![]() |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Let's say that all of the major online poker sites have complete databases of all the hands that were ever played. Accordingly, they also have the potential for the world's largest "PokerTracker" database, on every single player that plays - especially if all the sites combine their resources.
When we play poker, it can be broken down into a series of individual decisions. Each decision has limited options, namely check/fold, call, or bet/raise. In theory, there is a "superior" or "best" play at every decision - accordingly to mathematical odds, equity, etc. Now, one play may be "superior" against a particular opponent. Whereas other times in the seemingly exact same situation a different play may be superior, because it is against a different opponenent. An analogy may be drawn to blackjack, where it may be correct to "hit" if the count is beyond a certain number, or "stand" otherwise. One's "correct" play depends on the count of high/low cards that are left in the deck. In poker, this is where "reads" or "player stats" enter the equation. It could be either calculated (or analyzed empirically via the online sites' extensive databases), what play is "correct" against any given opponent(s) in any given situation. For example, against a 56/4/1 opponent, raising may be the best play in a particular situation. However, calling or folding may be superior against a 14/7/2 opponent. Again, all of this could theorectically be analyzed empirically using the online sites' databases (and perhaps backed up with mathematical proofs?). Imagine all of this information and database statistics were applied to a computer program that could go through an algorithm in order to derive the best play at each an every decision at the table. (Remember: this program has access to the largest "PokerTracker" database in history). Admittedly, this would be a labourous and difficult task, but nonetheless it remains possible. As a result, you have a machine that plays perfect poker - or as good as one could ever hope to be. Adam |
|
|