Timeline for Does the optimal strategy converge in poker if the SPR tends to infinity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 30, 2017 at 20:00 | comment | added | usul | @domotorp, I definitely agree with you up to the comma, but it is relevant to how difficult the question is likely to be... | |
| S May 28, 2017 at 18:42 | history | bounty ended | domotorp | ||
| S May 28, 2017 at 18:42 | history | notice removed | domotorp | ||
| May 28, 2017 at 18:32 | comment | added | domotorp | @usul There might be ways to prove theorems about properties of the optimal strategy without knowing it, so this doesn't seem relevant here. | |
| May 28, 2017 at 16:30 | comment | added | usul | For the actual poker game of heads-up no-limit hold'em, this is much too hard: we have no idea what the optimal strategy looks like and only this year has AI been able to consistently beat top humans. Even for very simplified poker games that have been "solved", the "solution" is some gigabytes-sized object so proving anything about them seems very tricky. | |
| May 28, 2017 at 4:39 | answer | added | Douglas Zare | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 27, 2017 at 18:40 | answer | added | Will Sawin | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 24, 2017 at 14:38 | comment | added | Douglas Zare | Unfortunately, that article has a lot of errors. | |
| May 23, 2017 at 13:16 | comment | added | domotorp | Indeed, it would be probably possible to define poker with an infinite stack size, though one must be careful with an infinite amount of re-raises. | |
| May 23, 2017 at 12:49 | comment | added | Carlo Beenakker | here is one description of possible strategies: cardsharp.org/infinite-stacks-a-thought-experiment | |
| S May 22, 2017 at 4:13 | history | bounty started | domotorp | ||
| S May 22, 2017 at 4:13 | history | notice added | domotorp | Draw attention | |
| May 12, 2017 at 6:05 | history | asked | domotorp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |