Comments on: Physics Envy

By: Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 6/15/2007 - General Science

Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 6/15/2007 - General Science — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 03:24:43 +0000

[...] Physics Envy Are physicists better poker players than mathematicians? [...]

By: beajerry

beajerry — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:13:10 +0000

It’s all about the poker-face in the end.

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 21:13:22 +0000

Matt, trust me, if everyone came to appreciate my quantum-poker analogy, the total amount of understanding in the world would go up, not down.

Rock, I had exactly the same book idea. Obviously someone will end up writing it, the idea is overdetermined. That doesn’t mean anyone will buy it.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:41:35 +0000

"Dave, the invocation of quantum mechanics is purely for PR purposes; it's really all about classical probability." Ah, the inappropriate invocation of quantum mechanics for PR purposes is making me dizzy! Isn't that best left to these guys?

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:59:44 +0000

AH, the amateur tournament. Those running the WSOP really need to cut down on letting any Joe Schmoe on the street join the tournament if he can front the cash. Not to say that there aren’t plenty of intelligent people who can figure out good strategies, but I’d much rather see a Dan Negreanu vs. Johnny Chan showdown at the end than this year’s luckiest amateur vs. this year’s next luckiest amateur showdown.
Maybe institute a minor leagues system? Earn your pinstripes before playing in the majors.

By: Dylan

Dylan — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:23:28 +0000

He appears to have done rather poorly – so instead of envy, you physics boys can crow still louder about your man Michael Binger’s conquest last year.

By: Rock Howard

Rock Howard — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:13:15 +0000

When I learned to play poker back at CalTech we had a saying which was “The cards change!” This quip was reserved for occasions where someone whined about not staying in to hit some draw. The idea, of course, is that you want to make the right decision given the situation at hand and not dwell on the “coulda woulda shoulda” of the hand as it actually plays out. A true Quantum Physics concept at work!

I actually created a book outline for “Quantum Poker” that combines this concept and a few other related concepts with some novel ideas for randomizing your play. (Humans are generally pretty bad at randomizing their actions, but injecting some randomness into your game definitely helps your poker results.)

While I am a winning player over my poker “career”, I haven’t come close to building up a serious bank roll or winning a major tournament. Otherwise I might get serious about finishing my book concept. Feel free to let me know if you think this is a book that has to be written. Personally I think it would sell about 50 copies, but maybe I am not thinking straight about this.

By: Ian B Gibson

Ian B Gibson — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 02:35:46 +0000

The thing about the WSOP in particular is that since it has ballooned in popularity over the last few years, the bad players now so far outnumber the good players that one of them will almost inevitably win the main event every year from now on, through sheer weight of numbers. Observe the string of nobodies who’ve taken the title in recent years, basked in their brief moment of fame, then disappeared back into the obscurity from whence they came.

So if you’re planning on testing your hypothesis with real money, I’d suggest entering some of the less popular tournaments, or better yet, avoid tournaments altogether and concentrate on regular games.

By: Jeff Harvey

Jeff Harvey — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 02:34:24 +0000

OK Mr. poker-quantum-mechanic. This summer, in Chicago. Me and
the boys will be waiting for you.

And I know you like to test out your theories, but leave the cat alone.
It could get messy otherwise.

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 02:07:54 +0000

Sure. Bring it on, brane-boy.