A large number of scientific and mathematical discoveries were made while working on something different. Discovery breeds more discovery.

Anything that keeps universities and governments funding research is a good thing. Likewise anything that keeps the brightest students being drawn to research is also a good thing. The future implications of any research being done today are impossible to quantify.

That would take serious computing power. Chess, a HU game with the same board and starting pieces, has 10^45 possible games. NLHE has variable hole cards, variable bet sizes, and variable boards.

Hoss (Hawrilenko) was probably at that time mostly a high limit LIMIT poker player and there is a rather exact strategy that's mainly about technique (that even I know next to perfectly though I rarely play limit poker anymore). But the game at big bet poker is about opponent adjusted strategy with opponent adjusted tactics, and not about blind technique that's fine against the bots and other optimal players where the strategy and tactics becomes much the same as the optimal technique. A player like Ivey is said to be extremely strong exactly when it comes to adjusting strategy to opponents, though it hasn't seem to have been working anymore at Stars, in case that player from Mexico is Ivey. The other player not having done well at Stars (though "Ivey" hasn't been doing as bad) is Antonius, so I am not ruling it all out that time has passed the natural players and even bots mop them up these days, and poker is dead. It's all rigged these days; can't wait to get to live games. I lost to one outer a week ago, my biggest heads up pot ever, and the session ran badly otherwise too, now grinding it all back at one limit lower. I got cheated at Merge, and at Stars it's all balanced badly, and at Ongame and iPoker I was doing fine but it all came down, looking like fixed so, putting the winning player down. I am a heterosexual and I don't get sucked out in real life nearly as often as I do online. What?? What what? Just my new style.

^
LOL, WP.

has there been a bet/challenge made yet or are people still just debating?

He is referring to the fact that exploitative strategies are more profitable, and they are. Even if you have a solution to the game and you can never lose, if your opponent is going to raise any two cards and check if he misses the flop, then you would be an idiot not to exploit that to its full potential.

GTO only comes into play when you're playing against near-optimal opponents. Obviously in a live 1/2 game you are going to be playing extremely exploitably to maximize your winrate.

Of course, IMO ike/sauce/kanu are all talking out of their ass about GTO and are playing the same balanced strategy that every other high stakes player is.

I'm not sure what I've said that you disagree with, but I've never claimed to have much of an idea what GTO HUNL play looks like or to play very close to it.

you seem qualified to make that distinction

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...-pair-1261498/

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...54&postcount=1

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...42&postcount=1

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...60&postcount=1

In "Mathematicians Apology," Hardy argued strongly for doing research for its own sake and not for future applications. He gave two examples of current research in math at the time that could never possibly apply to anything. Even in these extreme and hopeless examples, he argued, the research was still valid.

Funny thing was: both his examples turned out to be super important after he died. One was a branch of number theory which became central to encryption techniques. The other I can't remember.

To speculate on possible applications of poker theory: Bluffing frequencies are important to understanding nature. Animals bluff. I can't remember the details (would love if someone does) but I remember a study of a certain bird which had to leave the nest to find food. But when it left, a predator would come and eat its eggs. So some % of the time, the bird would "bluff" looking for food, and instead fly back and kill the predator. Researchers found that the bird "bluffed" 15% of the time. This 15% bluffing frequency was found to be optimal in certain war-time situations, I believe in the Israeli Army. (Remembering this from way back, all details are probably wrong.)

People have been working on bots for years so I don't think the massive amount of work it takes is really a factor anymore. Lots of time have been put in them and from what I have read they are already making winning bots at small/mid stakes. I just hope their creators are not going to be greedy as to not kill the games, and the industry, completely. They're probably really smart people so I doubt that will be the case.

Wikipedia is your friend...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mathe...an%27s_Apology

Willing to bet monies for durrr pussing out on this bet.

Also, playing at higher levels is obviously all about witchcraft and goat sacrifice to please the variance gods. Mathematics has no place in it, since the game is all about just running good in the right places.

lol

In Sauce's pokercast he claimed he/you/Kanu play GTO optimal and make very few adjustments to their opponent's play while everyone else looks to exploit weaknesses.

4th film, sauce said no such thing. He just stated that his own style, along with Ike and kanu, was fundamentally more gto focused as in they concentrate more on playing a close-to unexploitable style whereas other hsnl regs seem to focus more on exploiting their opponents' mistakes (sometimes at the cost of opening themselves to exploitation).

No he didn't. You're an idiot.

wtf NVG?

There are at least 3 ipoker bots in the background of this (NSFW):

I also heard the UofA bot is addicted to electricity and even uses DC sometimes.

bellatrix,

If your understanding of gto play is so strong why haven't you had more success at higher limits? You seem to have a much better grasp on these things than I do but our results aren't comparable. This isn't an attack. I'm genuinely curious.

Can I get cliffs on this thread?

hawrilenko says top players use game theory

discussion

durrr says there is no gto strategy for nl

people say it is proven there is one but still unknown

durrr doesn't get it and wants to play a "gto" limit bot to prove his point about nl for insane amount of money with no sell out clause

brain stopped working here trying to comprehend durrr's reasoning

This. LOL.

Wouldnt it make more sense for him to play NL

I'm guessing for the same reason Nash doesn't crush online poker - they have other things in their life they find more interesting and worthwhile.