The most important decision we make is whether we believe we live in a friendly or hostile universe.Thomas Edison
Ideas
Poker Hive
People
Ideas
Businesses
Connect with talented people.
Collaborate on ideas.
Realize your vision.
Not freeish. Not freesque. It's free!
The Idea
In the summer of 1999 Gary Kasparov, chess grandmaster, played a hardfought battle against a collective opponent, the world. This match showed the awesome power of collective decisions against the world's foremost expert. The same experiment can be carried out in poker, also against the world's foremost experts, many of which play online publicly in high stakes games. I believe the collective mind can beat them, even if the members hardly know how to play. The poker hive is crowdsourced online poker playing, where the members collectively decide what type of game to play, what stakes to play at, and ultimately what bets to make. When each member is ready to play they buy in - for a $5000 entry fee and 500 players the fee is $10. Once everyone has bought in, the members vote on what bets to make during the game. Then the members receive a share of the winnings.
I thought of this idea when I was...
Sports betting lines are determined by the masses. In order to win you have to outsmart this "hive". That is why even sports experts fail. In poker however experts play against other experts. Why not force these so-called experts to play against one enemy that is comprised of a "hivemind" in a social experiment of sorts? Technically, a central computer plays the game with the poker company's servers, and the hive members receive data streams from this central computer.
Comments Posted
This wouldn't work for poker. I think the reason it worked for chess is that chess takes a lot of analysis, and everyone can work together. Several people suggest moves, and then the group can take the best ones and work together to analyze how the game would go if they made that move. There might be some way to do a similar setup with poker (having tons of people work together to track the expert's habits, tells, etc), but having members VOTE on what to do certainly wouldn't work. The "hive" would be too predictable because it would always play based on the majority view, whereas an individual player will play the majority view most of the time, but mixes it up enough to keep you honest. I really think the hive would play worse than the average individual player in the hive.
Actually, I disagree. First, you assume that their is no best play and that people wouldn't recognize when is the best time to make a certain play. Also, based on the way that I would do the voting it wouldn't be a simple average. First step is to come up with about three of the most popular suggestions. It is not just taking the average suggestion. These three choices will be diverse and include a good selection of options. So then out of these three choices, another round of voting happens. This will keep the play less predictable.
This is a pretty cool idea in concept. I could see this as a non traditional fun way to play poker. Maybe the crowd puts in $10 a piece and goes heads up with another poker sites champ, be it PokerStars (Greg Raymer or Joe Hachem..etc)
Contact me if you have some traction in this area. I would like to kick this around more.
Post A Comment
Got something to say?
Log in to post a comment.
- Ideas Submitted
- 7186
Friend request sent!
A friend request message has been sent to .
And while you're busy making friends on the CH community, why not invite your own friends to join?
Friend request failed!