Home   |   News    |   Discussions   |   Books   |   Curiosities
Search
Custom Search
Popular Reads

Earthquakes and animal behavior
LHC may produce time travelling particles
Country boys boast bigger junk
Running the numbers on alien life
Uh-oh, placebo
Forgetful? Blame your house
Pill to blame for rise in prostate cancer?
Cat parasite has global ambitions
Carbon monoxide keeps city dwellers happy
Magnetic field alters moral judgments
Stars manufacturing organic matter?
Unnatural selection: Courtesy of The Pill
Men 2% funnier than women
Parasite rewires sexual attraction
Novel psychiatric drugs take aim at gut bacteria
Discussions
General Science

Not-Quite Science

Physics

Climate Change

Science Fiction

Past Forums

Sponsored Links
Browse

Animal Kingdom

Biology

Climate Change

Environment

Evolution

Genetics

Humans

Mind & Brain

Prehistory

Health & Diet

Health Threats

Health & Environment

Health: From The Lab

Mental Health

Reproductive Health

Energy Alternatives

Chemistry

Computing & Electronics

Nanotechnology

Pimping Nature

Robotics & AI

Physics

Space


Curiosities
Sci Shop
Peculiar and bizarre scientific stuff that you didn't even know existed and you don't need.
Books
Book Reviews
Rusty Rockets lists his all-time favorite science titles.
Archives
2012 2011 2010
2009 2008 2007
2006 2005 2004
2003 2002 2001
2000 1999 1998
Feature Archive


13 January 2010
Poker paradox: the more hands you win, the more money you lose
by Kate Melville

Analyzing more than 27 million hands of No-Limit Texas Hold'em, a Cornell researcher has found that the more hands players win, the less money they're likely to collect - especially when it comes to novice players. The study was published in the Journal of Gambling Studies.

Cornell's Kyle Siler hypothesizes that the multiple wins are likely for small stakes, and the more you play, the more likely you will eventually be walloped by occasional - but significant - losses. "[The finding] coincides with observations in behavioral economics that people overweigh their frequent small gains vis-à-vis occasional large losses, and vice versa," Siler explained. In other words, players feel positively reinforced by their streak of wins but have difficulty fully understanding how their occasional large losses offset their gains.

Interestingly, Siler's research also established that for small-stakes players, small pairs (from twos to sevens) were actually more valuable than medium pairs (eights through jacks). "This is because small pairs have a less ambiguous value, and medium pairs are better hands but have more ambiguous values that small-stakes players apparently have trouble understanding," said Siler, a poker aficionado himself.

The research has wider application in how humans handle risk and uncertainty, according to Siler. "Riskiness may be profitable, especially in higher-stakes games, but it also increases the variance and uncertainty in payoffs. Living one's life, calibrating multiple strategies and managing a bankroll is particularly challenging when enduring wild and erratic swings in short-term luck and results."

Siler concludes that in online poker, the biggest opponent for many players may be themselves, "given the challenges of optimizing one's mindset and strategies, both in the card game and the meta-games of psychology, rationality and socio-economic arbitrage which hover beneath it," he mused.

Related:
Parkinson's Drug Sparks Gambling Fever
Gamblers' Brains Wired For Failure
Stoned On Money

Source: Cornell University


Social

Follow Science a GoGo


Home         All The News      Science Forum         Books, Books, Books         Curiosity Shop         About

The terms and conditions governing your use of this website.
Copyright © 1997 - 2012 Science a Go Go and its licensors. All rights reserved.