News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by JoeAltmaier on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @09:34AM (#20866306)
Poker is somewhat a game of probabilities related to the 52-card deck. But any professional poker player would tell you, the big pots come from reading the other players. That wouldn't change.
Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by moate on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @12:44PM (#20868400)
It's so much harder to read a hand (and player) value when there are an infinite number of possible outcomes. If I have AA in a game of hold 'em with an A on the flop, I know there's no possibly way anyone else has AAA.

If there's an infinite deck, there's now no way of knowing if I'm tied for the best hand or not. How the hell can you read a player if you have no way to possibly peg him to a hand? The game would be unplayable with an infinite deck

Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by dointheatl on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @01:20PM (#20868785)
That's also the reason that you can't play poker with multiple decks shuffled together, despite this being common in blackjack. The rules of hold 'em don't allow for the possibility of two players both having the nut flush, nor is there any concept of "five of a kind," which would of course at some point happen with multiple decks in play concurrently.
Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by cygaril on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @02:11PM (#20869388)
Two players having the same hand is no issue - just split the pot. This already happens when neither player can improve on the five community cards.

Adding five of a kind also seems like a pretty easy adjustment.

The most obvious difference is the possibility of cards matching both suit and rank. So if you have HA HK and the flop is HA HJ S2 you have both top pair and also a very strong flush draw (although HA HA would be better), a combo which is impossible on that board with a single deck.

Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by moate on Tuesday September 03, 2019 @02:23PM (#20869525)
Yes, the game can deal with these things. There's been wild card games forever and people like them just fine.

The issue is that this is a completely different game. It might be a fine game. People might like it (maybe even more than Texas Hold 'em). But this isn't the same game anymore. They're both played with the same 52 data points, but the frequency of those 52 data points makes these games and the skills needed to be good at them very different.

My previous comment of the game being "unplayable" might have been hyperbolic. The point I was trying to make is that it's not the same game when you change one of the rules so dramatically.

Re:A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018) by JoeAltmaier on Wednesday September 04, 2019 @08:04AM (#20876287)
I'd venture that many modern players learned the game online. So future players can learn the new game online.