ST vs SW: Sabacc/Poker tournament

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Early TNG Data is predictable and can't read Riker.

If Data can overcome his predictability -- easy to do if Data figures out that being predictable is why he always loses -- Data could win. Early TNG Data was incredibly naive, but ST:FC Data was a far cry from the naive Data who got outbluffed by Riker all the time.
Brian

But if Data learns that he is predictable, he then becomes unbelievably predictable, because he become predictably unpredictable.

Uh... What?? Say that again?



Don't know but somehow I think it deserves a FUQ.

[taccovert4]

Now, I have no doubt in Thrawn's brilliance as master strategist and tactician (especially after serving under him in campaigns against the traitorous Admiral Zaarin Yup I'm still playing TIE Fighter even these days...), but the real question is: how far it will help him in a poker/sabacc game? taccovert4, sure *you* were helped much in poker by studying strategies of Napoleon and the likes, but are those strategists themselves also experts in games of gambling?

War of manuever is gambling. Thrawn successfully protracted a war of manuever with the republic. He was at a materiel disadvantage during much of this war. He gambled successfully on the NR bluff at Bilbringi, and had he not been murdered by the treacherous Rukh, would have destroyed the NR Fleet. Many of his other missions, like the first (when he attacked that 'Imperial' fleet with his Chiss border patrol) were gambles that he could have easily lost, had his superior strategems and tactics not come into play.

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Now, I have no doubt in Thrawn's brilliance as master strategist and tactician (especially after serving under him in campaigns against the traitorous Admiral Zaarin Yup I'm still playing TIE Fighter even these days...), but the real question is: how far it will help him in a poker/sabacc game? taccovert4, sure *you* were helped much in poker by studying strategies of Napoleon and the likes, but are those strategists themselves also experts in games of gambling?

War of manuever is gambling. Thrawn successfully protracted a war of manuever with the republic. He was at a materiel disadvantage during much of this war. He gambled successfully on the NR bluff at Bilbringi, and had he not been murdered by the treacherous Rukh, would have destroyed the NR Fleet. Many of his other missions, like the first (when he attacked that 'Imperial' fleet with his Chiss border patrol) were gambles that he could have easily lost, had his superior strategems and tactics not come into play.

But doesn't war maneuver have different game mechanics than card game?

[The Silence and I]

Early TNG Data is predictable and can't read Riker.

If Data can overcome his predictability -- easy to do if Data figures out that being predictable is why he always loses -- Data could win. Early TNG Data was incredibly naive, but ST:FC Data was a far cry from the naive Data who got outbluffed by Riker all the time.
Brian

But if Data learns that he is predictable, he then becomes unbelievably predictable, because he become predictably unpredictable.

You were joking, right?

[Fuzzy]

I've got to give this to Han redgardless of Thrawn's amazing tactics. After all, this is what Han DOES. It's just job to rock at any and all forms of gambling. His primary objectives are to gamble, cheat, and not get cheated, in that order. He wins after a novel worthy dramatic game. Because it's what he DOES.

[Isolder74]

Well someone broke the tie!


Han ahead by a nose, er bluff

[Stark]

The R2-D2 vs Data idea is ridiculous. Data gets beat by humans due to his predictablility and lack of personality (I'm not talking about emotions), whereas R2 is a fully realised intelligence. Data sucks at everything other than jumping down holes too deep to jump out of.

[Fuzzy]

The R2-D2 vs Data idea is ridiculous. Data gets beat by humans due to his predictablility and lack of personality (I'm not talking about emotions), whereas R2 is a fully realised intelligence. Data sucks at everything other than jumping down holes too deep to jump out of.

Good point. Data is foiled many times by the "quirks and imperfections of humanity" while R2 constantly defies authority and has a relationship with C-3pO in which they're best friends, but constantly insult each other, much like real humans. The simple fact that he has no face has no relevance to the fact that he is more unpredictable than Data.

[wautd]

I doubt R2 knows how to play poker (C-3PO would be a better matchup imo)

I voted Spock. He has the best pokerface imo

[Stark]

He's a robot? Jam a Death Star-plan card full of poker knowledge and we'll see who knows about poker! :p

And as mentioned, R2 doesn't even HAVE a face. And he's the smartest. So he wins! Computing a jump to hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, etc etc

[Kuja]

I want to see the look on Han's face when he gets beaten by a fireplug.

[taccovert4]

Fighting a war is gambling. Only the stakes are always higher.



Now to be childish, watch out, my Bothan Spies have located the sector this tournament is to be held in. To preserve the SW Universe from ST Scum, the Darksaber II has taken it upon herself to hunt down and destroy all ST characters, so Nurzamaan I would advise you either expel these pacifists or evacuate your starship as I will be firing on full planetary destruction settings.

[taccovert4]

Darn, had a computer problem and I messed up my reply.

yes war of manuever has different rules, but all wars have the same concepts. Poker is war, just of a somewhat bloodless variety. So the concepts are similar. Thrawn's greatest bonus is that he knows cultural a specieal weaknesses of the other players, giving hims an extra advantage.


But the warning was true!

[JediMaster415]

I say Han simply because he beat Lando, who is a professional gambler. The famous Solo luck would help him immensely.

Computational ability won't determine crap since there would be no possible use for it. In the end, it's who can bluff the other players and who has the better luck.

For Han, Luck is like the Force. It's strong in some people, non-existant with others.

May the Luck be with you.

[Stark]

Ridiculous. Computational ability IS a factor in poker. Its all about odds, remember? And R2 isn't a mindless machine; he can take the piss, get angry, display awe etc. He's a cagey little bastard.

Although, Han is a lucky, lucky man. Guess it depends how long between new decks.

[Darth Sephiroth]

Since there isn't a Wookie to tear his limbs off, I'd say for the beginning of the game Han or Lando would come out ahead, then it would be Thrawn before R2 gets annoyed and hacks the computer and wins all the rest.

[Durandal]

- Han Solo vs William Riker

Solo, easily. Riker has never played with real money, so the worst he gets when he goes home from Poker Night is "Aw shucks! I lost my chips!" It's not enough to just be competitive in Poker; you'll always play differently when it's your money on the line.

- Lando Calrissian vs James T. Kirk

Calrissian, unless Kirk finds a way to cheat.

- R2D2 vs Data

It would come down to sheer luck. Both are capable of computing the statistical probabilities their hands have of winning and the risks and gains associated with playing them.

- Grand Admiral Thrawn vs Spock

Thrawn could easily intimidate Spock out of his money with aggressive betting.

Who will eventually come out as winner?

It would come down to Solo vs. Calrissian. Then it'd be up to Lady Luck to call that one.

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Computational ability won't determine crap since there would be no possible use for it. In the end, it's who can bluff the other players and who has the better luck.

Didn't Deep Blue beat the crap out of Kasparov in lastest match-up?

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Now to be childish, watch out, my Bothan Spies have located the sector this tournament is to be held in. To preserve the SW Universe from ST Scum, the Darksaber II has taken it upon herself to hunt down and destroy all ST characters, so Nurzamaan I would advise you either expel these pacifists or evacuate your starship as I will be firing on full planetary destruction settings.

[childish]
ST chars may be scum but they're *my* guests this time, dude. Besides, most Imperial jet-set people are here, watching the tournament while enjoying the abundance of party scenes aboard my SSD Ibiza/. Now you don't want to make the Emperor upset, do you?

On the second thought, Lwaxanna Troi is here too... Wait, what is she doing? Dragging Grand Admiral Thrawn to the dance floor? OHMIGOD, PUNCH THAT FIRE BUTTON, NOW!!!!
[/childish]

[brianeyci]

Ridiculous. Computational ability IS a factor in poker. Its all about odds, remember? And R2 isn't a mindless machine; he can take the piss, get angry, display awe etc. He's a cagey little bastard.

Although, Han is a lucky, lucky man. Guess it depends how long between new decks.

Calculating the probabilities of certain hands and knowing when it is more likely for certain cards to show up is the hardest "computational" function of poker. Fucking humans can do it in their heads. Today's computers computers can calculate odds. There is computation in poker, but computational ability has little to do with who will win, because if you always play for the odds you end up being predictable.

This isn't Go. There aren't a billion trillion possibilities to compute.

Brian

[Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman]

Ridiculous. Computational ability IS a factor in poker. Its all about odds, remember? And R2 isn't a mindless machine; he can take the piss, get angry, display awe etc. He's a cagey little bastard.

Although, Han is a lucky, lucky man. Guess it depends how long between new decks.

Calculating the probabilities of certain hands and knowing when it is more likely for certain cards to show up is the hardest "computational" function of poker. Fucking humans can do it in their heads. Today's computers computers can calculate odds. There is computation in poker, but computational ability has little to do with who will win, because if you always play for the odds you end up being predictable.

This isn't Go. There aren't a billion trillion possibilities to compute.

Brian

Just wonder: can a computer (particularly those with immense computational ability) like Deep Blue programmed to emulate human behavior like "bluffing" or "playing speculatively"? Will it actually perform better than human or not?

And here's another consideration: in the movie Rain Man (starring Tom Cruise & Dustin Hoffman), the character played by Dustin Hoffman were consistently winning the poker game by "counting" the cards. What if we could program a computer to do such thing? Wouldn't the computer consistently beat the crap out of its human opponent?