Bots and the future of online poker

[hasugopher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
any solid player should be able to exploit a bot easily

im not worried

[/ QUOTE ]

not the point

[/ QUOTE ]
agree with what you're saying, but the contention that 'any solid player should be able to exploit a bot easily' is a joke. It depends on how good the bot plays ldo. I know you weren't necessarily agreeing with him I just felt it was worth pointing out.

[RIIT]

hasugopher: I agree. If somebody built a robot to play exactly like one of the better poker book systems available then by substitution you get the statement:

"any solid player should be able to exploit a poker-book-system player."

Then the discussion revolves around:

The quality of the poker book system
The accuracy of implementation by the robot builder

If the book system is good and the programmer did a good job then I think your characterization of "a joke" would apply to anybody claiming such an opponent is easy to beat.

If the book system is bad or the programmer did a bad job then I think it's fair to say that the robot player would go down in flames against a good human opponent.

[holyfield5]

there is no way bots can handle a real player in NL, keep dreaming. how will it make decisions based off so little information?

it doesnt have intuition, it will be like catching someone in an unbreakable chain combo in killer instinct, we find that doing something causes a certain reaction and just make it hand us money.

basically the bots wont be able to adapt as quickly, and whatever algorithm it bases its decisions off of will be highly exploitable. Either it will be highly bluffable, unbluffable and highly value bet vulnerable or it will be a random variance surfing spewbot.

[jogsxyz]

If anyone were able to program a bot to beat poker, why would he bother? He should be able to beat the game himself.

[Assani Fisher]

In full ring games, intuition and player reading becomes less important. I've 12 tabled smaller/medium stakes NL games and won consistently, and obviously 12 tabling doesn't give me a ton of time to get a read on all my opponents.

I would definitely agree that at the higher stakes you need to be paying more attention to each opponent.

[danzasmack]

[ QUOTE ]
If anyone were able to program a bot to beat poker, why would he bother? He should be able to beat the game himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahahahahaahahahahahaha

1) legalization of online poker is probably only thing to prevent this from being an issue in the future

2) also as bot technology steps up so does bot detection technology i'm sure

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
Bot technology is improving.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really not, FWIW. I'm pretty sure that 99% of what you see now could have been done 30 years ago.

[RIIT]

holyfield5: If what you're claiming is true then may I ask you to consider this scenario:

Let's pretend your hypothetical "real NL player" authors a best selling poker book that describes his professional system in detail. Now let's say that somebody implements that book system into a robot and let's say that the author plays said robot and the author consistently wins.

which of the following is true:

a) The robot maker failed to develop what was described
b) The author failed to completely describe his method

Game theory holds that if both the author and robot play identically then it is a long term deadlock.

[metamath]

do any of you guys know anything about programming?

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
do any of you guys know anything about programming?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes