This is for trader3, as promised - my cheque arrived today, address on the envelope shows it originates in Canadian Mohawk territory and is drawn on a bank in ... Belize. This is my first cashout, and things worked out. I can't imagine that there's much chance of a problem cashing out if one sticks with the bigger sites, but I invite comment.
I don't think this has been quite answered: how would someone fare if they used a poker program to handle all their betting, etc? Is there too much bluffing and psychology involved for a computer to be able to win?
Yes, and a computer certainly couldn't be taught how to play an even more complex game, such as chess... Actually, I think computers can be taught to do anything that we can do, only faster and better. The question is how much effort we want to place in programming them for these challenges... -Eric
Before I started trading I used to develop systems and spent a few years doing AI (Artificial Intelligence) based Expert Systems so I agree that you can develop a system to emulate a human's thinking (i.e. rules, heuristics).
I just started playing poker and got my ass kicked! I played at play money and raised my account from $1,000 to about $5,000. Then I put real money in and lost 50%! It must be time to go back to the drawing board. Could someone recommend a good play money online Poker game? I think my skewed results could have been due to novices who constantly raise with virtual cash. Thanks, The Stats Monkey.
Monkey, you can't hope to improve your skills in the least by playing at play money tables. Just play micro stakes. Pokerstars has a .02/.04 game. If you're playing hold 'em, Sklansky is a must read.
The same thing happened to me when I first got started - you didn't mention which limits you were playing, i.e. .25/.50, .50/1.00 or higher? I agree with Hank that there is no way you can expect to repeat play money results at real money tables. In my opinion, if you don't start winning right away at hold-em, you should read a book or two, and as Hank says, the Sklansky books are widely recognized as the best out there. I read Lee Jones' 'Winning Low Limit Hold-Em', and although I had to adapt some of the techniques he describes to the micro-limit tables, reading that book was the difference between losing and winning for me. Another thing you should know - in my experience, the variance (the amount by which your bankroll can swing up and down) is just crazy at the micro-limits (i.e. .02/.04 to .50/1.00). I have heard some poeple say that things settle down for good players once you hit the 3.00/6.00 level. Anyway, you can expect to have wild winning and losing streaks at the micro-limits. If you are really keen on learning, spend some time at the 2+2 website - the chat boards there are full of people like us who are just starting out and the veterans will always answer your questions. Re: the debate about whether a computer can emulate good poker play...I am not sure that the chess analogy holds up, because there is no element of bluff in chess. How could the computer tell if the betting patterns of the human player represented a bluff or not? Modelling based on past revealed bluffs? WOuldn't that be almost impossible to program? And what about the play of the computer - would bluff be programmed into it? How would it go about making the decision to bluff or not? All you AI programmers out there can now step up and explain why I don't know what I'm talking about
Hi Again, Thanks for the tip on the .02/0.04 game Rearden. If I get good I might earn enough to pay for my electricity bill per session, but until then I'll try it out as a cheaper place to learn with real money. TraderNik, I've read Gary Carson's Hold'Em Poker and am trying to use it help me play a tight aggressive game. The place I'm playing at is Ladbrokes and I do 0.50/1.00 games. I've just received $30 for losing $30, so I might just cash my remaining deposited funds and continue to gamble with the bonus. Anyway, thank you all for the advice! The Stats Monkey.