Thursday, August 22, 2013

Should Poker Be (A Tiny Bit) More Like Chess?

There are similarities between tournament poker and tournament chess, and many serious chess players, including some grandmasters, have taken up poker with success. Poker is a much, much richer game, however, because there is more variance in outcomes when weaker and stronger players face each other. Thousands of poker players pay $1000, $1500, or even $10,000 to enter poker tournaments, routinely creating multimillion-dollar prize pools. Most chess tournaments, except for invitational events reserved for the very top players in a country or the world, also charge entry fees, but tournament chess doesn't have enough variance to get people to put up even $1000 (in today's dollars) to play. So it's a good thing that poker isn't more like chess in the way that stronger chess players are very likely to win against weaker ones.

But as I was reading the August 21 issue of Card Player magazine recently, I stumbled across a discussion that got me thinking that poker still needs some improving. In a column called "The Rules Guy" (which is not yet available online) I read the following:

The Rules Guy: Props to Antonio Esfandiari. TRG salutes Antonio Esfandiari for saying "You're both out of line" to Jungleman (Dan Cates) and Scott Seiver after their intense verbal altercation on a Party Poker Premier League VI broadcast. A calming voice can, well, work magic.
What happened, in a nutshell, was that Cates had broken the rules by acting out of turn several times at the table. Acting out of turn means betting, folding, or doing other things you normally do when it is your turn to bet, but doing them before it is your turn. This is bad because it gives the players who are supposed to act before you information about your hand strength and intentions that they aren't supposed to have. Therefore it can help those players, and also hurt other players. It can also be a way of colluding with others at the table, which is obviously a fundamental no-no. Seiver called out Cates on his repeated out-of-turn acting, Cates said something in response, Seiver said "it's like actual cheating," Cates used the f-word, and it went on from there.

At some point, according to the article, Esfandiari said, "You're both out of line. You're [Cates] out of line for acting out of turn; you're [Seiver] out of line for attacking him." He is portrayed as the level-headed hero of the whole episode and gets "props" from The Pseudonymous Rules Guy.

When I was at the World Series of Poker this past June, I played in a $1500 buy-in no limit hold'em tournament. I was doing pretty well at my first table, but then the table broke and I was moved to a table of mostly younger players, plus one very well-known pro: Phil Laak, who is a close friend of Antonio Esfandiari. (They appear together on the ESPN broadcasts and even co-hosted an entire series about prop betting a few years back.) Laak was three seats to my right, and he was acting just like he acts on all the televised poker events that love to show him. He was hamming it up, saying crazy and clever things, acting alternately bored and intensely interested, jumping up to take an occasional picture with a fan, making friends with everyone, and so on.

Laak was in the last hand before the dinner break. The clock had run down, so everyone was free to go if they wanted to, but I stayed at the table to see the hand play out. Laak was heads-up against the player to his left (two seats to my right). There was much betting, and after the river card was dealt Laak went all-in. His opponent started thinking about this major decision of whether to call or fold. He had enough chips to call without being knocked out, but a lot of chips were at stake.

By this point Esfandiari had come over to our table. I don't know if he was playing in the same tournament, another tournament, or what, but he came to talk to Laak about plans for the dinner break. The two of them were talking, while Laak was in the hand, even before Laak had made his final all-in bet. This seems bad to me. Why should any player who is in a hand be allowed to say anything to anyone else while the hand is going on? But it got worse.

As Laak's opponent, who as far as I could tell did not know Laak personally, or at least was not great friends with him, was thinking over his decision, Esfandiari leaned over him and said something like "Hurry up and fold, we want to go eat!" Those probably weren't his exact words; I didn't write them down. But he clearly spoke to the player whose turn it was to act, and clearly spoke to him about one of the actions he was contemplating. He didn't just say "hurry up"—he mentioned folding too.

Now I don't think Esfandiari knew what Laak's hand was. Perhaps he was just goofing around because he was hungry and wanted to go and eat. But I wouldn't be surprised if he was also trying to help Laak just a little bit, perhaps unconsciously, by throwing Laak's opponent off his train of thought, or by sewing doubt about the right play to make.

As it happened, the guy didn't seem bothered by Esfandiari and didn't complain about him. He eventually called, only to find that Laak had made a straight flush on the river. In retrospect, he should have taken the "advice" and folded.

Regardless, I found Esfandiari's actions appalling. I didn't say anything, not being an expert in poker rules and etiquette, and not being involved in the hand, but I thought that if this was legal, it was a very big difference from chess. In a chess tournament, you aren't allowed to do anything close to that. If a friend of Magnus Carlsen walked up to Carlsen's opponent and said "just resign already" while he was thinking about his next move ... I cannot imagine what would happen, since it's so far outside the realm of possibility. Garry Kasparov used to be criticized severely for making faces during games in reaction to his opponent's moves. This is orders of magnitude worse.

Esfandiari may have been right about Cates and Seiver (though I think repeatedly acting out of turn is worse than getting pissed off at someone for repeatedly acting out of turn), but I think he was wrong to say a single word to Laak, or especially Laak's opponent, while their hand was in progress. It doesn't matter that he's a famous pro, or that he's the all-time biggest money winner in tournament poker, or that he's considered to be a nice guy. Let's keep poker different from chess in all the ways that matter for its popularity, but let's make it more like chess by enacting or enforcing rules that help each player, amateur and pro alike, make their decisions by themselves, in peace.


  1. I would think you'd have mentioned the Fundamental Theorem of Poker here, and noted that players have widely different degrees of how much of that they display outside of the actual hand. Phil and Antonio are definitely on the far side. (NB I know them both, Phil since way before poker.) Some folks are just "anglier" than others. That it's ingrained in poker and not in chess (ignoring Korchnoi's endgame play and Tal's sacrifices) isn't likely to change. It's amazing enough that such an important and useful expression as "Fuck you!" has been banned...

  2. Hi Elliott. Thanks for commenting! It's great to hear from you. I certainly agree that some people gesture more, talk more, etc. during hands. But shouldn't this be more acceptable when it is their turn to act, rather than their opponent's turn? And shouldn't one's friend who wanders over to the table be prohibited from talking during a hand one is in, especially to one's opponent? I certainly don't want to take away legitimate occasions for interacting with the opponent. I just want to take away deliberate attempts to disturb him while he is making a decision -- especially attempts by people not in the hand. Do you agree? Or have I completely misunderstood the point you are trying to make?

  3. I would think that any possible signalling between players, or between a player and someone outside the game, should be a major concern. No one can tell what "let's get dinner" might mean because players could have a list of terms they planned to use to signal various things. There should be no talking during a hand.

  4. Christopher, I think what you witnessed was way out of line. You should send that to the rules guy. These guys are psychological pros. IMO, Esfandiari made the player, who was probably feigning indifference (which players try hard to do to keep their hands under wraps), feel teased and small and/or think, why does he want me to fold.

    In the first scenario, imagine having to walk away doing what he asked you to do even if you were going to do it anyway. Now, instead of kust going through the game play to glean information your put in a position to figure out why he did that as wekk. It introduces, what I feel, should not be a part of the game. This is not supposed to be a Fat Tony game in some back alley warehouse. You should be able to play the game based on the moves but why should you have to deal with that.

    1. Great post Christopher! I completely agree with shag007. As soon as you described the action that Esfandiari took during that game, I thought, "Ah, he sees that his friend has a strong hand, or at least knows that his friend has a strong hand because he knows his friend, and he's trying to influence the opponent to call, and therefore lose significantly more money to the strong hand."

      I feel like it almost has to have been deliberate. No way to prove that, but either way it's pretty damn close to cheating.

      I definitely agree that poker should clamp down harder on outside-of-table influences like that. Interactions between opponents could be left alone (although obviously someone needs to step in if a fight breaks out), but certainly people outside the game should be KEPT outside. I actually think that would be MORE important in poker than in chess, since the psychological aspect is much stronger in poker.

      Chess is really a little more like golf, where there is a delicate situation, and the fans and other players are expected to give the player whose turn it is room to consider and make their move.

      Poker is meant to seem unruly AT the table, but it should not be unruly beyond that. If they allow things like what happened at the game you were in, then it's only a short stretch to letting someone jump into the ring and smack the players around with a chair.

  5. Great post Christopher! I completely agree with shag007.
    Millionaire Chess

  6. Whats up very nice website!! Man .. Beautiful .. Superb .. I’ll bookmark your website and take the feeds also¡KI am happy to search out a lot of helpful information here in the post, we need work out more techniques on this regard, thanks for sharing.

    domino 99 indonesia
    domino qiuqiu online
    bandar qq
    Bandar Qiu

    judi domino 99
    BandarQ | BandarQ Online | Agen BandarQ | Domino99 | Agen Domino | AduQ Online Terbaik

  7. Indeed, there's a link between chess and poker. When playing either chess or poker, you have to focus and work out the best move to make.BetCode.

  8. Indeed, there's a link between chess and poker. When playing either chess or poker, you have to focus and work out the best move to make.BetCode.

  9. Great work. You explained the things very clearly. I am expecting these kinds of blogs from you again! All the to write a good research paper






    -DEPOSIT 20.000

    -WITHDRAW 50.000


    -CASHBACK 10%




    fans page facebook

    line official

    BBM Pin : 5649B320

  11. I have read an article about poker chess in case study report writing service. the article has clearly explained the Basic Rules of Poker Chess.

  12. Most game developers know that detailed plans are never accurate and are usually Play Pokies Aristocrat

  13. Kyrie Irving and the Cleveland Cavaliers are still riding high off the momentum from last season’s incredible NBA Finals win, but with Nike Flyknit 4.0 the upcoming season only a few weeks away, there’s still plenty to figure out as the dust settles before the Cavs Nike Store hang their first banner in the rafters. Early reports had the Nike Kyrie 3 slated for a late-November early-December preview from Nike Roshe Run Nike Basketball with design duties likely handed over to Leo Chang once again. But now we have word from Kyrie himself lebron soldier 10 courtesy of WFNY’s Scott Sargent confirming that the Kyrie 3 will release on January 21st, 2017. According to Irving:“I think we Kevin Durant Shoes release on January 21st but I definitely will be wearing a pair of 3s for Christmas and going forward for any Kyrie 2 other holidays,” Kyrie said following the Cavalier’s Thursday shootaround. “January 21st is what we’re looking to aim at. I’m excited. I’m Nike Janoski excited to put the product out to you guys and the stories behind the shoes and the creative behind it. I LeBron shoes get really juiced up about it. I get to put my artistic mind to the test.”Stay tuned for an upcoming preview KD shoes of the Nike Kyrie 3 right here on Sneaker News and in the meantime, check out the latest colorways of Irving’s nike free flyknit Nike Kyrie 2.
    The Nike HyperAdapt 1.0, the self-lacing wonder that debuted back in March during Nike’s Innovation For Everybody event Nike Free Flyknit in NYC, is due up for a release very soon. Retailing at $720, the HyperAdapt 1.0, which features Electro Adaptive Reactive Nike Air Max Outlet Lacing, will release as follows:On November 28th, select Nike+ members will have the opportunity to purchase the Black/Blue Lagoon colorway via LeBron 11 an invite through the Nike+ App. On December 1st, Nike+ members will have the opportunity to test out the shoes at Nike Shox the Nike SoHo store and the Nike Clubhouse on 45 Grand, also located in SoHo; information regarding reservations for the trials Nike Air Max Zero

  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

  15. Enjoy the uk online poker sites for my website to first deposit bonus card enjoy the betting with Playdoit.

  16. One well known tournament of poker concept is that you need to play to make due with a specific end goal to allow yourself to win. That idea is much similar to resembles being reminded that you need to take with a specific end goal to remain alive.Gamedesire

  17. I like poker and rummy tournaments because in these tournaments everybody learn something. who they do not won the match but they learn skills and strategies. so take part in this games and try to win the game.

  18. The poker is one of my favorite game, I love to play this game with my friends.It is an amazing game which helps me freshen up my mind. I also love to play a rummy game and learned its tricks from a rummycircle review.

  19. Do you get baffled settling on choices on the stream? Well stay away from these basic poker botches with this mystery data on how figure stream chances immediately.See More

  20. Frequently ignored, this essential question must be replied before you can seek after your fantasy of turning into a long haul effective poker player. This article analyzes the qualities and shortcomings of four well known settings to play. Click here

  21. its more then chess. But a chess lover never admit it that poker is better then chess..
    Cat Ninja Game
    Toss The Turtle

  22. We are proficient in writing finance assignmentsand projects under the short deadlines and offer a chance to the students to excel in their finance projects.

  23. I sent your articles links to all my contacts and they all adore it including me poker online.

  24. It's my great pleasure to visit your blog and to enjoy your great posts here. I like it a lot. I can feel that you paid much attention for those articles, as all of them make sense and are very useful. Check Also: radar detector 2018

  25. The latest rage by poker aficionados and programmers is to create and use a poker bot that will automatically play online poker with little or no human interaction, with the ultimate goal of winning money.

  26. I often get emotionally involved. Like when I read your post, I can cry, laugh, sad, funny, depending on your written words. I think you are a sensitive person.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.