Poker has been solved

[Longines]

http://poker.srv.ualberta.ca

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30718558

Scientists have created a computer program they say is the perfect poker player and never makes a mistake.

The developers told Science journal they had "solved" the two-player game Fixed-limit Heads-up Texas Hold 'em.

And the algorithm had a strategy so close to optimal "it can't be beaten with statistical significance within a lifetime of human poker playing".

The poker-ace algorithm is also now available online for people to test, query and even play against.

[celtic]

Is the computer program called Pleno1?

[vegaslover]

Ipoker waiting to install it no doubt

[Rexas]

Does Ipoker have fixed limit heads up texas?

[Rexas]

Also, if it does, does anyone play it? If so, have mental health services been contacted?

[vegaslover]

Does Ipoker have fixed limit heads up texas?

fk knows cant deal with the laggy software. Not that ipoker will care a bot is a bot to them

[Oxford_HRV]

What if it caps me all streets with nut house and I have quads then leave?
Now who's the winner..

[TightEnd]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

[Longines]

Is the computer program called Pleno1?

"It's playing 24 trillion hands of poker every second for two months.[/i]"

I think that's a yes.

[kinboshi]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Thin "I'm better than a computer" brag article imo.

[Doobs]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Thin "I'm better than a computer" brag article imo.

More an article on Chris Hall highlighting variance over small sample sizes and a lack of understanding of GTO.  The bot shouldn't adapt to his play.

[Jon MW]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Thin "I'm better than a computer" brag article imo.

More an article on Chris Hall highlighting variance over small sample sizes and a lack of understanding of GTO.  The bot shouldn't adapt to his play.

The optimal game theory line is only optimal if every decision by both sides is the optimal one.

Obviously it could still provide such an advantage that it would still win over the long term, but I suspect that isn't the case. To make an unbeatable program it would have to be able to adapt. It's a limitation of game theory that it only provides a model for framework rather than a clear solution.

[Doobs]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Thin "I'm better than a computer" brag article imo.

More an article on Chris Hall highlighting variance over small sample sizes and a lack of understanding of GTO.  The bot shouldn't adapt to his play.

The optimal game theory line is only optimal if every decision by both sides is the optimal one.

Obviously it could still provide such an advantage that it would still win over the long term, but I suspect that isn't the case. To make an unbeatable program it would have to be able to adapt. It's a limitation of game theory that it only provides a model for framework rather than a clear solution

If it is a GTO bot, it would make a move that would be unbeatable if the opponent played perfectly.  Any time the opponent diverges, the bot gets an edge.  There may be ways to get bigger edges vs specific opponents, but that isn't the purpose of the bot.

If the aim is to play GTO, it absolutely shouldn't adapt.

FWIW there may be several lines that are GTO and isn't just one solution.

[Jon MW]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Thin "I'm better than a computer" brag article imo.

More an article on Chris Hall highlighting variance over small sample sizes and a lack of understanding of GTO.  The bot shouldn't adapt to his play.

The optimal game theory line is only optimal if every decision by both sides is the optimal one.

Obviously it could still provide such an advantage that it would still win over the long term, but I suspect that isn't the case. To make an unbeatable program it would have to be able to adapt. It's a limitation of game theory that it only provides a model for framework rather than a clear solution

If it is a GTO bot, it would make a move that would be unbeatable if the opponent played perfectly.  Any time the opponent diverges, the bot gets an edge.  There may be ways to get bigger edges vs specific opponents, but that isn't the purpose of the bot.

If the aim is to play GTO, it absolutely shouldn't adapt.

FWIW there may be several lines that are GTO and isn't just one solution.

For perfect GTO yes it shouldn't adapt, but the opponent diverging from GTO doesn't necessarily give you an edge. It's likely to and that's likely to provide a win - but it isn't always going to be the case.

To be unbeatable then a more thorough understanding of non-optimal moves is needed

[doubleup]

Chris Hall was asked to play against and write about the new 'unbeatable' Limit Hold'em poker bot Cepheus.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/08/online-poker-bot-cepheus-flaw

Well if he thinks that he can pop into the Cosmopolitan and play 100/200 vs a similar bot.