Collective intelligence in poker - Page 5 - Poker News

widowmakerrr · 10-16-2008, 09:01 PM

Durrr will flop some weird twopair and collective will stack off with overpair. End.

phantom_lord · 10-16-2008, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spaztastic

you're forgetting that 99% of poker players are total idiots

.

wat. · 10-17-2008, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sqwisssssss

ok, so what is this "edge" that durrr would have? everyone just bows down to the idea that durrr is the almighty and the collective group of competent solid players would never adjust as a percentage whole.

also, the collective group would never tilt or tire where as durrr will on ocasion.

the only edge i see for durr is that he can adjust quickly where it will take the collective group a little longer to adjust as a percentage whole.

the fact that the collective group wont tilt might make up for this edge that durrr would have.

these ideas of people having massive edges in heads up games, where both parties are competent, is fanciful.

its just like the side bets with durr and helmuth where people were willing to give a 5%+ edge on durrr. durrr would have no chance giving up 5%+ vig against helmuth..... unless helmuth starts tilting and playing stupid.

whatever, the point i'm trying to make is that i dont think this virtual match up wouldnt be the slaughter that others seem to think.

PLZ TELL ME THIS IS A LEVEL OMFG

Recon20k · 10-17-2008, 10:03 AM

Quote:

you're forgetting that 99% of poker players are total idiots

.

also the fact that the masses will play the hands competely standard and never simultaneously elect to do something funky/original will leave durrrr completely running over 2000 ppl at once.

SmokeyJ · 10-18-2008, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wat.

omfg

it's impossible to make "optimal decisions" in poker and be "too predictable" at the same time, i swear 1/3 of the ppl in this thread have the iq of a hard-boiled egg

tilting now tyvm

holy ****ing **** will you just leave. this is like, one of the only threads in NVG that has ever spawned interesting conversation, and some guy with 23 posts comes in and just tries to sound smart. holy ****.

i think though that the concensus is that durrr would win pretty easily against 2000 bad players, so what about 2000 solid 10/20 regulars? much more interesting imo.

nice idea OP btw

wat. · 10-18-2008, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyJ

holy ****ing **** will you just leave. this is like, one of the only threads in NVG that has ever spawned interesting conversation, and some guy with 23 posts comes in and just tries to sound smart. holy ****.

i think though that the concensus is that durrr would win pretty easily against 2000 bad players, so what about 2000 solid 10/20 regulars? much more interesting imo.

nice idea OP btw

there was nothing smart about my post just stating the obvious. if i were not just stating the obvious i would feel no need to act condescending. although it's understandable that my post may give the illusion of being smart, being posted in the middle of the NVG cesspool.

Abbaddabba · 10-18-2008, 05:30 AM

I'd definitely participate in something like this*

*and communicate my hole cards on the phone to durrr for $1,000/hour.

Imaginary F(r)iend · 10-18-2008, 06:56 AM

This shouldn't be impossible for some pokersite to pull as they could even moderate the nosebleed player in question (ie. force him to play under their supervision).

It would make a fun special SNG or timed cash game option once a week or something

Basically everyone would pool their money against the pro and just make the decisions against him. The money would be then distributed back to the orginal accounts.

"Team up against Ivey in a cash game as low as $200!"

Tomtah · 10-18-2008, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poker_n00b

It has been proved that people, en masse, predict stock prices very accurately. How would this translate into poker?

I will give you give minutes to think about why this applies to the stock market and not poker. GO!

dragonystic · 10-18-2008, 10:14 AM

the first thing i thought was that the play would be too predictable...but theres a nice way around this.

say the votes for call fold and raise come in: 31%, 2%, 67% respectively. you then use those numbers as the basis for a random number generator of sorts. Take 100 numbers, assign 1-31 to call, etc etc. Then produce the number and take that action.

if you used midstakes regs, the collective result would be close to unbeatable.

metamath · 10-18-2008, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragonystic

the first thing i thought was that the play would be too predictable...but theres a nice way around this.

say the votes for call fold and raise come in: 31%, 2%, 67% respectively. you then use those numbers as the basis for a random number generator of sorts. Take 100 numbers, assign 1-31 to call, etc etc. Then produce the number and take that action.

if you used midstakes regs, the collective result would be close to unbeatable.

i like this idea much better

haff1 · 10-18-2008, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomtah

I will give you give minutes to think about why this applies to the stock market and not poker. GO!

This

poker_n00b · 10-18-2008, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragonystic

the first thing i thought was that the play would be too predictable...but theres a nice way around this.

say the votes for call fold and raise come in: 31%, 2%, 67% respectively. you then use those numbers as the basis for a random number generator of sorts. Take 100 numbers, assign 1-31 to call, etc etc. Then produce the number and take that action.

if you used midstakes regs, the collective result would be close to unbeatable.

This was already proposed earlier in the thread. The thread is rather tr;dr so I'll excuse you.

johnnyironboard · 10-18-2008, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by poker_n00b

Guys and gals, first of all, welcome!

The following idea has always been on my mind, but recently after reading some finance related articles about collective intelligence being very powerful, I've decided to give it a go on this forum.

Suppose we design a pokering software where two accounts are playing heads-up. One account is being operated by, say durrrr, the other account by 2000 pimple-faced, greasy haired 2+2 members. Every action receives input from these 2000 players, and the most frequent one is than chosen to be played.

Say the firts hand we are OTB and have 73o. The software receives from 2000 players: 44 calls, 1699 folds and (2000 - 1699 - 44) raises as possible action for the hand. The software will then choose fold, because it is the most frequent one.

With numerical bets we will make it multiples of the pot, say 50%, 60% etc, so that it is easier to choose the most frequent one.

So in effect, durrr is playing vs 2000 players. Ofcourse, there has to be incentive for the 2000 players to actually play good. Perhaps by pooling bankrolls. In effect you are playing 50c big blind no limit at Railheaven vs durrr, PA and the likes.

It has been proved that people, en masse, predict stock prices very accurately. How would this translate into poker?

It would be awesome if someone programmed something like that in Visual Basic. I guess it's my best shot for playing durrr heads up.

Discuss.

Homework: read this article --> http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...013_033687.htm

over the long run you'd win- plenty of stats show that groups of qualified people are better at picking the reasonable max and min than 1- if a large group nails the reasonable max/min better than they will nail the mean better and in a lognormal world they will have better results- poker outcomes are lognormal.

React1oN · 10-18-2008, 05:05 PM

lmao I'm sorry OP but this is pretty silly.