Man, you wouldn't believe it, but Doug Polk, this ace of the poker world, has raked in a fortune playing heads-up Texas Hold Em No Limit. And get this—the guy's smarts helped him and his crew outsmart a crazy advanced poker bot whipped up by some brainiacs from MIT.
When Doug and his poker buddy Ryan Fee aren't out there scooping up stacks of money at the felt, they're busy teaching other folks the tricks of the trade at their site, Upswing Poker https://casinotop.be/. It’s like their little way of sharing the wealth, you know?
I mean, with all the high-flying Wall Street trading done by computers nowadays, I thought Doug might have some killer advice for us mere mortals still trying to make our mark in the trading pits against these AI monsters.
John Navin: So, Doug, you've stared down one of those AI poker bots. How's that feel?
Doug Polk: Let me tell you, it's a strange vibe when you're up against a machine that's crunching numbers and making plays with a precision we humans can only dream of. It hits you real quick that you're not squaring off against a person. The bot's style, it's not like anything you've seen at the tables with flesh and blood players.
We humans? We like to keep it simple, use a couple of bet sizes. But this machine? It's like it's got a whole arsenal of bet sizes bbc at its disposal, and that can get right under your skin cbc, not knowing what kind of curveball it's gonna throw next.
Navin: You mentioned in your video that the AI would take these thoughtful pauses. It kinda reminds us of those patterns on the stock market, right? What's going on in its silicon brain?
Polk: Yeah, the bot's got this habit of freezing up every time a turn card is dealt. By that point, we're halfway through the hand, right? That's when the AI's recalculating its master plan, running through every possible scenario while we're just trying to guess the few most likely moves.
Navin: You've tossed around the idea that AI bots have basically ""cracked"" pot limit hold'em, but no limit's still this big unsolved puzzle. How come?
Polk: Oh, there's been a bit of a mix-up. What's really been ""cracked"" is limit hold'em, not pot limit. With limit, your betting options are super restricted. There's no freedom to go big or stay small—it's all set in stone. But when you step into the world of pot limit or no limit, that's when you really have choices on how much to throw down.
That's where the complexity skyrockets, and that's why no limit's still such a beast. Think about it: it's got way more possible situations than games like chess or backgammon, which are child's play in comparison. Plus, these programs got to wrap their heads around differing bet sizes, which is a whole other can of worms.
Navin: After the dust settled and your team came out on top with more chips, the AI team called it a ""statistical tie."" Sounds a bit like they're trying to downplay your win. What's your take on that?
Polk: Honestly, I was a little cheesed off with how it all wrapped up last time. I've always said it's just a matter of time before AI overtakes us humans at the table, and it looks like that's starting to happen cnn.
But the way they talked about our win didn't sit right with me. Sure, we didn't hit that 95% confidence sweet spot, but we were darn close. And the media made it sound like the match was neck and neck, which wasn't the case at all. We had a solid lead most of the time.
I get that these university types need to hustle for funding, but trying to steal our thunder? Not cool.
Navin: With poker evolving, do you think there's still room for good ol' intuition or even reading physical tells?
Polk: Oh, for sure, but only if you're playing against folks who haven't got their poker face down yet. These days, the real pros know all about tells and work hard to keep their actions consistent, so they're not giving anything away.
I'm the kind of player who leans on the math side rather than gut feelings, but if you've got that sixth sense for sniffing out weakness, you're gonna clean up.
As players get savvier, though, you'll see less of that. Legends like Phil Ivey and Phil Hellmuth, they've made their mark this way. But the new generation of players? They're wise to those old-school moves.
Navin: Now that you've got this big win against AI under your belt, what advice would you give to traders facing off against the machines?
Polk: Our edge came from knowing that the AI couldn't quite get a handle on certain bet sizes. It had to simplify them to make sense of things. So, I'd say play around with your strategy in ways the AI might not get.
Find those limits where it gets tripped up. Make it think it's making the right play when it's actually walking into a trap because you're messing with variables it can't fully grasp.
It's going to take a bunch of trial and error to see what sticks. And as AI gets better, these little gaps in its game will start to close up. But remember, it can't improvise like we can in unique situations. That's where we gotta look for our advantage.
Navin: Carnegie Mellon's been running their own human vs. AI showdown. What's your reaction now that the bots seem to be pulling ahead?
Polk: That battle's over, and the humans got trounced, losing way faster than the AI did in our match.
I knew it was only a matter of time, but I didn't expect us to get lapped so fast! Tech's always moving at warp speed, though, so I guess I shouldn't be too shocked.
This time, the bot fixed up its weak spots and got the hang of throwing massive bets, which really put the screws to the human players.
Still, a part of me wishes I'd been there—maybe I could've turned the tide for team humanity.
"