• tcpais 3 days ago

    Finally, a way to settle the model wars that actually matters: Texas Hold'em. That 3D replay view is sick! ♠♦ I spent way too long watching the replay on Game 2a58900d. It’s wild to see the chain of thought mapped against the betting rounds. It really exposes when a model is hallucinating a strong hand versus actually calculating pot odds. This 'PokerBench' might actually become the standard for measuring agentic risk-taking.

    • falloutx 3 days ago

      yeah the 3d view is amazing

    • tanvach 3 days ago

      People looking into this a little too much, looks to me like random walk. You should try reinitiating the trial (or have multiple running) and see if the ranking is robust.

      • jazarwil 3 days ago

        Wdym exactly? I ran 163 games, are you suggesting more games or something else?

        • whattheheckheck 3 days ago

          You need to simulate 50k to 200k hands to get a true winrate

          • jazarwil 2 days ago

            I'd love to run more games, just very expensive unfortunately.

      • alalani1 3 days ago

        Do you have any idea why the win rate for GPT-5.2 is higher than Gemini 3 Flash yet the former loses money while the latter earns money? Is it just bet sizing (betting more when it has a good hand) or something else?

        • jazarwil 3 days ago

          There are a few reasons that come to mind, such as winning larger pots on average, and also playing more hands by virtue of not getting knocked out as frequently.

        • alfonsodev 2 days ago

          Really cool, I’m curious what would be the comparison versus a deterministic bot that uses probability tables.

          • Onavo 3 days ago

            What about the open source models? I remember from the trading benchmarks Deepseek performed pretty well.

            • jazarwil 3 days ago

              I didn't incorporate any open weights/source models just to limit the number of API providers I had to juggle, but it is just a config change if somebody wants to try a run with them.

            • VK-pro 3 days ago

              Very very fun. Just glancing at this quickly at lunch but is there any idea of incorporating tool use?

              • jazarwil 3 days ago

                Not at the moment, do you have something in mind?

              • falloutx 3 days ago

                Fun, any idea how much would be the cost per game? I am worried 160 isnt a big enough sample size.

                • jazarwil 3 days ago

                  It greatly depends on the models. The 6-handed setup with Opus and Pro cost about $30/game. The 4-handed setup with just small models was $6/game. I'd love to run more but I already spent quite a bit as it is.

                  • falloutx 3 days ago

                    Yeah thats costly, 160 games still gives about 1000+ total decisions and you can see some trends on how they think about the game state.

                    • jazarwil 3 days ago

                      Oh to be clear, there are ~21k hands here, and far more decisions than that.

                • thorawaytrav 3 days ago

                  Do you have idea why smaller models are better then large ones?

                  • jazarwil 3 days ago

                    I've seen some theories tossed around but I don't think I'm qualified to offer an authoritative answer. Gemini 3 Pro specifically seems to be consistently "tighter" and more passive than Flash.