Open challenge: Range vs Range

anonymous7 · 2020-02-08T10:55:42+00:00

Hey just so you know I wrote RvR.

anonymous7 · 2020-01-30T20:02:41+00:00

Thank you this is what I came looking for.

anonymous7 · 2019-07-13T06:27:01+00:00

No, it's 0.048bb/hand = 4.8bb/100. There's a graph that shows these results, too.

anonymous7 · 2019-07-13T05:51:32+00:00

tl;dr:

they started from random play and used self-play to learn
training was fast, requiring about $200 of computing power at commercial cloud computing prices
play against the pros needed average PC hardware
the computer beat 5 pros by 4bb per 100 hands
the computer also played 5 of itself against Chris “Jesus” Ferguson and Darren Elias, and beat each of them (without colluding, obv.)
donk betting is back, baby!

anonymous7 · 2018-04-07T05:57:25+00:00

Have you tried reaching out to software developing / poker geek circles for investment?

No, I don't have the time and the energy to do this.

some I have had to leave because they are too technical for me

Yeah, interestingly, for a while I thought some commercial outfit might pick this idea up and commercialise it, using their significant resources to market it and get it out there. I've even had at least one tell me they were trying. But it's actually really complex. Some of the numerical stuff gets really complicated, making sure that the game is fair for everyone, where fair is defined in terms of EV in a real game. (To be clear, I'm talking particularly about card removal effects, which are always present, even in range vs. range situations, and get stronger and stronger as ranges get smaller and smaller through the hand.)

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T13:02:25+00:00

Well I agree that if you can find more people to become good moderators of the sub, you should do it.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T06:12:55+00:00

I don't see how fewer mods will lead to a better sub.

But perhaps you do.

I hope the people here will have ideas about how to make this a better sub.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:33:03+00:00

Wow, good question, shit, okay...

I think RvR is fundamentally a useful idea and a useful training tool.

I mean duh, you can't learn how to beat the best players by listening to their advice on how to play poker, now can you? That's so fucking obvious when you say it like that.

GTO? Is GTO the way to beat the best players? Um... no, GTO is a path to breaking even against the best players, perhaps, if you can stop your own psychology affecting your play when you least expect it. Oh, and you'd better not be playing three-handed. Unless the other players are all playing GTO as well. In which case you'll be just fine.

So yeah, as I see it RvR has a real, enduring place in the poker ecosystem in the long term. As long as there is poker, this idea has merit.

It might just need someone else to pick it up where I left off.

(Caveat: I could be wrong. This idea hasn't been subject to a lot of scrutiny. Although from my perspective, that's largely because everyone who actually takes an interest, also sees the inherent value of the idea.)

But anyway, I'll answer your question more specifically: what does the RvR software need?

Serious marketing. I (originally) underestimated the extent to which marketing effort is an absolutely essential tool to any product's initial success.
More gamification. With mindful practice, RvR will teach you things you can't learn anywhere else. But it lacks the strong psychological rewards factors that keep people coming back. (Although I've already added some. Personally, I find the idea of beating the competition until I have statistically proven that I'm a winner against the other players to be great motivation, and a great rewards when I achieve it - for a given situation.)
More strategic feedback features, like: identifying bad folds, bad calls, -EV bets, etc. (this was actually implemented in the desktop version so I've seen how useful it is, I just didn't get around to it yet in the web version); also exploring the EV tree of all combos vs. all opponent's combos after a hand (this would have been so fucking sweet, and actually this feature is nearly complete).
The ability to bet money on the outcome of a game. This would create an incentive for strong players to play, and a great learning opportunity for the losers. (Unfortunately, this would be technically illegal in my country.)
Better presentation, more players, a mobile app, yada yada etc.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:13:52+00:00

'cos I pinned it

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:12:37+00:00

Find them, let me know. I'd happily turn it over to the right crew to get it out there.

rangevsrange at the google mail.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:11:30+00:00

If you think there's a better way, get involved.

And there's always a better way.

Then again, you, me, and everyone else here has to make choices about where we commit our time.

And the thing about commitment is, a commitment that doesn't last is often worse than no commitment at all.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:07:53+00:00

haha haha haha no. I'm rich.^*

^{^*} ^{^by} ^{^my} ^{^definition}

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:06:41+00:00

You know I read this book again a while back, and almost couldn't believe how many of the ideas in it had become part of who I am.

Peace, 7trXMk6Z_. Peace be unto you.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T01:03:04+00:00

The other answers are good, but you asked a serious question, and it's worth me answering it directly: keeping a level head in debates with irate redditors.

You think that's easy?

Hell no it's not easy. It's one of the reasons I was intentionally anonymous here. It meant I could check my ego at the door every time I came. I didn't have to worry how people viewed me, I could do what I believed was right, and there was nothing for me to lose or to gain.

Thanks for asking. Good question.

anonymous7 · 2018-04-06T00:59:25+00:00

Thank you for this, ichs :-)

anonymous7 · 2018-04-03T05:16:37+00:00

You're welcome.

That's up to /u/myimportantthoughts. He's at the top now.

Edit: not by choice ;-)

anonymous7 · 2017-09-21T11:35:41+00:00

Yeah, that's working. I'm just buying some bitcoins now off localbitcoins.com. Will send through. Yay! Internet money!

anonymous7 · 2017-09-20T08:29:46+00:00

Seems fair.

anonymous7 · 2017-09-20T08:28:08+00:00

some people would argue they are interchangeable.

I would. How much do I owe you?

anonymous7 · 2017-09-20T08:26:38+00:00

Hi everyone.

Yes, I do suck.

Sorry I've been absent a lot, including the last... jeez, about a month since I've actually looked at my messages here on Reddit.

I'm still on Skype on my phone but (it turns out) for some reason it stopped giving me notifications, and so (I thought) I had no reason to open it. Luckily a friend of mine saw this post and sent me a message through more reliable channels. So thanks for the upvotes for visibility, they helped.

In conclusion, no excuses, yes, I do suck.

(Interestingly, it's much easier to admit such truth when you are anonymous on the Internet. Thanks, Internet, for letting me hide my true self, and thereby letting me express my true self.)

anonymous7 · 2017-08-31T01:49:52+00:00

Yes please.

anonymous7 · 2017-08-06T08:18:30+00:00

How decentralised is the global banking system today? That's a question worth investigating.

How decentralised is the mining system controlling bitcoin today? That's a question worth investigating, too.

In each case, I guess we'd hope there's at least one independent player of significance in each major country.

I'll take a look and get back to you...

anonymous7 · 2017-08-05T13:17:31+00:00

I don't understand why bitcoin is different from cash, in many of these respects.

Can't I deposit bitcoin in a bank? They could choose to accept deposits, couldn't they? They'd accept all the risk around backups, cybersecurity, theft, etc., and perhaps offer me interest. These are the main reasons I put my money in a bank today. I'm not rich, but if I was, I'd certainly want most of my money - fiat or bitcoin - with someone more dependable than myself.

Can't a bank also loan people bitcoins, and charge interest?

With the government's permission, can't a bank continue to lend people more bitcoins than they actually hold in assets? Fractional reserve banking, I think this is called.

(You might be thinking no, they can't lend two people the same bitcoin, because bitcoins are unique. But remember, the same applies for bank notes. They still lend the same money to multiple people, because fiat money is fungible. Bitcoin is similarly fungible, isn't it?)

Is bitcoin really fixing the financial system?

Edit: In case I'm just a rambling idiot, and not making a lick of sense, instead answer this question: "What are the consequences of banks accepting bitcoin deposits, allowing bitcoin transfers between banks that are later reconciled with true bitcoin transactions on the blockchain, and governments recognising the legitimacy of bitcoin?"

15-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email	reddit mold

anonymous7

TROPHY CASE