the U of A is putting out.

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~games/poker/ (scroll down for publications)

i have read most of Morgan Kan's thesis and there is some REALLY interesting stuff. I would love to have a calculator that could calculate stuff like DIVAT, EHR, IHR, 7cHR, it doesn't look like it would be hard to make. it would definitely be nice to have in addition to pokerstove calculations.

it would really help with analysis around here i think, particularly with short handed and heads up hands.

[threeonefour]

[ QUOTE ]
For those curious, Poker Academy put some graphs up and a couple of hands from each session: Match Graphs and Hands

[/ QUOTE ]

I just noticed that you are one of the computer scientists at U of A.

any chance of you writing a bit for 2+2 about Polaris or just heads up strategy in general (maybe a quick run-down of your thesis?)? the 2+2 forums do a lot of work on poker strategy but it is largely unscientific, it would be nice to have a researcher post something about optimal heads up poker strategy.

[marv]

[ QUOTE ]
2+2 should really dissect these research papers that the U of A is putting out.

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~games/poker/ (scroll down for publications)

i have read most of Morgan Kan's thesis and there is some REALLY interesting stuff. I would love to have a calculator that could calculate stuff like DIVAT, EHR, IHR, 7cHR, it doesn't look like it would be hard to make. it would definitely be nice to have in addition to pokerstove calculations.

it would really help with analysis around here i think, particularly with short handed and heads up hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last three are pretty trivial, though 7cHR is worth precomputing as a big table for the flop (and maybe for the turn too depending on your application) 7cHR preflop you just precompte and store.

DIVAT is more complex since it relies on a database of fair values which takes some time to build. It also only applies when you have knowledge of both player's hole cards so its a bit limited for real poker games, but OK for the publicity stunts^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H man-vs-machine matches when full information is available at the end of each session.

Marv