(no title)
leeleelee | 9 years ago
It's also important to keep in mind that the best AI can still lose, and the worst AI can still win (and everything in between). Poker involves randomness, obviously whereas chess/go/etc does not.
leeleelee | 9 years ago
It's also important to keep in mind that the best AI can still lose, and the worst AI can still win (and everything in between). Poker involves randomness, obviously whereas chess/go/etc does not.
mormegil|9 years ago
andrewprock|9 years ago
yAnonymous|9 years ago
That's wrong. Even when you're holding a good hand, your opponent could hold a better one and reading them is a key element of poker. The opponent's hand is an important variable to decide whether you hold the winning hand or not.
If you look at the experiment in detail, you'll find that it was set up in the AI's favor.
>When a hand was all-in before the river no more cards were dealt and each player received his equity in chips.
While all that is less important when you can avoid all-in situations, the main statement -that the other player's behavior is irrelevant- is still wrong.
yazr|9 years ago
Could you elaborate on this ?