tops poker

tops poker las vegas

2005-06-23T04:48:00.000-07:00

CBS) This report by Ken Adams is the second in a series for CBSNews.com chronicling his run at the 2005 World Series of Poker in Las Vegas.
My parsimonious "editor," being typical of the new breed of tops poker voyeur who barely knows a river from a flop, asked me who are the top 12 pros I would be looking out for in Vegas. Well, the obvious answer is that I'm looking out for any pro I happen to be playing against at any point. Still, picking 12 top pros is an interesting challenge. They're a fascinating often bizarre lot. They have big personalities, sometimes hidden. Here goes: Phil Hellmuth: The player everyone loves to hate; the "John McEnroe of poker." He just won the heads-up title sponsored by NBC, besting the 64 top pros in the world. He won the championship in 1989 at the age of 24, denying Johnny Chan a record three-peat (Chan had won in 1987 and 1988, beating Eric Seidel in the dramatic hand that is featured in the movie, "Rounders"). Hellmuth holds 9 WSOP bracelets, tying for the record. Annie Duke: One of the two top female tournament players. She was taught to play by her brother Howard Lederer, another top professional. She's the mother of four; smart (B.A. and Ph. D -- all but dissertation -- from top schools). She's the first female player to win more than $1 million in a tournament. Howard ("the Professor") Lederer: Annie Duke's brother, he's one of the most successful tournament players around. He's also educated, smart, and a good guy. Chris ("Jesus") Ferguson: He won the championship in 2000, the year that writer Jim McManus played and wrote his book, "Positively Fifth Street." "Jesus" has a Ph. D. in computer science (specialties: artificial intelligence and game theory). He's also a swing dance instructor and an unassuming, nice guy. He happens to be a great player. Chris Moneymaker: His unlikely victory in 2003 made him a poker rock star. He earned his chips playing on the Internet, not at the tables of Las Vegas and Atlantic City. Greg "Fossilman" Raymer: He is the reigning champ, having won it all last year. John Juanda: One of my favorites. Juanda is quiet, shy, not at all the image of the intimidating assassin stereotype, but one of the most consistent winners on the circuit. He was player of the year two years ago and has been at more final tables in each of the past two years than any other player. Daniel Negreanu: Maybe the best in the world at the moment. He was player of the year last year -- an amazing talent. And besides, he was featured in The New York Times magazine last week so everyone knows who he is. Also a pretty nice guy.

Daniel Negreanu's Big Top Poker Challenge

2005-06-09T01:00:00.000-07:00

Daniel Negreanu's Big Top Poker Challenge , Part Three
June 06, 2005 John Caldwell

As noted previously on this site, in an effort to maximize his new role as a poker host as the new Wynn Casino, Daniel Negreanu has issued an open challenge. He will play anyone at the Wynn, in any of nine different games for anywhere from $100,000 to $500,000. To this point, Daniel has played three matches, and was 1 win, two losses in those matches. Fortunately for Daniel, the one win out did the two losses in cash, and he was actually up $100,000. But those matches, as exciting as they were, felt like the warm up act to the main event. The main event's name was Barry Greenstein. Daniel and Barry had been trading barbs on the internet for a couple weeks, and you sensed a genuine tension between the two, if not out and out dislike. With the notable exception of Doyle Brunson, Daniel and Barry get some of the best press in poker. Daniel for his gregarious, outgoing charm (not to mention multiple TV wins), and Barry for his "Robin Hood of Poker" image, with all his tournament winnings going to his charity of choice, Children Inc. So, what do two top players with positive images do when they want to tangle? Why, play nine different games heads up for $500,000 each, of course. As is part of Daniel's terms of his challenge offer, all matches must be played at the new Wynn poker room, for which Daniel is a host. The first of the nine matches was played out over the last two nights, and the game was 7 Card Stud. After playing for five hours or so Friday night, Daniel had carved out a $73,000 lead after being down as much as $300,000 at one point. Daniel actually came back from the 300k deficit to take a 164k lead at one point. The night ended (as agreed) at midnight, and Daniel was up $73,000. The next night brought the conclusion to the match, and Barry Greenstein was the winner. Daniel had this to say (via his Blog) about the match. There was a pretty bad trend arising in our match. When I made my two pair he'd make a straight or a flush. When I started with the best pair he'd catch 4's and 2's. When I had a pair and a flush draw, or a straight and a flush draw I'd blank off again, and again. I had all the confidence in the world that I would win this match, but I just couldn't fade the cards. It was truly brutal and I wouldn't wish that anti-rush on my worst enemy! So, now Daniel is 1 win, 3 losses, and down one-nil (as they would say in soccer) to Barry G. Daniel said he would be happy to play Barry again at Stud, but its unclear whether that match will happen, or if they will move on to another game.

top poker pro Robert Williams

2005-05-24T23:12:00.000-07:00

Top poker pro Robert Williamson III to play mobile phone champ in Vegas
May 19, 2005 John Caldwell

A few months ago, we reported the launch of Infospace's "Hold Em Plus for Prizes". Infospace has recently teamed up with top poker professional Robert Williamson III to make good on the 'prizes' part of the name. For the next couple months, players can download the Hold Em game on to their cell phone, and play in a series of tournaments leading up to the Grand Final Tournament. The winner of this Grand Final Tournament gets to fly to Las Vegas, and have dinner, and play poker with Williamson, who in addition to being a top player, is also the host of GSN's 'Poker Royale' program. "With the Hold'em Poker+ for Prizes Mobile Mega Tournament Championship, we're taking one of our most popular games and allowing everyone to compete for a poker player's dream vacation," said Andy Riedel, VP at InfoSpace. "With the skyrocketing popularity of poker and the growing success of our 'For Prizes' Network, we expect this to be one of our largest tournaments ever." Other prizes include Sony PSP portable game units, and $1,000 Amazon.com gift certificates The Hold Em Plus game is a little different, as the community cards are dealt first, then players get to select their two hole cards from four choices. Finally, the last two cards are dealt, and the hand is completed. As part of the promotion, Williamson is going to log some time playing on the system. "Hold'em Poker+ for Prizes is an exciting twist for America's most popular game, Texas Hold 'em" said Williamson "I am proud to launch the Mobile Mega Tournament Championship and I look forward to playing with fans on my cell phone."

GAMING MILESTONE: Casinos' win tops $1 billion

2005-05-13T12:11:00.000-07:00

GAMING MILESTONE: Casinos' win tops $1 billion

Most experts watching the ebbs and flows of Nevada's gaming industry believed that the state's casinos would record their first monthly gaming win of $1 billion sometime this year. But they didn't expect it to happen in March.

"We were thinking May, once we had a full month of operations out of Wynn Las Vegas," said Frank Streshley, senior research analyst for the State Gaming Control Board. "Everything was just going strong in March."

Nevada's casino industry shattered all previous monthly win totals during the third month of 2005, collecting $1.031 billion from gamblers during the 31-day period.
The win total, announced Wednesday by gaming regulators, surpassed the previous record of $930.3 million in March 2004. The figure was a 10.9 percent year-over-year increase.
The 341 casinos taking part in the summary reported a collective total drop -- the actual amount wagered by gamblers -- of $13.4 billion.

"March was absolutely off the charts when you looked at the quarterly earnings reports for the major casino operators," said Brian Gordon, a partner in Applied Analysis, a Las Vegas-based financial consulting company.
"There had been concerns early in the quarter because of weather and other issues, but March proved to be an absolute blockbuster for the industry."
To put the figure into historical perspective, in 1974 Nevada casinos as a whole won $1.004 billion, the first time the industry collected more than $1 billion from gamblers in a 12-month period.

"Surpassing $1 billion in win for the month is another solid indictor that our state's economy is doing exceptionally well," Gov. Kenny Guinn said in a prepared statement.
Deutsche Bank gaming analyst Marc Falcone said that strong convention attendance during March, including 135,000 delegates who took part in the ConExpo-ConAgg trade show early in March, and increased visitation in conjunction with the first weekend of the National Collegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament helped add to the win total.

The surge was felt statewide except in one area, Reno. Casinos in that Northern Nevada city collectively had a win decrease of 1.56 percent in the month.
In Clark County, six of the seven jurisdictions, according to the control board's breakdown, reported all-time win records.

On the whole, Clark County's gaming win was almost $865 million, an 11.42 percent increase over the $776.3 million won a year ago. Casinos on the Strip for the first time won more than $500 million from gamblers in a month, collecting $514.4 million, a 10.5 percent increase compared with $465.4 million last March.
Although casinos in downtown Las Vegas didn't have a record month, the gambling houses along Fremont Street won $63.1 million in March, an 11.4 percent jump compared with $56.7 million won a year ago.

Casinos in North Las Vegas won $28.2 million, a 12.6 percent year-over-year increase; the Boulder Strip (including Henderson) won $85.1 million, a 12.4 percent rise; and the balance of Clark County (which includes areas outside the Strip) collected $98.7 million, a 15.2 percent jump.

"We look at three different indicators: convention visitors, leisure travelers and local customers," Streshley said.
"All three areas were strong, so it wasn't just one area that gave casinos a bump, it was industrywide."

Speculation had been that the April 28 opening of the $2.7 billion Wynn Las Vegas, which added 2,716 rooms to the Strip market, would boost the gaming win substantially, especially by the end of May after the resort's first full month of operation.

Barring a hiccup in the economy or an incident that could curtail travel to the United States from foreign markets, Streshley said he expects the $1 billion monthly win figure to become commonplace.

"It should continue. Wynn added more rooms, and we'll see the new tower at Caesars Palace open during the summer," Streshley said.

"Enough is happening to continue to drive visitor traffic."
Falcone agreed that Nevada casinos will continue to reap the benefits of a vibrant tourism market.

"We expect the momentum (has) continued into the second quarter," Falcone said in an investors' note.
"We believe this bodes well for operators with Las Vegas exposure, including MGM Mirage, Harrah's, Wynn Resorts and Caesars, as well as local operators Station Casinos and Boyd Gaming."

Slot machine win statewide of $719.6 million on $11.3 billion wagered was an all-time record, Streshley said, adding that March is traditionally a strong month for slot machine play.
Streshley said betting on basketball in March, which includes both the NCAA and the National Basketball Association, gave the casinos a win of $16.2 million on $170.9 million wagered, a 16.7 percent year-over-year increase.

He added that first-round NCAA Tournament losses by such favorites as Syracuse and Kansas helped the casinos.

Micah Roberts, director of race and sports for Station Casinos, said the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament steadily has grown into one of the busiest wagering weekends in Las Vegas. He said customers don't bet on basketball alone.
"It's a party atmosphere, and people come to watch the games and have a good time," Roberts said.

"Sports bettors also like to play blackjack, poker and slots. The numbers (amount wagered on the NCAA Tournament) were a little higher than in the past, and I attribute that to the electricity the tournament brings."

Jerry Reed tops field of dreamers and wins his first WSOPC championship

2005-05-12T09:35:00.000-07:00

Jerry Reed tops field of dreamers and wins his first World Series Of Poker Championship.

Every successful person endures failure -- whether it’s in business, athletics, or even relationships. In fact, failing is part of life’s process. Anyone who hasn’t failed at some point in his life has probably not accomplished anything, either. The measure of achievement is not in how many times one has failed, but how many times he has rebounded and tried again and again.
Meet Jerry Reed. He was a pitcher in the Los Angeles Angels farm system in the early 1960s. However, Reed was released before he could make it to the majors. Nights spent in hotel rooms in the minor league system did gradually lead to another competitive passion – poker. “I used to play poker with the other ballplayers players at night,” Reed said. “We used to make odds on who would be released the next day. I used to always be the favorite. Sure enough, one morning, I was cut.”
After leaving baseball, Reed started and owned a successful video production business. His recreational interest in poker led to game development and a brand new advanced concept – a video poker table. In the late 1970s, Reed developed a multi-player poker table with video graphics. He was inspired to develop the new high-tech table because many poker games (including all games in California) were self-dealt and riddled with problems. Reed’s video poker table assured accuracy, randomization, and fairness to all players. He introduced the game in California. Unfortunately, legal authorites were confused by the “video poker” tag and thinking it was a slot-related device, they pulled the plug. Reed’s mistake was that he was too far ahead of his time. Note: Other video poker tables have been developed since then, and at least one is in the testing phase.
Reed’s ‘failures’ were, in fact, learning experiences which motivated him to try new things and develop alternative ideas to the status quo. Now age 67, he is promoting a new poker venture, and playing in major tournaments.
Lake Tahoe’s $500 buy-in no-limit hold’em tournament, attracted 182 entries competing for $88,270 in prize money. Day One resulted in the elimination of 173 players. The nine finalists returned on Day Two, with Jerry Reed holding a commanding chip lead over the field. Finalists arrived with the following seat positions and chip counts:
SEAT 1 Keith Rahman Bend, OR 25,100
SEAT 2 Bobby ‘Turbo’ Martin Austin, TX 38,500
SEAT 3 Paramjit Gill Diamond Bar, AZ 22,900
SEAT 4 Josh Ewing S. Lake Tahoe, CA 29,300
SEAT 5 Jerry Reed Palo Alto, CA 86,700
SEAT 6 Don Mullis Mooreseville, NC 17,700
SEAT 7 Steve Schicchitano Pleasanton, CA 32,500
SEAT 8 Mike ‘Shoes’ Gambony Scottsdale, AZ 20,000
SEAT 9 Dan Owen Napa, CA 1,400

Players were eliminated as follows:
9th Place – The final table started out with a bang. Steve Schiccitano was dealt pocket aces, flopped trip aces, and still lost the pot. Dan Owen had K-J, flopped a made-straight, and also had a royal flush redraw. The straight held up and Owen had avoided elimination, at least for the moment. Unfortunately, that would be Owen’s only bright moment of the finale, as he was knocked out a few hands later when his ace high failed to pair. Dan Owen, a retired business executive, collected $1,764 for 9th place.
8th Place – Bobby ‘Turbo’ Martin (second in chips) took a beat and then doubled up twice, putting him back into the race. Meanwhile, it took an hour before the next player was eliminated. Don Mullis was short-stacked throughout his stay, and finally went ‘all in’ with second pair (9s), losing to Jerry Reed’s top pair (aces). Mullis has enjoyed a fabulous Lake Tahoe tournament, to date. This marked his fourth final table appearance, in six tries. Mullis, a classy North Carolina-based retiree who is traveling around the country in a mobile home, also won Event #4. Eighth place paid $2,650.
7h Place – Keith Rahman made an ‘all in’ raise from the button with A-9 and was called instantly by ‘Turbo’ in the blind with A-K. Rahman failed to make a pair and went out in 7th place. The private security manager from Oregon locked up $3,530.
6th Place – Josh Ewing was making his second final table appearance. The 24-year-old Lake Tahoe local was blinded down to felt and ultimately took $4,415 for 6th place.
5th Place – Bobby Martin, a.k.a. ‘Turbo’ ordered a kamikaze (shot) and true to his maniacal image, moved ‘all in’ for the fifth time in ten minutes. Unfortunately, he picked the wrong time to be hyper-aggressive. Jerry Reed looked down and saw A-K and called the raise in a flash. Both players flopped an ace, but when a king fell on the turn, Turbo was drawing dead. Turbo finally ran out of gas, but did pocket $5,295 as the 5th-place finisher.
4th Place – Mike ‘Shoes’ Gambony, a former professional pool player who has converted to poker playing, went out next. The native Texan now living in Scottsdale, AZ won the Iowa State Poker Championship in 2001 and has also made three WSOP final tables. But his shot at victory in this event hit the rail. Fourth place paid $7,060.
3rd Place – That left three players remaining, with Jerry Reed holding a better than 3 to 1 chip lead versus both opponents. However, if Reed thought the final stretch would be easy, he was in for a battle. The trio played for 90 long minutes before Steve Schicchitano finally had to commit his final chips on a draw. Schicchitano was dealt 9-8 and watched as the flop came 10-10-7. An outside straight draw led Schicchitano to move ‘all in,’ which was called by Reed with A-7. The second pair held up, and Schicchitano, a business agent from Pleasanton, CA was out with third place prize money -- $8,825.
The heads-up duel between Jerry Reed and Param Gill began with Reed holding a formidable 222,000 to 52,000 chip advantage. On the first hand of play, Reed was dealt A-A and raised, which caused Gill to fold. That hand would pretty much define the closing chapter of the tournament. Gill managed to survive six hands before the odds ultimately caught up with him and he was eliminated. Reed was dealt 9-5 versus Gill’s Q-4, which amounted to two ugly hold’em hands. But the worst hold’em hand can sometimes be a thing of beauty. Reed thought the flop was beautiful, when 7-7-5 put him into the lead. Successive rounds brought two blanks, and Reed was the latest WSOPC champion.
Runner-up Param Gill was born in India and now lives in Arizona. He won an event at the California State Poker Championship last year and hopes to do well enough in tournaments to eventually play poker full-time. Second-place price money amounting to $16,065 will surely help Gill’s path to poker glory.
“Everything was going my way tonight,” said Reed following his victory. “It seemed like whatever I was doing ended up right. Even the last hand when I was a dog, I had things go my way.”
Jerry Reed is working on a new project. He is creating a $100,000 buy-in poker tournament to be called the “World Heavyweight Poker Championship,” a novel concept which includes a series of heads-up matches which would be televised. He expects to get 100 players committed to play in the event and hopes it may come about as early as December 2005.
You win some. You lose some. Whatever happens to Jerry Reed and his ambitious ideas, you can be certain he will continue to keep swinging for the fences. On this night, an unseasonably cold night in the Sierra Nevadas, Reed stepped up to the plate and hit one out of the park.

Deluxe Folding Poker Table Top

2005-05-11T09:16:00.000-07:00

This state of the art folding poker table tops will rest on your existing kitchen, dining, or picnic table. The table will hold 8-10 players for either high stakes poker action or the kid's favorite board game. Unlike other folding poker table tops, this folding poker table top has a high quality padded and seamless playing surface. These tables also offer a comfortable padded armrest that is custom manufactured with durability in mind.

The dimensions open are 72 X 40 inches and when folded 36 X 40 inches and only 2 inches thick. It stores anywhere. This portable folding poker table top is made with the highest quality materials and weighs approximately 30 pounds.

2-in-1 Blackjack Folding Poker Table Tops

2005-05-07T15:51:00.000-07:00

New "2-in-1" high quality solid wood folding poker table tops features a Las Vegas style Blackjack playing surface on one side and a Poker playing surface on the other side. This table top measures 48 x 48 inches and folds into a 2 feet by 4 feet dimension for easy storage and travel. It also comes with a heavy-duty nylon carry-on bag with a double strap handle.

This convenient wood table top also has 8 player positions with individual trays for poker chips and beverages. It is made of superior quality green felt for a smooth playing surface. Enjoy your poker party and play in a casino-like atmosphere using this 2-in-1 poker blackjack table top.

Poker Tells tops 10: Weak is Strong/Strong is Weak

2005-05-06T12:38:00.000-07:00

Poker Tells tops 10: Weak is Strong/Strong is Weak

In its most simplistic form, this usually applies to novice players but frequently applies to pros as well. Basically, players like to be actors, and when they have a monster hand they tend to look disinterested. eg. "Oh, is it my turn to act" or "Oh I guess I will play these cards". Alternatively, a player increasing the level of his voice while raising the pot, and trying to look intimidating. may be running a bluff.

Top Poker Hands!

2005-05-03T18:52:00.000-07:00

There seems to be a difference of opinion about what the poker hands that tops are.
I know Phil Hellmuth has AA KK QQ JJ AK AQ 1010 99 88 77 but doesn't have AJ.
Most charts have AKo at 11th. If you look at a bunch of on-line charts there seem to be small differences. Is there a definitive list of top hands by EV or is it a matter of opinion?

There is no absolute ranking. It depends on the situation. AA is better than KK obviously, but the relative strength of say, AJo, 87s, and 66 varies greatly.

Hellmuth's top 10 list is for beginners. It isn't intended to be the best hands for an expert to play for the greatest expectation, but is for beginners to be able to play using his beginner's strategy. Accordingly, any hands that require good judgment to play post-flop are omitted.

Poker Tells Top 10! Update..

2005-04-29T09:26:00.000-07:00

What is a Tops Poker Tell? A tell is any habit, behavior, or physical reaction, that gives other players more information about your hand. The following are tips supplied to PokerTop10 by the pros, and can apply against novice or advanced players. Remember, that in poker there are many contradictions and exceptions to the rule. Also, experienced pros will give out false tells to fool players.

2) Facial Expression:

Again, many pros try to disguise their entire face by wearing a cap and looking downward. This is to avoid the classic stare down that poker pros are famous for. They may try to study your face for nervousness (detecting a weak hand), or even look for repetitive characteristics like a body "tic". You may have obvious unhappiness in your face when your hand is weak, and conversely, you may show a contrasting show of confidence when your hand is strong.

tops poker or poker table tops? This is what you are typing

2005-04-28T08:58:00.000-07:00

tops poker 1231 1054 poker table tops 109 93 portable poker table tops 20 17 poker table tops custom 14 12 discounted poker table tops 10 9 folding poker table tops 10 9 buy poker table tops 6 5 felt table tops poker 6 5 42 poker table tops 4 3 poker tops 4 3 texas holdem poker table tops 4 3 black felt poker table tops 3 3 black poker table tops 3 3 poker card table tops 3 3 54 inch poker table tops 2 2 cardinal poker table tops 2 2 felty table tops poker 2 2 poker tabel tops 2 2 poker table tops canada 2 2 poker table tops in new jersey 2 2 poker tables and poker table tops 2 2 portable poker tops 2 2 retail poker table tops 2 2

Poker Tells Top 10!

2005-04-27T07:39:00.000-07:00

Poker Tops:
What is a Poker Tell? A tell is any habit, behavior, or physical reaction, that gives other players more information about your hand. The following are tips supplied by the pros, and can apply against novice or advanced players. Remember, that in poker there are many contradictions and exceptions to the rule. Also, experienced pros will give out false tells to fool players.
1. Watch the Eyes:
This is why many pros wear sunglasses or visors/caps when playing, they know that the eyes rarely lie. For eg. many players can't help but stare at big hole cards, so their length of time peeking is longer. Conversely, if a player is looking to steal the pot, he may look to his left to see if the remaining players, who haven't yet acted, have quickly glanced at their cards and are likely to fold. Another eg., a player may try to ask you questions about your hand, knowing that people rarely can "look someone straight in the eyes" while being dishonest.
(check for more daily updates)

Poker Table Tops!

2005-04-26T16:22:00.000-07:00

Different types of Poker tops are available in the market. You can choose between folding poker table tops or unfoldable poker table tops whichever suits your requirement. Many other terms related to poker are like Clay Poker Chips, Winning Poker Hands, Roulette Systems, Texas Holdem Strategy, Caribbean Stud Poker. These poker table tops are available in different sizes. Prices also vary depending upon quality of Poker table tops.

Learning Tops Poker Texas Hold ?Em with Temporal Differencing tops poker

2005-04-22T17:00:00.000-07:00

Knowledge-free game play took a leap forward with Tesauro?s creation of TD-Gammon, a self-training neural network designed for backgammon. ? While applications that learn through temporal differencing have become common in full-state information gaming, they have yet to be applied to games with imperfect information, despite the fact that bridge, Tops Poker, and the like have proven intractable through traditional brute-force state-search methods. ? Such problems can be used to represent a wider range of real-world challenges than complete information games. ? This paper delineates the first incarnation of a system to play the Tops Poker variant Texas Hold ? Em . ? Hold ? Em is widely considered the most strategically interesting variation of Tops Poker by professionals, combining incomplete information with deception. ? In the system laid out here, individual players use a neural network to make their betting decisions at each juncture. ? The playing table uses various simple heuristics to tally relevant characteristics of the hand, and the players use this information as half the set of inputs to the network. ? An evaluation of the betting styles of both the player and the opponent make up the other half of the inputs. ? In training, both players refer to the same network while betting; this self-training allows for greater sampling than could be provided by the far smaller number of games able to be played against human opponents. ? Temporal differencing allows the delayed feedback (winning or losing at the end) to reweight the network after each decision. ? The structure of the network is laid out in detail. ? The early results are briefly noted and avenues for further exploration are considered.

1. Introduction

Gaming is one of the first fronts on which computational intelligences have successfully challenged biological supremacy. ? Systems that play backgammon, othello, and chess have learned to play at or above the levels of even the most masterful human opponents. ? All of these games share a common set of features, however. ? Each player has full information about the state of the game at all times, misdirection plays no part in the rules and has no effect, and a given board state always contains an optimal move or set of moves by the player, regardless of the quality of his opponent. ? These games, which lend themselves to a highly formalized mathematical representation, come naturally to algorithmic machines.

Many other games that humans play have inputs not nearly as easy to represent in formalized language. ? Games such as bridge and Tops Poker, which are played with incomplete state knowledge, are much less often tackled by the research community. ? The modeling of Tops Poker carries with it the additional unique problem of attempting to read the opponent?s state knowledge. ? It is to Tops Poker, specifically, that this project turns its attention. ? It outlines the creation of an autonomous system to play Texas Hold 'Em, a popular tournament variety of Tops Poker, using a neural network trained using a variant on the temporal differencing method made popular by Gerald Tesauro?s TD-Gammon. ? This one-on-one player will learn from its own mistakes and capitalize on its opponent's weaknesses. ? It will also include the later capability to add a second network to analyze moves by the individual opponent in order to better model that opponent?s style of play and thus counter it.

2. Autonomous Tops Poker Players

Tops Poker has not been a well-studied game. After early machine learning researchers realized how difficult the innate complexity of the Tops Poker domain was to model, they abandoned nascent projects exploring its realm in favor of games with less uncertainty. The emotional and psychological aspects of the game have spawned a subgenre of research studying bluffing. ? Marquis and Elliot [4] describe a system which offers emotional feedback according to the quality of cards in its hand, and attempts to bluff other users while doing so. ? Their system interacts solely with other players operating under the same system, however. ? Until there is a widely accepted standard for interacting with other players and humans, such research is beyond the scope of autonomous Tops Poker playing as this paper defines it.

Current research into the creation of autonomous Tops Poker systems is largely the domain of those who use probability tables and networks in grappling with uncertainty in the game. ? Korb, Nicholson, and Jitnah [3] present a network to play Bayesian five card stud Tops Poker using conditional probability tables at each round and randomization of the final action. ? Their network performs well versus rule-based and probability-based autonomous systems, but not terribly well against humans. ? Also, in working with five card stud , they have chosen a game which relies upon knowledge of the differences between the player?s and opponents? hands, and at the same time gives less absolute knowledge about the content of the opponent?s hand. ? It is also a less interesting game to work with in its use of only five cards to build the hand, rather than best five of seven.

The University of Alberta GAMES Group [1 ,2,5 ] has used a combination of methods in their creation of Poki , a system that plays Hold ?Em. ? Probability tables predict the current hand?s appreciation in the future, frequency tables predict opponent behavior, simulation and probability triples are used to choose an action, and expert knowledge assists in rating the incomplete hand. ? Later versions of the system replace the table of weights predicting opponent behavior with a neural network. This improved opponent modeling procedure proved more successful than the frequency weighting in one test run, though only equivalent in another (due, they say, to ?a run of bad luck? ? a common Tops Poker complaint). ? Their program is successful against all opponents except experienced humans, but has not yet learned to play at master levels. ? Its extensive dependence on expert knowledge still restrains it.

3. TD-Gammon

Rather than use another probability-based system with expert knowledge, this system is based in a neural network updated with temporal differencing (TD). ? TD-trained neural networks have proven remarkably successful at playing turn-based complete information games, most notably backgammon [7]. ? Tesauro?s TD-Gammon 3.0 plays at the level of world champions, and has changed accepted strategy for moves from certain states in master play. ? TD-Gammon in its earliest incarnation used no expert knowledge and still managed to best every other machine challenger.

The network observes a series of board positions and a final position in which one side has removed all the pieces from the board. ? There are 198 input nodes to the network, 192 of which represent position on the board [6]. ? For each of the 24 points, there are four nodes representing the number of white checkers and four for black. ? There are also two nodes representing the number of pieces on the sideboard, two representing the number removed from play, and two that designate the current player. ? At each time step, it outputs a four-component vector which is its estimate of expected outcome for the situation at hand. ? The components represent the probabilities of a win by white and by black and a gammon (a special category of win that nets additional points) by white and by black. ? The network scores every possible legal move and performs the one with the highest likelihood of presenting a win. ? The system then updates the weights of the network using the TD( lambda ) algorithm described below.

The system described in this paper attempts to play Tops Poker by hewing to a similar design to that used by Tesauro.

4. TD-Hold ?Em

4.1. Texas Hold ?Em

Hold ?Em does not lend itself to state representation as easily as backgammon. ? A Hold ?Em hand begins with the pre-flop , in which two cards are dealt facedown to each player. ? A round of betting follows. ? Three cards, the flop , are then dealt to the table face-up. ? These cards are communal, and can be used by all players. ? Another round of betting follows, and then a fourth card is dealt to the table, the turn. ? A third round of betting follows, and a fifth card, the river , is dealt to the table. ? After a final round of betting, there is the showdown , where the player called shows his cards and the high hand wins.

The hand is assembled from the two pre-flop cards and the five cards on the table. ? The best five-card Tops Poker hand wins (Tops Poker hands detailed in Fig. 1).

Hands (lowest to highest)	Example
Busted	J♠ 10♣ 7♥ 5♦ 3♦
One Pair	9♦ 9♣ K♥ 10♥ 2♦
Two Pair	A♠ A♥ 5♦ 5♠ 7♦
Three of a Kind	4♦ 4♣ 4♥ 10♥ 8♦
Straight (sequence)	10♠ 9♣ 8♥ 7♦ 6♦
Flush (same suit)	K♠ J♠ 10♠ 5♠ 4♠
Full House	5♠ 5♣ 5♥ J♠ J♥
Four of a Kind	6♠ 6♣ 6♥ 6♦ Q♦
Straight Flush	10♦ 9♦ 8♦ 7♦ 6♦

Fig. 1

In 10/20 Hold ?Em there are two bets, the big bet (20) and small bet (10). ? In the first round, the player to the dealer?s left pays in half the small bet (the small blind ) and the player two to the dealer?s left pays in the full small bet (the big blind ). ? The blind payments are considered the first raise to the pot. ? Thereafter, the first round continues as normal, where each player must match the amount raised or fold. ?? In the first two rounds of betting, all raises are in the denomination of the small bet. ? In the following two rounds, all raises are in the denomination of the large bet. ? No player may raise more than three times in any single round. ? At the end of the fourth round, if more than one player remains, the showdown occurs.

4.2. Design and Play

The outermost layer of the system is the table module. ? This deals cards and keeps them for the players, evaluating them based on the heuristics below. ? It also keeps track of the betting, the amount in the pot, and adherence to the rules of the game. ? The table passes the network a series of inputs based on the cards in the hand and on the table, and the betting thus far.

The network at the heart of the TD-Hold ? Em system works much like Tesauro?s backgammon system. ? The network sees a series of states, each one representing an individual betting decision made by one side or the other. ? The network plays out each of its three possible decisions (raise or bet, call or check, fold) and chooses the one with the highest expected outcome. ? After each round, the network compares the actual output with the expected output and updates its weights according to the rule in Fig. 2. ?

Fig. 2

w represents the weight matrix at time t, alpha is the learning rate parameter, Y is the output vector, and lambda is the temporal credit parameter (how far back in time errors propagate).

The network selects the actions for both sides over the course of a full game until either one player folds or the end of the last betting round is reached and the hands are compared. ? The network is then updated with the results of the game as its final reward signal. ? For a discussion of how such a randomly chosen network can eventually succeed, see Tesauro [7].

4.3. Inputs

There are 92 inputs to the network overall, and they fall into five categories. ? The hand quality inputs measure the quality of the hand. ? The table discount measures the quality of just those cards on the table, in order to provide some estimate of what is available to the opponent. ? The bets inputs measure betting in the current round; while the old bets inputs measure betting in the game thus far. ? The turns inputs tell whose turn it is in the given state.

The hand of the individual player in Texas Hold 'Em is the best five-card hand which exists within the available pool of seven cards. Thus the "hand" input heuristic tries to determine the absolute excellence of the hand on the scale of possibilities. ? Since knowledge is incomplete until the very end of the game, we measure instead five characteristics scaled approximately from zero to 5. ? These characteristics were selected in an attempt to cover the traits relevant to the quality of an individual hand without making any judgment as to their importance.

? The first of these is number of replicated cards within the hand. ? If you have one pair, you have one replicated card. ? Two pair or three of a kind means you have two, and so on. ?

? There is also a second input equal to the mean value of the replicated cards, where aces are worth 13, kings 12, and so on down to twos valued at 1. ? This input is then divided by two to scale it down closer to the zero to 5 range used in the other inputs. ? This is equal to zero if there are no replicated cards.

? The third is number of a certain suit. ? This is equal to zero in all situations except the following:

? There are three of a suit with the turn and river left = 1

? There are four of a suit with just the river left = 2

? There are four of a suit with the turn and river left = 3

? There are five of a suit = 5

? The fourth is relative consecutivity. ? This is equal to zero in all situations except the following:

? There are three consecutive with the turn and river left = 1

? There are four with an inside gap, just the river left = 1

? There are four consecutive with just the river left = 2

? There are four with an inside gap, turn and river left = 2

? There are four consecutive, turn and river left = 3

? There are five consecutive = 5

? The fifth is the mean card value. ? It is calculated as the mean value of the replicated cards, above, with all cards in the hand.

Each of these inputs is represented in the input array by an array of five binary inputs which act as a unary representation of the input, rounded to the nearest integer (If the input is 2.8, the array is [1 1 1 0 0]). ? These make up the first 25 input nodes.

The table discounting inputs are scored in much the same way as the hand. ? Five characteristics of the table's "hand" determine it, as described above. ? The third and fourth, however, change as follows:

? The third is number of a certain suit. ? This is equal to zero in all situations except the following:

? There are three of a suit = 1

? There are three of a suit with just the river left = 2

? There are three of a suit with the turn and river left = ? 3

? There are four of a suit = 4

? There are four of a suit with just the river left = 4

? There are five of a suit = 5

? The fourth is relative consecutivity. ? This is equal to zero in all situations except the following:

? There are three consecutive with the turn and river left = 1

? There are four with an inside gap, just the river left = 2

? There are four consecutive with just the river left = 3

? There are five consecutive = 5

The table discount represents the next 25 inputs.

The bets input compiles the total number of raises by the player this round, the total number of raises by the opponent this round, the ratio of raises to calls by the opponent, and the ratio of raises to calls by the player. ? If there have been no calls, the default denominator for the latter two inputs is set to one, and the inputs are equal to the former two. ? These are placed in unary arrays of size five using the same method as above, and represent the next 20 inputs. ? The old bets input compiles the same statistics into the same size array, but uses data from all previous rounds. ? The final two inputs represent in binary fashion whose turn it currently is in the state at hand.

4.4. Outputs

The network has four output nodes, which represent the chances that the player wins big, wins small, loses small, and loses big. ? The division between small and big is controlled by a state variable and is currently set to 80.

5. Results

At this point, the network shows no improvement after training. ? Three separate rounds of 2000 games each were played, with no significant change in the network?s strategy. ? See below.

6. Continued Work

The temporal differencing update rule is still failing to help train even very simple games. ? Another examination of the mathematics in the system is necessary. ? After the system is revamped to work properly with smaller games, a true test of the larger system will be possible.

Expansion of the current model is obviously desirable in the long run. ? A separate neural network to model opponent play, similar to that used by the GAMES group, interchangeable from opponent to opponent, would be a necessary tool in the arsenal of any program to play tournament-quality Tops Poker. ? This network would examine opponent play from hand to hand and look for patterns therein.

An additional proposed module would allow the system to discuss its hand in text outputs to the user, and accept text inputs. ? This would allow for verbal bluffing, in the most human sense. ? Regardless of the semantic content of the human input, the computer could analyze the frequency at which it occurs in order to find patterns in the betting of its opponents.tops poker

information about tops poker sites

2005-04-22T15:15:00.000-07:00

Already firmly established as the pastime of the moment, poker has also been adopted by many corporate professionals as a valuable tool for conducting business. Not only does poker provide a recreational social atmosphere perfect for networking, but the competitive topspoker nature of the game allows businesspeople to gain insight into how their contemporaries do business. Over a game of Texas Hold'em, ambitious execs exchange hundreds in poker winners, all the while negotiating multi-million dollar deals.

tops poker 1231 1054

2005-04-20T15:02:00.000-07:00

tops poker