Star Trek poker
Thread Rating:
March 16th, 2018 at 10:45:45 AM
permalink
The death of Stephen Hawking this week got me running to YouTube to watch his appearance in "Star Trek: The Next Generation."
I hadn't paid attention to the poker play in this episode, but did this time and noticed this scene, like many others in TNG, has nonsensical poker procedure. It's so rife with error that I won’t even bother explaining it. I will say that it certainly *sounds* like a rousing game of poker! Here's the action:
Clockwise at the poker table from Data are holograms of Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and Sir Isaac Newton.
—Einstein recalls that Hawking raised Data 4. He mistakenly calculates that the bet is 7 to him.
—Newton corrects Einstein by saying the bet is 10 to him. The sound of a clinking of chips indicates that Einstein calls.
—After some discussion, Newton says the action is to Hawking, who now raises 50.
—Newton and Data fold.
—Einstein, sensing a bluff, calls.
—Hawking shows quad 7s.
During the poker craze of the 2000s, my friend and I watched with more scrutiny over what the crew of the Enterprise-D was doing in the episode Cause and Effect. Yes, I know it's television and the writers are just trying to tell their story for the non-poker-playing masses (for extra flair, they often make the obligatory string bets). They're even playing 5 Card Stud for goodness' sake! I don't fault them for errors, but I would have been really impressed had the show got the game right. (One pet peeve was always that Worf turns over his hole card for all to see—definitely a poker faux pas!)
Because this is the Internet, here's an overanalysis of their game from an unedited transcript of the emails my friend and I exchanged. You're welcome!
So I'm watching TNG right now with a deck of cards....
Data: _ 4 9 6 9 (I'm assuming everybody has a rainbow)
Riker: _ 8 10 J 7
Worf: 3 A 7 4 J (yeah he did turn over his hole card
right before turning everything face down)
Beverly: _ Q Q 2 8
1 rd, no bet
2 rd, Bev opens with 10, everyone calls
3 rd, Bev leads with 20, Will raises "and 50 more",
everyone calls
4 rd, Bev leads with 20, Data folds, Will raises, Worf
folds, and Bev reraises, Will reraises, and Bev calls.
Data shows a pair of 9s, I doubt he has 2 pair since
he didn't go against Bev's 2 Q's at the end, unless he
thought Bev had a Q in the hole. Why did he call
Will's first raise when he only had the first 9? If
he had a 9 in the hole, why fold at Bev's rd 4 lead?
Worf should also have folded with Will's raise, but
Klingons have gaul, so I can see him staying in.
Will was bluffing one of 2 9's (gut shot straight
draw), since Data was showing the other 2 9's. Bev
could have had either of the 2 other Q's (3 Q's), or
one of the 3 2's or one of the 2 8's (2 pair); or not
and just a pair.
My response was:
You watched that in quite detail. I wonder if the writers had each round of betting scripted. I doubt it, though.
Data's betting doesn't make much sense. He woud have needed either an A or K in the hole, and hope he pairs one of those to beat Crusher's pair of queens after the second up-card. It's possible data had a 4 in the hole, in which case he would stay in hoping for a 4 to make three-of-a-kind. But since Worf got one of his 4s, he was facing long odds to win the hand. Perhaps Riker's raise put enough money in the pot to make the "pot odds" correct for him to try for the last 4, but I doubt it. If he had 9s and 4s after the last round (he definitely didn't have three 9s) he would have at least called Crusher on the last round, even with Riker's straight draw showing. With 2 pair, calling a bet of 20 with a pot that big is the correct play, and calling Crusher would also prevent Riker from trying to bluff *two* players.
Dr. Crusher definitely should have reraised Riker's raise of 50. At that point, he was without question trailing Crusher's 2 queens, and the correct strategy would be to make it expensive for him to try for his straight.
His response:
I would think the betting was scripted; and then the
cards were then scripted to match the "action". The
important part was the play between Will and Bev.
Leading to Bev calling Will's bluff; because she
"remembered" what he had. When we first see the poker
game, the Enterprise had already exploded once
onscreen.*
And since Worf and Data ultimately folded, their hands
weren't important. Come to think of it, Worf should
have lead out with the first A (bluffing that he had
an A in the hole).
*I come up with about 46 times through the causality
loop. Worf says that their chronometers are off 17.4
hours. I assume the poker game was at 9pm and the
crash occurred just after the 6am morning meeting
(9.078hr loop).
Wait, it could be *47* times (the loop being 8.88
hrs)! Owing to the inside joke about 47 with the TNG
writers!
My response:
excellent analysis!
did you notice how Data's cards are neatly lined up in front of him, while everyone else's cards are just kind of piled about? (though, he *is* the dealer and would more likely place the cards, rather than drop them)
one last poker note: usually in stud games (5-card, 7-card), the last card is dealt face-down.
His response:
Didn't notice the neatness, but it fits Data's
character. I did notice that Data looked at his hole
card right before he folded. Not like he can forget
what card he had...
I was wondering about the amount of face up cards!
Hard to bluff when the rest of the table knows 4/5 of
you hand!
But it moves the story along much faster. A 7 card
game would have taken longer to "play", and only
showing 3 cards would have made it harder to show that
Will was bluffing a straight. Although they could
have given him an open-ended draw. And with Bev
showing her pair [chuckle] and two hole cards, I think
it would be harder to bluff.
Also, Troi is normally at these games. I'd think she
was omitted for time.
My response:
Yeah, I remember him looking at his hole card, as well. That's probably a cultural sub-routine, where he's observed that although players clearly remember their hole card(s), they look one more time to admire their hands before folding.
Yep, they made a simplistic game even simpler with that "house rule." Probably not much of an exciting game in the long run.
And finally, I agree for storytelling purposes they probably kept the poker table simple. It usually takes 5 or 6 people to make poker interesting. Good poker players will fold most of the time, so 4-handed, it'll be rare to get a good pot going. Unless everyone calls like in this scene.
His response:
I'm surprised I haven't found any analysis of ST poker
games online.
[Editor's note: you have now!]
I hadn't paid attention to the poker play in this episode, but did this time and noticed this scene, like many others in TNG, has nonsensical poker procedure. It's so rife with error that I won’t even bother explaining it. I will say that it certainly *sounds* like a rousing game of poker! Here's the action:
Clockwise at the poker table from Data are holograms of Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and Sir Isaac Newton.
—Einstein recalls that Hawking raised Data 4. He mistakenly calculates that the bet is 7 to him.
—Newton corrects Einstein by saying the bet is 10 to him. The sound of a clinking of chips indicates that Einstein calls.
—After some discussion, Newton says the action is to Hawking, who now raises 50.
—Newton and Data fold.
—Einstein, sensing a bluff, calls.
—Hawking shows quad 7s.
During the poker craze of the 2000s, my friend and I watched with more scrutiny over what the crew of the Enterprise-D was doing in the episode Cause and Effect. Yes, I know it's television and the writers are just trying to tell their story for the non-poker-playing masses (for extra flair, they often make the obligatory string bets). They're even playing 5 Card Stud for goodness' sake! I don't fault them for errors, but I would have been really impressed had the show got the game right. (One pet peeve was always that Worf turns over his hole card for all to see—definitely a poker faux pas!)
Because this is the Internet, here's an overanalysis of their game from an unedited transcript of the emails my friend and I exchanged. You're welcome!
So I'm watching TNG right now with a deck of cards....
Data: _ 4 9 6 9 (I'm assuming everybody has a rainbow)
Riker: _ 8 10 J 7
Worf: 3 A 7 4 J (yeah he did turn over his hole card
right before turning everything face down)
Beverly: _ Q Q 2 8
1 rd, no bet
2 rd, Bev opens with 10, everyone calls
3 rd, Bev leads with 20, Will raises "and 50 more",
everyone calls
4 rd, Bev leads with 20, Data folds, Will raises, Worf
folds, and Bev reraises, Will reraises, and Bev calls.
Data shows a pair of 9s, I doubt he has 2 pair since
he didn't go against Bev's 2 Q's at the end, unless he
thought Bev had a Q in the hole. Why did he call
Will's first raise when he only had the first 9? If
he had a 9 in the hole, why fold at Bev's rd 4 lead?
Worf should also have folded with Will's raise, but
Klingons have gaul, so I can see him staying in.
Will was bluffing one of 2 9's (gut shot straight
draw), since Data was showing the other 2 9's. Bev
could have had either of the 2 other Q's (3 Q's), or
one of the 3 2's or one of the 2 8's (2 pair); or not
and just a pair.
My response was:
You watched that in quite detail. I wonder if the writers had each round of betting scripted. I doubt it, though.
Data's betting doesn't make much sense. He woud have needed either an A or K in the hole, and hope he pairs one of those to beat Crusher's pair of queens after the second up-card. It's possible data had a 4 in the hole, in which case he would stay in hoping for a 4 to make three-of-a-kind. But since Worf got one of his 4s, he was facing long odds to win the hand. Perhaps Riker's raise put enough money in the pot to make the "pot odds" correct for him to try for the last 4, but I doubt it. If he had 9s and 4s after the last round (he definitely didn't have three 9s) he would have at least called Crusher on the last round, even with Riker's straight draw showing. With 2 pair, calling a bet of 20 with a pot that big is the correct play, and calling Crusher would also prevent Riker from trying to bluff *two* players.
Dr. Crusher definitely should have reraised Riker's raise of 50. At that point, he was without question trailing Crusher's 2 queens, and the correct strategy would be to make it expensive for him to try for his straight.
His response:
I would think the betting was scripted; and then the
cards were then scripted to match the "action". The
important part was the play between Will and Bev.
Leading to Bev calling Will's bluff; because she
"remembered" what he had. When we first see the poker
game, the Enterprise had already exploded once
onscreen.*
And since Worf and Data ultimately folded, their hands
weren't important. Come to think of it, Worf should
have lead out with the first A (bluffing that he had
an A in the hole).
*I come up with about 46 times through the causality
loop. Worf says that their chronometers are off 17.4
hours. I assume the poker game was at 9pm and the
crash occurred just after the 6am morning meeting
(9.078hr loop).
Wait, it could be *47* times (the loop being 8.88
hrs)! Owing to the inside joke about 47 with the TNG
writers!
My response:
excellent analysis!
did you notice how Data's cards are neatly lined up in front of him, while everyone else's cards are just kind of piled about? (though, he *is* the dealer and would more likely place the cards, rather than drop them)
one last poker note: usually in stud games (5-card, 7-card), the last card is dealt face-down.
His response:
Didn't notice the neatness, but it fits Data's
character. I did notice that Data looked at his hole
card right before he folded. Not like he can forget
what card he had...
I was wondering about the amount of face up cards!
Hard to bluff when the rest of the table knows 4/5 of
you hand!
But it moves the story along much faster. A 7 card
game would have taken longer to "play", and only
showing 3 cards would have made it harder to show that
Will was bluffing a straight. Although they could
have given him an open-ended draw. And with Bev
showing her pair [chuckle] and two hole cards, I think
it would be harder to bluff.
Also, Troi is normally at these games. I'd think she
was omitted for time.
My response:
Yeah, I remember him looking at his hole card, as well. That's probably a cultural sub-routine, where he's observed that although players clearly remember their hole card(s), they look one more time to admire their hands before folding.
Yep, they made a simplistic game even simpler with that "house rule." Probably not much of an exciting game in the long run.
And finally, I agree for storytelling purposes they probably kept the poker table simple. It usually takes 5 or 6 people to make poker interesting. Good poker players will fold most of the time, so 4-handed, it'll be rare to get a good pot going. Unless everyone calls like in this scene.
His response:
I'm surprised I haven't found any analysis of ST poker
games online.
[Editor's note: you have now!]
March 16th, 2018 at 11:24:20 AM
permalink
As an avid TNG fan and sometime-poker player, I never noticed any crazy inaccuracies that bothered me. Usually, the script of the episode mandated that someone got bluffed or called on a bluff etc. and generally the action was "accurate enough" for the casual player not to notice. I always forget that string bets aren't allowed since they are pretty much REQUIRED to be in any TV/movie about poker.
But good analysis. Well done.
But good analysis. Well done.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
March 16th, 2018 at 11:29:06 AM
permalink
Before the poker boom in the early 2000's, I never played in a casual game where betting was consistent or made sense as far as raises and re-raises and all of that. Even nowadays when I (rarely) play, outside of a tournament setting or for any real money, nobody really pays attention to that stuff. Super-casual poker players like me don't think about odds or pot odds or check-raising or any of that other poker math that constitutes "good" play, so I guess that's why I never thought the poker scenes in TNG were all that unrealistic. Keep in mind they're not playing for money, and they rarely play at that (I think Picard says in one episode something like he hasn't played in months).
As far as Data looking at the cards he would obviously have memorized, you're right in that it's a specifically programmed sub-routine. It's been mentioned throughout the series that Data has been programmed to act more human and do things he doesn't need to do to better fit in with people around him.
As far as Data looking at the cards he would obviously have memorized, you're right in that it's a specifically programmed sub-routine. It's been mentioned throughout the series that Data has been programmed to act more human and do things he doesn't need to do to better fit in with people around him.
March 16th, 2018 at 11:34:14 AM
permalink
Wouldn't Troi's empath abilities allow her to know immediately whether or not someone was bluffing (except Data)?
March 16th, 2018 at 11:34:54 AM
permalink
Some of the things that bugged me about those was splashing the pot and string raises.
March 16th, 2018 at 11:35:15 AM
permalink
Quote: TigerWuBefore the poker boom in the early 2000's, I never played in a casual game where betting was consistent or made sense as far as raises and re-raises and all of that. Even nowadays when I (rarely) play, outside of a tournament setting or for any real money, nobody really pays attention to that stuff. Super-casual poker players like me don't think about odds or pot odds or check-raising or any of that other poker math that constitutes "good" play, so I guess that's why I never thought the poker scenes in TNG were all that unrealistic. Keep in mind they're not playing for money, and they rarely play at that (I think Picard says in one episode something like he hasn't played in months).
As far as Data looking at the cards he would obviously have memorized, you're right in that it's a specifically programmed sub-routine. It's been mentioned throughout the series that Data has been programmed to act more human and do things he doesn't need to do to better fit in with people around him.
Picard only played in the game once, in the last scene of the finale!
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
March 16th, 2018 at 12:59:24 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsPicard only played in the game once, in the last scene of the finale!
That's right... I forgot about that! So he played even less than I remembered...haha...
March 16th, 2018 at 2:32:46 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsPicard only played in the game once, in the last scene of the finale!
Yeah, but he, "Should have done it a long time ago."
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
March 16th, 2018 at 6:14:05 PM
permalink
Quote: Mission146Yeah, but he, "Should have done it a long time ago."
I do always get a bit dusty at that scene...
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
March 16th, 2018 at 9:10:43 PM
permalink
Wow. Incredibly detailed analysis in that first post. Can’t we just remember that ST is supposed to be entertainment? LOL
I love the Hawking scene too. It’s the only time in ST that a cameo appearance is of someone who is playing them self.
Troi: I seem to remember her mentioning at one of the poker games, the telepath thing is something she can turn on and off, and promises to keep it off during the games. They’re all friends and such, it was accepted, and that was that.
5 card: Remember that this was before the poker boom. Most people haven’t heard of Hold Em, in fact most people haven’t heard of a game that has more than five cards. So, for an unsophisticated TV audience, 5 card makes sense.
Stud: I remember poker scenes in other episodes that were draw. Don’t know why the game in the original post was stud. In the Hawking episode it kinda makes sense since we don’t see anyone putting cards in his card holder.
Splashing the pot: Again, it’s a friendly game. Also, wasn’t it a relatively small table?
String bets: Now that’s a whole other can of worms. And again, it can happen in friendly games. And, yeah, it’s almost required whenever there’s a poker game on a TV show.
As some of you may remember me saying, I am a dealer in a pub poker league. So I have to respond to a lot of these kind of issues. I tell new players that although they see it all the time on TV, you’ll never see it on a poker show. Bottom line, when you say “I see your bet, and...” there’s no ‘and’.
Rounders: Rounders is often held as an example of a dramatic, but realistic, presentation of poker.
The biggest example of rules being broken is at the judge’s game. When Mikey starts betting for the dean, that’s two man on a hand. Absolutely forbidden.
And there are string bets. I can think of a couple But the way they did them, the way the scenes played out, they were perfect example of string bets that could have happened in real life.
There were the games vs Teddy KGB, particularly the last hand. (Everybody remembers this one.) Not only is KGB splashing the pot, he is doing it one stack at a time, string bet, while saying, “I ... bet ... it ... all.” Of course Mike isn’t gonna object, he has the nuts!
I love the Hawking scene too. It’s the only time in ST that a cameo appearance is of someone who is playing them self.
Troi: I seem to remember her mentioning at one of the poker games, the telepath thing is something she can turn on and off, and promises to keep it off during the games. They’re all friends and such, it was accepted, and that was that.
5 card: Remember that this was before the poker boom. Most people haven’t heard of Hold Em, in fact most people haven’t heard of a game that has more than five cards. So, for an unsophisticated TV audience, 5 card makes sense.
Stud: I remember poker scenes in other episodes that were draw. Don’t know why the game in the original post was stud. In the Hawking episode it kinda makes sense since we don’t see anyone putting cards in his card holder.
Splashing the pot: Again, it’s a friendly game. Also, wasn’t it a relatively small table?
String bets: Now that’s a whole other can of worms. And again, it can happen in friendly games. And, yeah, it’s almost required whenever there’s a poker game on a TV show.
As some of you may remember me saying, I am a dealer in a pub poker league. So I have to respond to a lot of these kind of issues. I tell new players that although they see it all the time on TV, you’ll never see it on a poker show. Bottom line, when you say “I see your bet, and...” there’s no ‘and’.
Rounders: Rounders is often held as an example of a dramatic, but realistic, presentation of poker.
The biggest example of rules being broken is at the judge’s game. When Mikey starts betting for the dean, that’s two man on a hand. Absolutely forbidden.
And there are string bets. I can think of a couple But the way they did them, the way the scenes played out, they were perfect example of string bets that could have happened in real life.
There were the games vs Teddy KGB, particularly the last hand. (Everybody remembers this one.) Not only is KGB splashing the pot, he is doing it one stack at a time, string bet, while saying, “I ... bet ... it ... all.” Of course Mike isn’t gonna object, he has the nuts!
I tried to find a YouTube clip, but failed.
In the scene where the opponent says “I bluffed the big ringer!” Right before that he says “You’re raising me $300? I call your $300. How much is in there Whites?”
Whites replies, “Um, $1,500”
“$1,500? Here’s $1,000... $500... I bet the pot limit, kiddo.”
In the scene where the opponent says “I bluffed the big ringer!” Right before that he says “You’re raising me $300? I call your $300. How much is in there Whites?”
Whites replies, “Um, $1,500”
“$1,500? Here’s $1,000... $500... I bet the pot limit, kiddo.”
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
March 16th, 2018 at 11:09:59 PM
permalink
Thanks for the overanalysis of my overanalysis! :D
Yes, ST is supposed to be for entertainment—that's why we talk about how Khan could possibly have known who Chekov is! And how Troi and La Forge "switch off" their abilities during poker!
Too bad the movies couldn't squeeze in a poker game with Picard present. The only great TNG movie was First Contact, and they were kinda busy.
Stud and 5 Card Draw were indeed the games of choice for TV poker before the 2000s. In the early 2000s, we enjoyed playing Stud and Omaha in Reno—the Cal Neva always had regulars at the Stud table. By mid-decade, all those games were gone. All hold'em all the time. There's occasionally an Omaha wait list at the big casinos, but I haven't seen an actual game in progress.
If I do, I'll play. And if I get a good hand, I'll see that bet … and raise with the deed to my ranch–that I've got here in my pocket!
Yes, ST is supposed to be for entertainment—that's why we talk about how Khan could possibly have known who Chekov is! And how Troi and La Forge "switch off" their abilities during poker!
Too bad the movies couldn't squeeze in a poker game with Picard present. The only great TNG movie was First Contact, and they were kinda busy.
Stud and 5 Card Draw were indeed the games of choice for TV poker before the 2000s. In the early 2000s, we enjoyed playing Stud and Omaha in Reno—the Cal Neva always had regulars at the Stud table. By mid-decade, all those games were gone. All hold'em all the time. There's occasionally an Omaha wait list at the big casinos, but I haven't seen an actual game in progress.
If I do, I'll play. And if I get a good hand, I'll see that bet … and raise with the deed to my ranch–that I've got here in my pocket!
March 17th, 2018 at 8:04:17 AM
permalink
I learned 5-card stud from my Dad when I was a kid in the early 80's. We always dealt the first down and then four up. He had a long-standing game with friends, but I don't think he ever played in a casino or card room. I have never even seen 5 Stud dealt anywhere else other than TV or movies. I thought it was a pretty boring form of poker.
One thing that always bothered me about the TNG poker games was this: in several episodes, they talk about "money not existing" in their time. If money doesn't exist, what do the chips represent? If nobody has any skin in the game, they might as well play Go Fish!
I guess it could be argued that they could be playing for something like each other's holodeck time or some other pseudo-commodity.
Oh, and don't forget that data cleans up in a game in 19th century San Francisco in Time's Arrow. I wonder if he had that much of an advantage being an android, or were 19th century poker players just not very good? I can't imagine he was able to hone his skills that much beating the likes of Riker and Worf.
One thing that always bothered me about the TNG poker games was this: in several episodes, they talk about "money not existing" in their time. If money doesn't exist, what do the chips represent? If nobody has any skin in the game, they might as well play Go Fish!
I guess it could be argued that they could be playing for something like each other's holodeck time or some other pseudo-commodity.
Oh, and don't forget that data cleans up in a game in 19th century San Francisco in Time's Arrow. I wonder if he had that much of an advantage being an android, or were 19th century poker players just not very good? I can't imagine he was able to hone his skills that much beating the likes of Riker and Worf.
"Dealer has 'rock'... Pay 'paper!'"
March 17th, 2018 at 8:06:13 AM
permalink
*oops... double post*
"Dealer has 'rock'... Pay 'paper!'"
March 17th, 2018 at 8:17:17 AM
permalink
Quote: Joeman
Oh, and don't forget that data cleans up in a game in 19th century San Francisco in Time's Arrow. I wonder if he had that much of an advantage being an android, or were 19th century poker players just not very good? I can't imagine he was able to hone his skills that much beating the likes of Riker and Worf.
I suspect for games on the Enterprise, Data turns his difficulty setting way down to "fit in" with his friends. On a real mission, he probably lets his A.I. run full force to make sure there's no chance of losing.
Remember, there was also that awesome episode where they get stuck on that "casino planet," and Data cleans up at the craps table once he discovers the game is rigged. That's probably in my top ten TNG episodes.
Love the look on his face when he starts winning... haha...
March 17th, 2018 at 8:20:18 AM
permalink
Quote: Joeman
One thing that always bothered me about the TNG poker games was this: in several episodes, they talk about "money not existing" in their time. If money doesn't exist, what do the chips represent? If nobody has any skin in the game, they might as well play Go Fish!
I also agree Five-Stud is boring. Too much hand knowledge, honestly, especially after the fifth (and maybe even the fourth card) playing one down, four up. The polar opposite is five-Card draw, where the only thing you can do is make assumptions about hands.
My favorite Five-Card draw gimmick is to only ask for one card when I have Trips (in a no Wilds game) and then play it from there. There are tons of ways that can go, but to me, the initial decision to never adverise Trips is a no-brainer. That’s at least until you’ve been playing with the same people for awhile, they eventually make adjustments. Still, even then, a single card draw could mean anything. If you want that to last a little longer, you could draw two to trips every now and then.
Oh, Star Trek! I think the Federation eliminated money, but other peoples still had forms of currency, I believe. The concept of money was certainly understood. Besides, chips could just be, “Points,” so as long as the game is not golf, you know you want to finish with the most points.
Quote:I guess it could be argued that they could be playing for something like each other's holodeck time or some other pseudo-commodity.
I don’t think that the chips would have had any real-world value whatsoever. I’ve tried to get real world bets on Monopoly, can’t drum up the interest. Point is that there is no inherent reason a Poker game MUST have any real world stakes.
Quote:Oh, and don't forget that data cleans up in a game in 19th century San Francisco in Time's Arrow. I wonder if he had that much of an advantage being an android, or were 19th century poker players just not very good? I can't imagine he was able to hone his skills that much beating the likes of Riker and Worf.
Ha!
They couldn’t have known at the time the show was created, but there are Texas Hold ‘Em programs that are essentially long-term invincible against human competition. Without that, Data would still have flawless probability analysis, inherently.
He probably could switch certain things off and back on every game. I love how Riker would always go over as this great poker player when he was truly awful.
I think Riker being the best player supports my assumption that there were rarely, if ever, real world bets or consequences. If you were ever, “Playing for something,” you would certainly learn to play better than that. It was just a character development mechanism to sell the average viewer on Riker’s unpredictability.
Kind of like how legit sciency-type people watch the show and know a lot of the science stuff is complete bull, call it out, but enjoy the show anyway.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
March 17th, 2018 at 8:25:07 AM
permalink
Quote: TigerWu
I suspect for games on the Enterprise, Data turns his difficulty setting way down to "fit in" with his friends. On a real mission, he probably lets his A.I. run full force to make sure there's no chance if losing...
However infinitesimal, there is always a chance he loses a fairly dealt game, but yes, I’m sure he programs to make it much less likely. Probably wouldn’t be good for the plot, though.
If you don’t catch any cards, you don’t catch any cards.
I wonder how likely Daniel Negreanu would be to beat me in a single heads-up NLHE game? 95%+, perhaps? I maintain my beating him on one game is a possibility, though.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
March 19th, 2018 at 7:12:14 AM
permalink
Quote: TigerWuQuote: Joeman
Oh, and don't forget that data cleans up in a game in 19th century San Francisco in Time's Arrow. I wonder if he had that much of an advantage being an android, or were 19th century poker players just not very good? I can't imagine he was able to hone his skills that much beating the likes of Riker and Worf.
I suspect for games on the Enterprise, Data turns his difficulty setting way down to "fit in" with his friends. On a real mission, he probably lets his A.I. run full force to make sure there's no chance of losing.
Remember, there was also that awesome episode where they get stuck on that "casino planet," and Data cleans up at the craps table once he discovers the game is rigged. That's probably in my top ten TNG episodes.
Love the look on his face when he starts winning... haha...
That's definitely in my top 20 TNG episodes, so great if you are a casino person.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
May 27th, 2020 at 9:38:29 PM
permalink
I just rewatched the first episode of “Star Trek: Picard” and noticed that the first thing Picard does is say “See. And raise.”
A new Star Trek show starts with a string bet!
A new Star Trek show starts with a string bet!
May 28th, 2020 at 2:39:59 AM
permalink
String bets were common in the poker scenes of Next Generation too.
Splashing the pot seemed to be required.
Also, on at least one occasion, when folding while playing stud, Worf turned his down cards up, then turned them all down.
Note: string bets like that are common in almost all poker scenes of tv shows.
Hell, there’s even an obvious and huge string bet in one pivotal scene in Rounders!
Splashing the pot seemed to be required.
Also, on at least one occasion, when folding while playing stud, Worf turned his down cards up, then turned them all down.
Note: string bets like that are common in almost all poker scenes of tv shows.
Hell, there’s even an obvious and huge string bet in one pivotal scene in Rounders!
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
October 27th, 2023 at 11:39:15 AM
permalink
Someone on Reddit posted an analysis of the same Star Trek poker scene as mine in my original WoV post (around the same time as me):
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/8zs1pr/analyzing_the_worstplayed_hand_of_poker_that_we/
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/8zs1pr/analyzing_the_worstplayed_hand_of_poker_that_we/
October 27th, 2023 at 11:56:48 AM
permalink
Quote: smoothgrhSomeone on Reddit posted an analysis of the same Star Trek poker scene as mine in my original WoV post (around the same time as me):
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/8zs1pr/analyzing_the_worstplayed_hand_of_poker_that_we/
link to original post
It's almost like some people don't give a crap about any of that mathematical nonsense and just like to play cards for fun. Literally no one in an extremely casual home game like this is calculating the percentage odds of getting a specific card or trying to optimize the dollar amount of raises and re-raises and calls.
October 27th, 2023 at 1:28:48 PM
permalink
Quote: TigerWuQuote: smoothgrhSomeone on Reddit posted an analysis of the same Star Trek poker scene as mine in my original WoV post (around the same time as me):
https://www.reddit.com/r/DaystromInstitute/comments/8zs1pr/analyzing_the_worstplayed_hand_of_poker_that_we/
link to original post
It's almost like some people don't give a crap about any of that mathematical nonsense and just like to play cards for fun. Literally no one in an extremely casual home game like this is calculating the percentage odds of getting a specific card or trying to optimize the dollar amount of raises and re-raises and calls.
link to original post
I don't think it would be fun without doing the calculations.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
November 30th, 2023 at 1:21:10 AM
permalink
Quote: TigerWuBefore the poker boom in the early 2000's, I never played in a casual game where betting was consistent or made sense as far as raises and re-raises and all of that. By the way, I'm now playing poker on the website from the comfort of my own home and I have to say it's pretty darn convenient! Even nowadays when I (rarely) play, outside of a tournament setting or for any real money, nobody really pays attention to that stuff. Super-casual poker players like me don't think about odds or pot odds or check-raising or any of that other poker math that constitutes "good" play, so I guess that's why I never thought the poker scenes in TNG were all that unrealistic. Keep in mind they're not playing for money, and they rarely play at that (I think Picard says in one episode something like he hasn't played in months).
As far as Data looking at the cards he would obviously have memorized, you're right in that it's a specifically programmed sub-routine. It's been mentioned throughout the series that Data has been programmed to act more human and do things he doesn't need to do to better fit in with people around him.
link to original post
Your perspective on the poker scenes in Star Trek: The Next Generation is indeed fascinating. The casual nature of these games reflects how many people approach poker in real life, without a focus on the intricate strategies often associated with professional play.
December 4th, 2023 at 1:48:56 PM
permalink
Extended poker scene in Star Trek: Picard Season 3 finale: https://screenrant.com/star-trek-picard-season-3-poker-easter-egg/
