Not it woudl not be very simple. As these definitions have amount time set. So If we compare tournament chess game about 4 hours. We must compare it to poker session lasting four hours. Meaning about 200-400 hands. Probability that a noob would win champion on that is extremely low.
I think Robertie estimate complex poker games have about same complexity as backgammon maybe 7 poker, 8 backgammon. And in backgammon you can easily try. Load gnu backgammon and see how many tries it takes you win a 25 pt match. I know very few people who ever succeeded on that. But lack levels does show on top. Not that many pepeat winnerd in backgammon WC. But same people tend be in the money. Same in poker. Especially limit poker would chew lesser plaeyr for sure in 4 hour session. If you suspect that join onlinetable with 10-20$ blinds to see what happens in 4 hours. Yes there is still random variation but people with lesser skill will depart from their money Petri 2010/10/26 Christoph Birk <b...@obs.carnegiescience.edu> > On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Brian Sheppard wrote: > >> Yes, it was in the Poker literature. The Alberta team defined that concept >> and used it to measure hold-em players. Their Website has all of their >> papers, and there are not that many, so you can find it there. >> > > Wouldn't by that definition Poker become a very simple game? > Due to the large "luck factor" even a skilled player wins > only by a relatively small margin against a weaker player. > Even a pro can loose on a bad day against a beginner. This > is not possible in a perfect information game like chess > or go. > > Christoph > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > Computer-go@dvandva.org > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@dvandva.org http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
