- PokerChess is a board and card game with the strategy of Chess and betting and bluffing of Poker. Learn to play Poker Chess with instructional videos!
- Just like in poker, it is very important in chess to understand your opponent's general strategy; try to read his or her mind. Then you can turn the game in the direction that will be the most unpleasant for your opponent! Here is a good example from my youth. My very first opening for Black that I learned was the Dragon variation of the Sicilian.
- We have created a step-by-step guide to teach you - How to Play Chess (rules of chess, how chess pieces move and basic strategies of chess) Introduction to Chess Chess is a two-player strategy board game played on a checkered board with 64 alternating color squares arranged in an 8×8 grid.
Chess and poker are two games which include a lot of calculations by the players in a game.
There is some degree of similarity between the styles and complexity in the games which have seen a lot of players switch between games, especially chess players who have switched over to play poker to earn a few bucks.
There has been a raging debate for quite some time regarding which game is more difficult or complex.
Poker players would side with their game and chess players would side with theirs but to answer this debate we would have to look at both sides of the equation.
Chess is a more limited hame than poker. Every game starts with the same way with the pawns at the same position, so the first moves are some specific moves and then it gets mote interesting. A chess player needs to be concentrated and logical during a long game (sometimes it takes tens of hours in time), and a poker player needs a time interval between dealing cards and withdrawing the pot, so it might be seen as a bit less mentally taxing.
Also read: Are you bored of online poker?
EXCLUSIVE BONUS CONTENT
Get this article as a beautiful, easily save as a PDF or print for daily use.
Craps casino france. Get an amazing infographic covering this topicto share with your friends.
Get a free copy of our popular eBook '21 Secrets to Dominate the Poker Tables Like a Pro'.
One on one and one on many
A complex equation.
The first point of difference which brings in the complexity equation is the number of players you play with on a regular basis.
Chess is mostly played as a one on one game while poker can start with multiple players playing against you on a table.
This creates a certain level of complexity for the poker player since he would have to keep a watch on 4-5 other players rather than just the one who would have played against him in chess.
As we all know, every poker player is different and keeping a track of the styles throughout the game would not be easy for a poker player. With practice this can change, chess players though have to worry about just their one opponent and no one else, so poker wins this round in the sense of complexity.
The analytical aspect of the game
Chess and poker players both need to be analytical while playing their games; chess players spend hours training and learn about a multitude of defenses and strategies to counter those by the opponent.
Chess players have an added advantage of playing against just one opponent and can learn about each move of the opponent in detail, while poker players dealing with so many opponents can feel a little overwhelmed when it comes to that.
Of course, the analysis done in real time about just what each player can do is much greater in the poker game as there are so many factors (players) to look out for, the same might not apply to chess but the sheer number of strategies running around in the head to counter one move should not be taken lightly.
Humans play a big role as well
Learn Poker Or Chess Free
Some similarity to poker cards.
This is where certain things play out in poker, every poker player knows about the ‘tells' each player has and the fact that a lot of poker players bluff while playing the game.
This aspect makes poker a little difficult and complex to deal with.
You might say one thing but do something else at the table in a poker game. There is also the fact that players spend hours learning how they can use the ‘tells' of their opponents to their advantage, there are many books which deal with just the ‘tells' and how to deal with them.
Chess does have an element of the human opponent having a tell but the bluffing does not apply because the only moves you can pull off is what you actually do on the chess board.
The bluff is something which can turn a game around and has to be kept in mind while playing poker, not true when playing a game of chess though.
Luck or skill?
This is one factor which has been debated for a long time regarding poker. Four winds south bend poker room schedule.
The game does have an element of luck; you do need some luck to win a lot of poker games.
Skill is something that is required to do well in almost every game but luck is a huge element while playing poker. Chess players have a lot of skill to deal with the plethora of strategies going on around in their head and on the board.
This is not to say that poker players are not skillful or don't require skill to win games but the luck factor does make poker a game which can throw a few surprises and can do make a little bit more complex compared to chess.
Man and machine
Machines are taking over.
Everyone knows about the computer that actually defeated Gary Kasparov, the chess world champion. In 1997 Deep Blue defeated Kasparov and the whole gaming community went crazy as to how a computer was able to take down a world champion (something that had never happened before).
This loss has provided fuel to the fire for this question and analysts have said that poker players cannot be defeated by computers because of the telling factor and also the fact that luck is involved hugely in poker games.
What many would not know is that a new computer program has been made which claims that it will not lose to any poker player.
Cepheus, developed by a Finnish software company has cracked the code to play Texas hold'em poker, although this is only for the two player game, this is a huge step in ensuring that the ‘machine' factor is not brought into the complexity debate.
Two great games but no real winner
To be honest both games are complex and tough to master in their own respective ways.
While you do not play with many opponents in chess, you know almost every defense and strategy that your opponent can use and vice versa. Knowing what someone else might do and then recalculate to counter that move is tough in itself.
Poker has the element of bluffs, tells and lucks, which can be a fickle mistress. Sure you can be on a crazy winning run and see it come to a halt all of a sudden and the opposite can happen in the game of poker as well.
The one thing which makes this game complex is the players you play against and of course, that is also one of the most appealing facets of the game of poker.
Chess and poker are frequently compared as both games are based on strategic thinking and decision making. I know many professional and semi-professional chess players who've completely abandoned chess in favor of poker.
At some point the numerous fans of Russian super-GM Alexander Grischuk were really worried that he might be another casualty of this trend. Fortunately both GM Grischuk and WGM Almira Skripchenko (who won over $250,000 in her poker career), decided to stay in chess.
As you can see, many chess players tried to utilize the skills they acquired by playing chess at the poker table. But can poker skills be useful at the chessboard?
While we lightly touched the subject of bluffing in chess in this article, the reason to discuss the subject of chess and poker again is the following bizarre idea of one chess amateur. He quoted the recent tweet of Bill Mitchell:
'One of my favorite tricks playing poker is to bet big on a hand I know I'll lose so my opponent thinks I'm bluffing next time..'
So, the above-mentioned chess amateur suggested to deliberately blunder something in the very beginning of the game, so your opponent thinks that you are a total beginner who doesn't know how to play chess. Then you set up a trap and offer bait. As your opponent still thinks that it is just another beginner's blunder, he/she takes the bait and promptly loses the game.
You see, I don't play poker, so I don't know who Bill Mitchell is (and a quick Google search didn't provide any answer). The guy could be a poker star or he could be just an amateur. Also, since I don't play poker, I cannot say if the Bill Mitchell's strategy is good or bad.
But I can tell you that in chess this idea would be both ridiculous and stupid.
This is how I see this 'strategy' in chess.
1) At the very beginning of the game you make a ridiculous blunder. I assume it should be something like this:
So, your opponent believes that you are a beginner and takes the bishop.
2) Later in the game you set up a trap and give him another piece for free. Probably it should look like this:
Learn Poker Or Chess Quiz
As silly as this scam looks, I truly cannot say that it is completely pointless and it would never work. First of all, after your initial blunder 2.Ba6?? your opponent might start laughing so hard that he/she dies and consequently you will win by forfeit. Second, against a total beginner it might work because beginners generally accept all the free pieces they are offered without any worries for the consequences.
Learn Poker Or Chess Online
But, I can assure you that against this kind of player you don't need the initial, intentional blunder, since the beginner will accept the real bait even without your sophisticated psychological preparation!
So why might this strategy work in poker but most certainly will not work in chess if you are playing anyone above USCF 1500? To answer this question, let's check game theory.
Game theory divides all games into two categories: cooperative and non-cooperative. Both chess and poker are obviously non-cooperative games as the opponents are trying to achieve their own goals: one player's win is certainly another player's loss!
Wikipedia states:
'Non-cooperative games are generally analysed through the framework of non-cooperative game theory, which tries to predict players' individual strategies and payoffs and to find Nash equilibrium.'
Nash equilibrium is one of the cornerstones of the game theory. This is how Wikipedia explains it:
'In game theory, the Nash equilibrium is a solution concept of a non-cooperative game involving two or more players in which each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players, and no player has anything to gain by changing only his or her own strategy.'
So basically, similar to the Newton's first law that says that 'a body in motion will remain in motion unless it is acted upon by an external force,' the Nash equilibrium says that a player in a game has no incentive to change his/her current strategy unless the opponent changes his/her current strategy. So far so good.
It looks like it only proves that when we start the ruse by playing 2.Ba6?? we set our opponents on the wrong track, which they will keep following until they discover the deceit when we checkmate them. But if we dig deeper, we can find a big difference between chess and other popular games, including poker. Wikipedia calls chess a 'perfect information' game, where you can see all the information on the board. At the same time backgammon has perfect information on the board, but has chance moves (roll of dice). And what about poker? Wikipedia says that poker has both 'imperfect information' (some or all the cards are held by other players) and ' chance moves' (the cards being dealt).
So while superficially chess and poker might look similar, in reality they are completely different! Therefore, unlike poker, when you offer opponents your second 'free gift' as bait, they will see all the information on the board (remember, unlike poker, chess is the game of perfect information), see the obvious trap and reject your sacrifice -- so your whole strategy will fail!
Of course, the analysis done in real time about just what each player can do is much greater in the poker game as there are so many factors (players) to look out for, the same might not apply to chess but the sheer number of strategies running around in the head to counter one move should not be taken lightly.
Humans play a big role as well
Learn Poker Or Chess Free
Some similarity to poker cards.
This is where certain things play out in poker, every poker player knows about the ‘tells' each player has and the fact that a lot of poker players bluff while playing the game.
This aspect makes poker a little difficult and complex to deal with.
You might say one thing but do something else at the table in a poker game. There is also the fact that players spend hours learning how they can use the ‘tells' of their opponents to their advantage, there are many books which deal with just the ‘tells' and how to deal with them.
Chess does have an element of the human opponent having a tell but the bluffing does not apply because the only moves you can pull off is what you actually do on the chess board.
The bluff is something which can turn a game around and has to be kept in mind while playing poker, not true when playing a game of chess though.
Luck or skill?
This is one factor which has been debated for a long time regarding poker. Four winds south bend poker room schedule.
The game does have an element of luck; you do need some luck to win a lot of poker games.
Skill is something that is required to do well in almost every game but luck is a huge element while playing poker. Chess players have a lot of skill to deal with the plethora of strategies going on around in their head and on the board.
This is not to say that poker players are not skillful or don't require skill to win games but the luck factor does make poker a game which can throw a few surprises and can do make a little bit more complex compared to chess.
Man and machine
Machines are taking over.
Everyone knows about the computer that actually defeated Gary Kasparov, the chess world champion. In 1997 Deep Blue defeated Kasparov and the whole gaming community went crazy as to how a computer was able to take down a world champion (something that had never happened before).
This loss has provided fuel to the fire for this question and analysts have said that poker players cannot be defeated by computers because of the telling factor and also the fact that luck is involved hugely in poker games.
What many would not know is that a new computer program has been made which claims that it will not lose to any poker player.
Cepheus, developed by a Finnish software company has cracked the code to play Texas hold'em poker, although this is only for the two player game, this is a huge step in ensuring that the ‘machine' factor is not brought into the complexity debate.
Two great games but no real winner
To be honest both games are complex and tough to master in their own respective ways.
While you do not play with many opponents in chess, you know almost every defense and strategy that your opponent can use and vice versa. Knowing what someone else might do and then recalculate to counter that move is tough in itself.
Poker has the element of bluffs, tells and lucks, which can be a fickle mistress. Sure you can be on a crazy winning run and see it come to a halt all of a sudden and the opposite can happen in the game of poker as well.
The one thing which makes this game complex is the players you play against and of course, that is also one of the most appealing facets of the game of poker.
Chess and poker are frequently compared as both games are based on strategic thinking and decision making. I know many professional and semi-professional chess players who've completely abandoned chess in favor of poker.
At some point the numerous fans of Russian super-GM Alexander Grischuk were really worried that he might be another casualty of this trend. Fortunately both GM Grischuk and WGM Almira Skripchenko (who won over $250,000 in her poker career), decided to stay in chess.
As you can see, many chess players tried to utilize the skills they acquired by playing chess at the poker table. But can poker skills be useful at the chessboard?
While we lightly touched the subject of bluffing in chess in this article, the reason to discuss the subject of chess and poker again is the following bizarre idea of one chess amateur. He quoted the recent tweet of Bill Mitchell:
'One of my favorite tricks playing poker is to bet big on a hand I know I'll lose so my opponent thinks I'm bluffing next time..'
So, the above-mentioned chess amateur suggested to deliberately blunder something in the very beginning of the game, so your opponent thinks that you are a total beginner who doesn't know how to play chess. Then you set up a trap and offer bait. As your opponent still thinks that it is just another beginner's blunder, he/she takes the bait and promptly loses the game.
You see, I don't play poker, so I don't know who Bill Mitchell is (and a quick Google search didn't provide any answer). The guy could be a poker star or he could be just an amateur. Also, since I don't play poker, I cannot say if the Bill Mitchell's strategy is good or bad.
But I can tell you that in chess this idea would be both ridiculous and stupid.
This is how I see this 'strategy' in chess.
1) At the very beginning of the game you make a ridiculous blunder. I assume it should be something like this:
So, your opponent believes that you are a beginner and takes the bishop.
2) Later in the game you set up a trap and give him another piece for free. Probably it should look like this:
Learn Poker Or Chess Quiz
As silly as this scam looks, I truly cannot say that it is completely pointless and it would never work. First of all, after your initial blunder 2.Ba6?? your opponent might start laughing so hard that he/she dies and consequently you will win by forfeit. Second, against a total beginner it might work because beginners generally accept all the free pieces they are offered without any worries for the consequences.
Learn Poker Or Chess Online
But, I can assure you that against this kind of player you don't need the initial, intentional blunder, since the beginner will accept the real bait even without your sophisticated psychological preparation!
So why might this strategy work in poker but most certainly will not work in chess if you are playing anyone above USCF 1500? To answer this question, let's check game theory.
Game theory divides all games into two categories: cooperative and non-cooperative. Both chess and poker are obviously non-cooperative games as the opponents are trying to achieve their own goals: one player's win is certainly another player's loss!
Wikipedia states:
'Non-cooperative games are generally analysed through the framework of non-cooperative game theory, which tries to predict players' individual strategies and payoffs and to find Nash equilibrium.'
Nash equilibrium is one of the cornerstones of the game theory. This is how Wikipedia explains it:
'In game theory, the Nash equilibrium is a solution concept of a non-cooperative game involving two or more players in which each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players, and no player has anything to gain by changing only his or her own strategy.'
So basically, similar to the Newton's first law that says that 'a body in motion will remain in motion unless it is acted upon by an external force,' the Nash equilibrium says that a player in a game has no incentive to change his/her current strategy unless the opponent changes his/her current strategy. So far so good.
It looks like it only proves that when we start the ruse by playing 2.Ba6?? we set our opponents on the wrong track, which they will keep following until they discover the deceit when we checkmate them. But if we dig deeper, we can find a big difference between chess and other popular games, including poker. Wikipedia calls chess a 'perfect information' game, where you can see all the information on the board. At the same time backgammon has perfect information on the board, but has chance moves (roll of dice). And what about poker? Wikipedia says that poker has both 'imperfect information' (some or all the cards are held by other players) and ' chance moves' (the cards being dealt).
So while superficially chess and poker might look similar, in reality they are completely different! Therefore, unlike poker, when you offer opponents your second 'free gift' as bait, they will see all the information on the board (remember, unlike poker, chess is the game of perfect information), see the obvious trap and reject your sacrifice -- so your whole strategy will fail!
Does it mean that chess players cannot learn anything from poker since it is a totally different game? I think we can! Just like in poker, it is very important in chess to understand your opponent's general strategy; try to read his or her mind. Then you can turn the game in the direction that will be the most unpleasant for your opponent! Here is a good example from my youth.
My very first opening for Black that I learned was the Dragon variation of the Sicilian. I loved the excitement of an attack in the position with opposite-side castles. To tell you the truth, this excitement and adrenaline rush were even more important than the result of the game! If I got this kind of the position, I could play pretty well:
After the game I learned that the whole combination happened in the game Althausen and Simagin played in 1943, and this information made me even more proud since I felt like I played like a grandmaster!
But sometimes my adult opponents thought: 'why should I go for all these complicated positions against a kid who can probably calculate some variations, but doesn't know first thing about chess strategy?' So, these mean people castled kingside and I felt cheated. This is not what I liked.
All experienced chess players 'play the opponent' in some way. I remember that before playing GM Etienne Bacrot in the famous tournament Cap d'Agde I was thinking about my strategy for this knockout match. I knew that my opponent was younger than me and already had a higher rating. I also suspected that just like all youngsters he liked sharp positions and knew all the developments of the modern opening theory. So, I decided on the following strategy:
1) Follow the old Soviet chess saying : 'С молодёжью в эншпиль!' (Roughly translated: 'when you play youngsters, go straight to the endgame!')
2) All the openings I would play in the match should be very fashionable. That is, very fashionable at the time when Etienne's grandparents were born!
Here is one of the games from our match:
And here is the latest opening development I was following:
As far as I know, many professional poker players wear sunglasses, so their opponents cannot see their eyes. Fortunately, chess players don't, with the exception of this famous game:
Next time before the game, look at your opponent's eyes. Try to figure out his/her thoughts, what he/she likes and dislikes. What's his/her mood? This information can be very handy for your decision making during the game!
How To Become A Chess Master
