If poker is easier than chess, can you tell me why it takes chess players so much longer to become elite players than it does poker players? There are poker players who only began to play seriously several years ago that now dominate the tournament circuit. The Grinder comes to mind. Can you name a single top level chess player that did it in five years? Such a thing is *IMPOSSIBLE* in chess. What about in ten years? In fifteen? In 20? A rare breed can do it in 20. A true prodigy in fifteen. The best chess players without exception begin to seriously study the game before age ten and the vast majority do not reach grandmaster level until in their 20's on average. Another few years to reach the very top (there are about 1000 grandmasters in the world).
The idea that because a computer can play chess better than poker means chess is easier is utter stupidity. Computers can do differential equations too. Does that mean poker is harder than a career in math? Computers also don't experience emotion. Does that say something about the difficulty of humans to feel emotion? Is it "difficult" to feel emotions? Some effort involved? No, it's just something we have innately that computers do not possess. There are elements of poker that require abilities beyond that of a computer. This says nothing about how "difficult" it is master poker.
The amount of time and effort it becomes to be a world-class chess player dwarfs that required to become a world-class poker player which is easily proven and does indicate that for humans, chess is far more difficult than poker.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Poker vs Chess
Earlier, we posted this item about computers, chess and poker. The post provoked a couple of exchanges with a contribution by former chess player Bradley Loh. But now another poster has waded in and he has some interesting things to say. We think it worthwhile to give that a response a post of its own.
Posted by The Closet Grandmaster at 10:49 am