Turbo Texas Hold'em Vs. Acespade software

[dowlinga]

I was just curious on opinions of which of these software packages is best for Texas Hold'em. I am looking for some software to help compensate for the lack of good games around here and my close to zero budget that keeps me from heading up to the casino. I have read a lot of books, but need to get more game play under my belt, other than the weekly quarters game. Which of these packages is the best learning tool and therefore, probably the most realistic in performance? Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Ashley

[Easy E]

Rather than repeating the link, here's a comparison posted on RGP about a year ago. Search in this forum, back in Sept 2002, using this exact phrase:
"If you're looking for the missing link, it is"

[758219]

Turbo Texas Hold'em is everything. You put up just about any kind of table you want; type of players, number of players, etc. Even the best players in the world have difficulty holding their own against the best of these players. And I am not sure weather they can even do it, as there are one or two lineups that are so strong and tricky.

Currently am losing against the Turbo Holdem V4's tight lineup (raise less, all adjust), and in the past have been able to hold just my own vs. solid good profiles. I have had it for more than a year, but only now have discovered a lineup and lineups (if I put my own up from the toughest to beat) that beat me.

The only difference is that they don't play all the time like real opponents, that are easier to read, as they play more solid and don't do too much unpredictable stuff. Many of those profiles, however, play top class poker, weather they are regularly unpredictable or not. They regularly play even better than the top humans. The partial irrationality makes them even tougher at high limit play vs. solid opponents, while at lower turbo limits it makes them play worse, not like humans; but there are better lineups/profiles for lower limits also, and the Turbo is not really something one needs for low limit practise, other than get a feel for it if one has forgotten.

One can also run simulations on every street, to get answers; I have used it mostly for preflop strategy. Turbo also deals very fast, so you get to play hands in a flash, and can even make it to skip all the about nonplayable hands, though then you don't get the blinds cost in to it without tricky math (I haven't figured it out), so you would know how much you win or lose per hour against this or that lineup. The ordinary dealing is however fast, and it can skip the rest of the hand after you fold some hand, and the next hand comes immediately. You can also put it to deal any hand to you, as simulated but play it yourself, so you can practise to play that hand any number of times.

There is no match for this program. Wilson's web site has more info; worth reading.

Also don't miss Abdul's link there, not that I agree with all of it, as it's mostly for higher limit. (Also see the online poker playing site - pokerroom - has published it's preflop results about every level of play. That's not simulated, but from real play.)

[Mason Malmuth]

"Even the best players in the world have difficulty holding their own against the best of these players. And I am not sure weather they can even do it, as there are one or two lineups that are so strong and tricky."

I have not seen the new version, and unless the new version plays much better than previous versions, I don't believe this to be the case.

MM

[Easy E]

nor do I see poker software challanging the top players anytime soon.

[cferejohn]

I don't see why not. They make chess software that can challenge the best chess players. Admittedly, it needs specialized and powerful hardware to run, but I'm comfortable with the statement that hold'em is a less complex game than chess, in terms of possible moves to analyze.

[Joe Wells]

Turbo Texas Hold'em is a wonderful tool for improving your game. However, there isn't any "world class" play by this program. If you are expecting a world class line-up, you will be disappointed.

[BruceZ]

Chess computers just play against a position; poker computers must play against people. The correctness of a computed chess move depends on the position and not on who the opposing player is. Poker played with no regard to the tendencies of the other players can be mediocre at best, and is easily defeated. Chess for a computer is essentially a computational exercise. The more powerful the computing resources, the better decisions can be made. Infinite computing resources would produce a chess program which can never lose. Simply increasing computing resources alone will not help a hold'em program to make better decisions. It is much more difficult for a computer to play high quality hold'em than high quality chess. This is why chess computers have existed for awhile which can defeat all but the very best players in the world, and now can sometimes even beat the very best. The same cannot be said for hold'em playing computers.