How far has NL poker come? How far do we have to go? (abstract/long)

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
Exploit me baby.
I'm calling with A10 and K3.

un-exploitable play = the easter bunny

One needs perfect information past present and future to be perfectly un-exploitable.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea what you are talking about

[ QUOTE ]
One can even design situations where a series of -ev bets turn +ev without ever making a +ev bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
design one plz

[Ellsworth T]

You can compare this to chess, a game that has been played for centuries, and still there is no unexploitable strategy even remotely close to comprehension. Though I agree that sometime in the future it will be theoretically possible for players to play unexploitably or close to it, I do not think this will happen in our lifetimes, and I think the problem comes down simply to the human brain being unable to extrapolate the myriad of possibilities that any poker action affords; possibly greater than chess. Add in there the fact that some information is entirely deductive, I believe that unexploititive play is beyond the realm of possibility for now. But I agree with your overall premise of actual current and future play mimicking unexploitative play closer and closer.

[JacKnight21]

[ QUOTE ]

I have no idea what you are talking about

[/ QUOTE ]
Try this; do you think its exploitation if the dumb human only pushes 100bb with AA vs the bot?

[ QUOTE ]
design one plz

[/ QUOTE ]
It only takes a little imagination to control bankroll/stakes that this becomes possible.

edit-just read a thread- and I think the BoostedJ staking deal qualifies but this is not the specific bet I usually discuss in turning -ev to +ev.

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
Try this; do you think its exploitation if the dumb human only pushes 100bb with AA vs the bot?

[/ QUOTE ]
NO

the human is missing out on huge value if he's only winning 3bb's off me on average with AA

the bot's winrate with AA will be much higher than 3bb's

[w_alloy]

People are getting too hung up on this unexploitable vs. exploitable thing. One could argue that you could replace all the "unexploitable"s in the main post with "maximally exploitable on average" and it would be more correct. But the main content of the post would not change, and the questions would still be valid.

Obviously most people are off on tangents, and thats fine. But I am still curious how much people think play will change at high stakes over the next five years if no UIGEA relief comes.

[JacKnight21]

[ QUOTE ]
the human is missing out on huge value if he's only winning 3bb's off me on average with AA

the bot's winrate with AA will be much higher than 3bb's

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll try AGAIN; my bot will only call this humans 100bb bet with AA now I have a bot that makes more money than yours and is unxploitable / everthing else staying the same. Do you see where this is going?

[JacKnight21]

[ QUOTE ]
But I am still curious how much people think play will change at high stakes over the next five years if no UIGEA relief comes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Historically people continue to play when they are entertained or think they have an edge. When either of these are no longer present people migrate to new/old poker games. The learning/fun curve is reset.

Soon 6 card PLO8 for Rolls will be the only game in town

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll try AGAIN; my bot will only call this humans 100bb bet with AA now I have a bot that makes more money than yours and is unxploitable

[/ QUOTE ]

incorrect

If I am the human playing this bot I am pushing from the button with 72o and showing a profit

Basically, I will either push preflop with trash (that I couldn't otherwise play profitably), and raise other stuff for value. your bot has a huge exploitable leak

[ QUOTE ]
Do you see where this is going?

[/ QUOTE ]

not at all

edit: according to my calcs, pushing 72o has an EV about 1.1 bb's more than folding 72o on the button, against your bot

[JacKnight21]

You've changed the human; he was only pushing AA for 100bb. Now if human pushes 72o+ my bots range is much wider than yours back to my first post. My bot beats your bot blah blah blah circles circles circles

but it doesn't matter it just goes to show that only when you have perfect information can you make perfect plays.

My bot has the humans range and adjust accordingly.

I reread your post- against ALL possible ranges and limiting human to ONLY all in or fold in SB then your bot has the correct calling range, but again your whole discussion is mental masterbation as it proves un-exploitable play exits only in artificial situations where you have all the information and this doesn't exist.

My un-exploitable Bot>>Your un-exploitable Bot
you should upgrade

[HP]

[ QUOTE ]
but it doesn't matter it just goes to show that only when you have perfect information can you make perfect plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bot doesn't make perfect plays, it makes un-exploitable plays. Also, I'm not sure we are using the same definition of un-exploitable

[ QUOTE ]
I reread your post- against ALL possible ranges and limiting human to ONLY all in or fold in SB then your bot has the correct calling range, but again your whole discussion is mental masterbation as it proves un-exploitable play exits only in artificial situations where you have all the information and this doesn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this entirely, if you take out the word 'only'. Actually, maybe not, I'm not sure what you mean exactly by "where you have all the information". The only info my bot had was the rules of the game, is this what you mean?

The masturbation was quite enjoyable btw

I believe there exists at least one un-exploitable strategy for HU NL (with no rake). I am too lazy to dig up the formal mathematical proof for this (by John Nash)