Which takes more skill?!?!

[Cuda1447]

Answer poll and discuss.

 

[shortspanishguy]

Ummm chess by far

 

[FrozenCanadian]

ya chess by far

 

[Yossarian]

they require very different kinds of skills so I don't think it's fair to say one takes more skill than the other.

 

[MazerRackham]

Are you kidding? Chess. There's no "luck" in chess like there is in no limit poker. Just ask Chris Moneymaker about luck. SNAP!!

 

[Cuda1447]

My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

 

[shortspanishguy]

anticipating 13 moves ahead > anticipating the river

 

[compnovice]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

Well, you can program the computer to get good cards...no such luck in chess....

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: MazerRackham
Are you kidding? Chess. There's no "luck" in chess like there is in no limit poker. Just ask Chris Moneymaker about luck. SNAP!!

LMAO

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: compnovice

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

You dont know anything about programming... do you

a computer cannot sense when my emotions change and I start playing my reckless, or when I get tighter, or when I go on tilt... or when I change gears because we are close to the bubble, or all kinds of other variables like that.

 

[compnovice]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: compnovice

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

You dont know anything about programming... do you

a computer cannot sense when my emotions change and I start playing my reckless, or when I get tighter, or when I go on tilt... or when I change gears because we are close to the bubble, or all kinds of other variables like that.

Ahh... you type too slow.. I edited my post before you replied...

you can program the computer to get good cards...no such luck in chess....

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: compnovice

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

You dont know anything about programming... do you

a computer cannot sense when my emotions change and I start playing my reckless, or when I get tighter, or when I go on tilt... or when I change gears because we are close to the bubble, or all kinds of other variables like that.

Has this ever been tried?

Edit- I answered my own question. vex the poker bot.

 

[ShowdOWN]

you cant get lucky in chess, more skill is involved.

 

[VanTheMan]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447

Originally posted by: compnovice

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
My argument is that a VERY good chess computer can beat the best human player (which has been done) but the best computer poker bot will NEVER be able to beat a very good human player, because a computer cannot account for the psychological part of the game.

You dont know anything about programming... do you

a computer cannot sense when my emotions change and I start playing my reckless, or when I get tighter, or when I go on tilt... or when I change gears because we are close to the bubble, or all kinds of other variables like that.

It could if you used a computer designed just to play poker using various input devices to detect changes in your body. It could probably detect emotional changes as well or better than a person because it could use thermal imaging, facial movement tracking, etc. The computers that have beaten the best human chess players were designed specifically to beat them.

 

[kindest]

im confused.. isnt poker a statistical game.. where as chess is more tactical..

a computer should be able to beat man at least 1/2 the time more so for idiots...closer to 50/50 for smart ppl..

 

[Legendary]

A poker bot could be programmed to make mathematically precise moves at all times, and over time would win, due to the fact that the player would be unable to read the robot's emotion. The game would be played by sheer mathematics where a robot obviously has an advantage. The beauty of chess is that a computer has no advantage over the human except for starting color, which is a minor advantage.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: kindest
im confused.. isnt poker a statistical game.. where as chess is more tactical..

a computer should be able to beat man at least 1/2 the time more so for idiots...closer to 50/50 for smart ppl..

wait... what?

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: Legendary
A poker bot could be programmed to make mathematically precise moves at all times, and over time would win, due to the fact that the player would be unable to read the robot's emotion. The game would be played by sheer mathematics where a robot obviously has an advantage. The beauty of chess is that a computer has no advantage over the human except for starting color, which is a minor advantage.

Im talking about a program, not a robot. Nothing can be hooked up to the player or sensors used to monitor heart rate, thermal temperature or any of those sorts of things. Computer is only using algorithms/statistics just like the chess computer.

 

[V00DOO]

Chess by far because you can play your holdem hand perfectly before the river and still get outdraw and lose.

 

[VanTheMan]

A poker program could still beat a human. Like Legendary said, neither one would be able to read the other one, thereby negating the psychological advantage. The program could be written to bluff under certain circumstances or play by sheer probability. It could also trend a human's actions.

 

[amdforever2]

Data was clearly better than many of the rest at poker.


Regardless, Chess. No luck means more skill required to win.