Einstein versus......

[SomethingClever]

Say you have Einstein and the world's greatest limit hold 'em player, let's say David Sklansky, in a heads-up match.

Assume Einstein has never played the game before, but is taught the basic rules before beginning.

Starting chips 10,000. The blinds are set at 5/10, and never go up.

Who wins?

[ThaSaltCracka]

Sklansky.

[nicky g]

What about Einstein vs a bear? Say you train Einstein in no holds barred fighting for a year first? Who wins?

[Lazymeatball]

Sklansky, next question.

[PhatTBoll]

Ditka

[Alobar]

einstien wouldnt stand a chance

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky, next question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why so cut and dried?

With the blinds and betting limits so low relative to the size of the stacks, don't you think one of the greatest minds of all time would have time to adapt and perhaps put up a challenge?

What if the stacks were a million chips?

[Lazymeatball]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sklansky, next question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why so cut and dried?

With the blinds and betting limits so low relative to the size of the stacks, don't you think one of the greatest minds of all time would have time to adapt and perhaps put up a challenge?

What if the stacks were a million chips?

[/ QUOTE ]

no

[ThaSaltCracka]

here is why its Sklansky too, and I will use anecdotal evidence to support it. Michael Jordan was/is a phenomenal athlete, but he tried to play pro baseball. He was basically taught the basics, and maybe even a little bit more than the basics, but he couldn't even come close to hanging with people that had been playing for years. Its the same way in poker. As Bernie would say, you get out what you put in, and no one could possibly be a winning player right of the bat, no matter how smart they are.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
What about Einstein vs a bear? Say you train Einstein in no holds barred fighting for a year first? Who wins?

[/ QUOTE ]
It depends what kind of training he gets. Is it Gracie Jiu Jitsu? What would be the best stylew against a bear. I know the correct answer but want to see what people will say. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Lazymeatball]

Greatest minds of all time? He'es definitely up there, but what about Newton, Socrates, Archimedes, DaVinci, Van Gogh, Shakespeare. All great minds, but they'd all suck at Poker. I'll take Richard Millhouse Nixon over any great mind any day in a poker game.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
here is why its Sklansky too, and I will use anecdotal evidence to support it. Michael Jordan was/is a phenomenal athlete, but he tried to play pro baseball. He was basically taught the basics, and maybe even a little bit more than the basics, but he couldn't even come close to hanging with people that had been playing for years. Its the same way in poker. As Bernie would say, you get out what you put in, and no one could possibly be a winning player right of the bat, no matter how smart they are.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like the analogy.

But don't you think that Einstein would grasp almost immediately the nature of the game and all the probabilities? Plus he would most likely understand the fundamentals of game theory right off the bat, too, which is important for HU play.

[SomethingClever]

Well, I said "one" of the greatest minds of all time, and I don't think that can be argued.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I am sure he would pick all that up quickly, but in one session, very doubtful. Plus there is no telling how a bad beat would affect him. I think if someone as smart as him(or for that matter any of the "great" minds throughout time) spent several hundred hours studying poker, they would kill everyone at it. There are some things waaay to complex for me to truely grasp about gambling and for that matter poker. They would also be very analytical and decisive. But to be honest with you, who says Sklansky isn't all of those things already?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Greatest minds of all time? He'es definitely up there, but what about Newton, Socrates, Archimedes, DaVinci, Van Gogh, Shakespeare. All great minds, but they'd all suck at Poker. I'll take Richard Millhouse Nixon over any great mind any day in a poker game.

[/ QUOTE ]All of these clowns were Free Masons and in the Illuminati /images/graemlins/shocked.gif, supposedly. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
All of these clowns were Free Masons and in the Illuminati /images/graemlins/shocked.gif, supposedly. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Were? They discovered the secret of immortality centuries ago and they're still alive and still rule the world from behind the curtain.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure he would pick all that up quickly, but in one session, very doubtful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah... but this would be an incredibly long session, even if it was capped on every street on every hand.

Let's raise the stacks from 10,000 chips to 500,000.

With a bet limit of 10, that'd take like a year.

[Lazymeatball]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I said "one" of the greatest minds of all time, and I don't think that can be argued.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, i think my post started off arguing whether Einstein was one of the greatest mind of all time, but then I stopped myself before saying something dumb. I don't blame you for the confusion.

Any way, if you want a real GreatesMindEver/Poker Player, I'll take Renes desCartes

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
With a bet limit of 10, that'd take like a year.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, is your question really - Could Einstein learn to play poker (given enough time) as some great players? If so, probably.

[andyfox]

There's an Einstein exhibit, here in L.A. at one of our museums; I'm going to attend next week. I'll see if there's any information there to help answer the question. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I've heard that Einstein ended up at Princeton because Cal-Tech refused to pay him the $10,000/year he wanted as his salary. After all, who did he think he was, Einstein? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Lazymeatball]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
With a bet limit of 10, that'd take like a year.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, is your question really - Could Einstein learn to play poker (given enough time) as some great players? If so, probably.

[/ QUOTE ]

He'd have the intelligence, but I don't think he'd have the discipline to spend a year on something as boring as poker.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am sure he would pick all that up quickly, but in one session, very doubtful.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah... but this would be an incredibly long session, even if it was capped on every street on every hand.

Let's raise the stacks from 10,000 chips to 500,000.

With a bet limit of 10, that'd take like a year.

[/ QUOTE ]
So basically, you are asking if Einstein could learn the game, properly, in a year while solely playing and doing no studying? No, I don't think he could, regardless of how smart he was, he would constantly revert back to bad habits and misplays.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, I said "one" of the greatest minds of all time, and I don't think that can be argued.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, i think my post started off arguing whether Einstein was one of the greatest mind of all time, but then I stopped myself before saying something dumb. I don't blame you for the confusion.

Any way, if you want a real GreatesMindEver/Poker Player, I'll take Renes desCartes

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, some of those guys from the olden days were pretty smart, I tell ya.

Ever read any Neal Stephenson? Really, really, really intelligent historical characters figure prominently in a lot of his works, and he writes about them in a way that's pretty fascinating.

Guys like Newton, Hooke, Huygens and Leibniz, for example.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All of these clowns were Free Masons and in the Illuminati /images/graemlins/shocked.gif, supposedly. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Were? They discovered the secret of immortality centuries ago and they're still alive and still rule the world from behind the curtain.

[/ QUOTE ]no, more precisely, this means they obviously had x-ray visions, and thus could read all the cards. duh!

[Lazymeatball]

Hooke? that microscope guy, I love him, he discovered the cell, didn't he? Another cool guy of historical interest, Carnot. he named a cycle after himself

[SomethingClever]

Yeah, there's this part in "Quicksilver" where Hooke and some other guy (a fictional character) are doing an experiment on how long they can keep a dog alive by using a bellows to make it breathe. Of course they have cut the dog open to observe its heart while they're doing this.

Pretty sick, but fascinating.

[Lazymeatball]

if I ever get around to a reading list, this guy is on the list (Stephenson).

[SomethingClever]

Read Cryptonomicon first. Then Snow Crash. Then the others.

[jagoff]

[ QUOTE ]
Greatest minds of all time? Newton, Socrates, Archimedes, DaVinci, Van Gogh, Shakespeare.

[/ QUOTE ]

MORONS!

[Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!]

Bruce lee could beat sklansky.

[jdl22]

Apparently John von Neumann sucked at poker. One would expect him to be much better than Einstein so I'm going to go with Sklansky.

[Evan]

I think Einstein would be in trouble against far weaker players than David Sklansky. Honestly, I would bet on myself in the scenario you described. Poker is not a very intuitive game in many repects.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
Bruce lee could beat sklansky.

[/ QUOTE ]
But could he beat a tiger?

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker is not a very intuitive game in many repects.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but neither is the theory of Relativity...

[Lazymeatball]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Poker is not a very intuitive game in many repects.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but neither is the theory of Relativity...

[/ QUOTE ]

Now i dare you to provide some correlation between the two.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Poker is not a very intuitive game in many repects.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but neither is the theory of Relativity...

[/ QUOTE ]
Now i dare you to provide some correlation between the two.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand either one well enough. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[daryn]

einstein would get crushed vs. almost anyone on this site. well, not the idiots. you know what i mean.

poker's not his game. he would get checkraised on the turn, and all he would be thinking of is how to unify gravity with the quantum forces.

[Patrick del Poker Grande]

Don't you guys remember when Mike McD walked into the judges' game? I would own Einstein. Bring it, Al!

[FatMan]

Why not add Stephen Hawking, Sir Isaac Newton and Data. They can all play on the Holodeck.

[MS Sunshine]

"Van Gogh"

I think this one might have tilt issues.

MS Sunshine

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
"Van Gogh"

I think this one might have tilt issues.

MS Sunshine

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm all in...both ears.

[fnord_too]

Sklansky would be heavily favored.

You are making the assumption that superior intelligence in one area means superior intelligence in another. Einstein had great insight into physics, but in no way does that imply that he could instantly intuit decision making under uncertainty, and work out all the game theoretical implications of play that DS has worked on.

Let me relate a story about probably the greatest physicist the US has produced, Richard Feynman. Feynman was a brilliant mathematician, in addition to being an incredible physicist. A lot of his proofs and solutions to problems were simple and eloquent, while other great minds' efforts yielded long laborious results. In an interview he said something along the lines of "All people ever see is the final product. The don't see the notebooks and notebooks full of false starts and hard work I had to do before I came up with the easy way of doing it."

The point is, the "effortless" fruits these big thinkers usually are the result of a tremendous amount of work. Poker is no simple game that one can look at and solve like a Rubic's Cube.

Make the stacks 1,000,000 BB instead of 1,000 and maybe AE could get competitive, but it would be extremely difficult to overcome the knowledge and skill DS has without putting in a lot of effort and deep thinking. (Actually, he probably has a better chance with 1000BB because there will be a higher luck factor). If he has to play except to eat, sleep, etc. until the challenge is over, I don't think he will be able to win regardless, because he wont have the necessary time to reflect and work through subtle strategic nuances. And this is all assuming he has the right psychological properties to compete (like not steaming and not giving away information and not having too much or too little risk aversion to make more correct plays than DS)

[SomethingClever]

Feynman's great. I like his books.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
MORONS!

[/ QUOTE ]

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

~D

[andyfox]

Which of the two men would have had a better chance to have scored with Marilyn Monroe? i

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not add Stephen Hawking,

[/ QUOTE ]

Hawking is actually a closet poker player. He even uses the Ace of spades and some other cards when discussing the notion of "spin" in The Universe in a Nutshell.

~D

[Six_of_One]

[ QUOTE ]
Which of the two men would have had a better chance to have scored with Marilyn Monroe? i

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly Einstein, because just look at that hair.

[The Yugoslavian]

Goodness, is this even a question?!? Hell, I'd take Hikaru Nakamura (best chessplayer in US -- far from the top in the world) not to mention Gary Kasparov before I took Einstein. I don't know of any theory of Einstein's that involves skills even closely translatable to poker. He wasn't the mathematition you may give him credit for, most of his conceptual ideas were flawed, and as far as I know he didn't compete on a high level in any sport or contest. Was Einstein brilliant -- of course! Was he one of the greatest minds ever -- by many definitions, yes! Does this mean he would *ever* get to Sklansky's level in poker -- VERY unlikely.

[Reef]

that would be a much better match

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
He wasn't the mathematition you may give him credit for, most of his conceptual ideas were flawed, and as far as I know he didn't compete on a high level in any sport or contest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, Einstein was a complete tool. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[The Yugoslavian]

Fischer would never be able to play poker professionally b/c a dealer would be handling 'his' cards and administering the burn and board cards. Also, if you thought most internet players were paranoid and Hellmuth was a huge whiner -- imagine how Fischer would act!

[The Yugoslavian]

Read the next two lines of my post, /images/graemlins/tongue.gif.

The question is not whether Einstein was extremely smart and talented at what he did, it's whether he could match up in poker against a top poker theorist and player.

I also definitely don't think I'm saying Einstein was a tool. I'd really love to hear about how his conceptual skills would actually help him at the poker table though.

Hell, I think there is a decent chance you or I would be able to defeat Einstein in your thought experiment (yes, seriously). I would wager this to be much more likely than Einstein being able to get the best of Sklansky.

Yugoslav

[Slacker13]

Your saying that just because someone is smart they should be great at poker? I know a few dumbasses that are very good poker players. I also know a few very smart people who are dumbasses so without actually having meant Einstein I would say Sklansky would smoke him.

[andyfox]

I'm going to the Einstein exhibit at the Skirball next week. Maybe there'll be some info. to help me decide who'd truly be the favorite in poker and with Marilyn

Nice meeting you the other day.

Regards,
Andy

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to the Einstein exhibit at the Skirball next week. Maybe there'll be some info. to help me decide who'd truly be the favorite in poker and with Marilyn

Nice meeting you the other day.

Regards,
Andy

[/ QUOTE ]

If someone didn't pick up on the Marilyn thing the first time, they won't get it now...

[Evan]

I bet he didn't come up with that in one sitting.

[SomethingClever]

Heh. I was just joking.

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
I bet he didn't come up with that in one sitting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I just wanted to make a witty comeback.

Sklansky probably wins.

[andyfox]

/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[slickpoppa]

I think Bobby Fischer as a poker player would be very interesting. He is clearly a genius, albeit disturbed and emotionally unstable. Nevertheless, I think he would be able to become very good at the game very quickly. The only question is whether he could handle the luck associated with poker; I imagine his tirades against bad beats would be even worst than Hellmuth's.

[Gamblor]

What if Einstein changes his name to Albert Ditka?

[jaeon]

another reason i think einstein wouldn't stand a chance against any real poker player is i don't think he had the proper mindset for the game. i was watching the elegant universe on nova last night and it was talking about how einstein never included the ideas of quantum mechanics into his theories because he thought the universe was too ordered to be based on probabilities rather than certainties...."God does not play dice with the universe." so i would think as soon as the fundamentals were explained to him, he'd leave in disgust, thinking the game a waste of his time.

[The Yugoslavian]

FWIW, I don't think Fischer could be a very successful poker player due to the large amount of luck invovled (as you mention). Fischer is clearly schizophrenic and he had a hard time *ever* losing in chess which is a results oriented game. In poker I just don't believe he could withstand the massive amounts of losing. We'd never get to see his tirades of Hellmuthian proportions (Fischer's would be different as he'd just boycott events and/or make ridiculous demands all the time -- Hellmuth just is a drama king) b/c Fischer would never make it that far in his poker 'career.'

Also, while Fischer could certainly learn the math and probability related to poker I doubt he'd ever excel at the psychological aspect (which seems to be more important at higher levels) -- although I'm sure he'd recognize betting patterns well.

Yugoslav

[tek]

How about Richard Nixon vs. Harry Truman?

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
How about Richard Nixon vs. Harry Truman?

[/ QUOTE ]
Didn't we already do that thread?

[ThaSaltCracka]

when is the "when will jakethebake reach 5k posts" threads going to start? Jeez you post a lot /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
when is the "when will jakethebake reach 5k posts" threads going to start? Jeez you post a lot /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
5K? I'll race you to 20K! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[FatMan]

The bear, he plays tight aggressive.