Live Updates of the Laak vs Computer Match HERE

[Jackal69]

[ QUOTE ]
phil laak hand from 2k limit event

phil opens qq, gets 3bet. he calls.

flop AK6. he checks, guy bets.

phil : if i fold will you show me?'
guy : 'ya'

phil folds qq faceup
guy shows 55

whole table laughs at phil

[/ QUOTE ]

awesome, they might as well let jennifer tilly play it and claim its better than humans if it wins...

[ambler]

[ QUOTE ]
I expect there will be a lot of discussion about how Laak sucks after all of this, but it also seems quite possible to me that Polaris is just damned good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Without hand histories, it's hard to know whether Phil or Ali was the worse player.

[Brocktoon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
phil laak hand from 2k limit event

phil opens qq, gets 3bet. he calls.

flop AK6. he checks, guy bets.

phil : if i fold will you show me?'
guy : 'ya'

phil folds qq faceup
guy shows 55

whole table laughs at phil

[/ QUOTE ]

awesome, they might as well let jennifer tilly play it and claim its better than humans if it wins...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah man, cause folding QQ on an AKx flop against a 3-bettor at a full table is COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS!!!

Irrefutable proof that Laak has no idea how to play LHE.

LDO.

[DAT MOOSE]

i would like to see somebody like HOSS TBF or another HU specialist coming from a mathematical background take on the computer (i think hoss fits this description unless im mistaken)

although ali vs the computer is an interesting matchup as ali is a wild and crazy live player who im sure makes a ton of mathematically incorrect decisions(big deal) that end up working out for him/metagame yo..

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]


although ali vs the computer is an interesting matchup as ali is a wild and crazy live player who im sure makes a ton of mathematically incorrect decisions(big deal) that end up working out for him/metagame yo..

[/ QUOTE ]

If the computer is indeed playing adaptively/exploitive, then metagame considerations might still have merit. If it is playing optimally, then not so much.

[PITTM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
phil laak hand from 2k limit event

phil opens qq, gets 3bet. he calls.

flop AK6. he checks, guy bets.

phil : if i fold will you show me?'
guy : 'ya'

phil folds qq faceup
guy shows 55

whole table laughs at phil

[/ QUOTE ]

awesome, they might as well let jennifer tilly play it and claim its better than humans if it wins...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah man, cause folding QQ on an AKx flop against a 3-bettor at a full table is COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS!!!

Irrefutable proof that Laak has no idea how to play LHE.

LDO.

[/ QUOTE ]

youre right. calling a 3 bet with queens preflop isnt terrible. what was everyone who knew anything about limit poker thinking?

[6471849653]

After day one the computer has won $1000 in a $10-$20 game, 50 big bets, that's a 2.5 bb/100 score for the computer after 2000 hands (duplicate hands). If that stays the same, as far as I know it's up to double (whatever, not more than 2.5 bb/100) of what a heads up specialist vs. "non-specialists" can expect to win with perfect play at around $100-$200.

Under the best of cases one could win five big bets per 100 at medium limits playing vs. mediocre opponents (I am not talking about e.g. Full Tilt opponents who rate to play better). Not counting any rakes. The best of cases is e.g. when the opponents are not playing too much back/against preflop and on the flop (nor turn), but making often check-raises with draws and up to less (often roping pairs) and one then often calling them down with an ace high, so all in all one has from most parts a good control with an effective strategy. That strategy has to be different at low limits as the fish will go crazy, that's not good, and they will not play back/against preflop and on the flop (and the turn) like that but just the opposite - the scores against those low limit passives (could be over-aggressives too in case one can't play them because of the rake as it's only about a 2-3 bb/100 profitable minus the rake that's e.g. 5 bb/100) are maybe 8 bb/100 minus the rake.

If the humans lose, they will be called non-specialists or even mediocre as heads up limit holdem players, and the computer will be called an expert or even a specialist (it could adjust vs. non-optimal players and beat them even for more).

P.S. "All hands played will be made publicly available after the completion of the event."

[DeathDonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
although ali vs the computer is an interesting matchup as ali is a wild and crazy live player who im sure makes a ton of mathematically incorrect decisions(big deal) that end up working out for him/metagame yo..

[/ QUOTE ]

I am certain Ali's poker theory is among the best of any player I've ever played with. Much better than mine. There's a reason he gladly will play 400/800 games where you invent silly rules or variants as the game goes on, and it's because he adapts extremely quickly / understands the correct strategy/EV quicker than his opponents. He'd also never admit this as he works too hard on his image.

-DeathDonkey

[SuperUberBob]

[ QUOTE ]
youre right. calling a 3 bet with queens preflop isnt terrible. what was everyone who knew anything about limit poker thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

Capping it?

[jackhigh]

This photo taken last night (notice the F**k Me boots)! Rumor has it she has already dumped Sklansky and has enrolled in typing classes in Henderson.