Computer based performance analysis of games
A computer-based method of analyzing player performance in a game comprising the following steps in any order: creating one or more rules wherein the rules associate a recommended action to one or more game parameters; receiving one or more game histories containing at least one game parameter and at least one historical action; analyzing the player performance according to the rules and the game histories; and, displaying a result of the analysis, wherein the result of the analysis shows player performance as related to the rules.
This application claims the benefit of provisional patent application 60/758,293 filed 13 Jan. 2006 by the present inventor.
BACKGROUNDThis invention relates generally to a method that analyzes and displays participant performance results for computer based wagering games based upon game history and more particularly to computer based poker and blackjack games.
The Internet has given rise to a large number of wagering games, such as poker, where players compete online from various parts of the world. These games often take the form of tournaments wherein thousands of hands are played to determine a winner. Online gaming is unique in that the players usually do not see their opponents. As such the play tends to be “technical” wherein the best course of action is based on styles and strategies independent of any interaction with other players. Players invest in online classes, software and books to learn to improve their wagering skills, but these learning aids are often based on some sort of player interaction. In spite of a wide range of books and classes, for many players the best way to learn to play on line is to compete often and glean what can be learned from mistakes made in competition. This is not a very efficient means to learn, but it has the benefit of using actual game situations for providing a sort of “on the job” training. Unfortunately there are no tools to systematically review a player's performance with respect to winning tactics and strategies.
As such, what is needed is a way to apply many different tactics and strategies to a set of real historical data and generate recommendations to improve player performance.
SUMMARYdisclosed is a computer-based method of analyzing player performance in a game comprising the following steps in any order: creating one or more rules wherein the rules associate a recommended action to one or more game parameters; receiving one or more game histories containing at least one game parameter and at least one historical action; analyzing the player performance according to the rules and the game histories; and, displaying a result of the analysis, wherein the result of the analysis shows player performance as related to the rules.
The construction and method of operation of the invention, however, together with additional objectives and advantages thereof will be best understood from the following description of specific embodiments when read in connection with the accompanying drawings.
Specific examples of components and arrangements are described below to simplify the present disclosure. These are, of course, merely examples and are not intended to be limiting. In addition, the present disclosure may repeat reference numerals and/or letters in the various examples. This repetition is for the purpose of simplicity and clarity and does not in itself dictate a relationship between the various embodiments and/or configurations discussed.
This invention is for a system and method that compares actions in a computer based card game to the actions of a set of rules that model of differing player performance. The winner's performance is fit into one of these sets of rules, and that model is used to show the player how to play the game better.
To understand how this invention works, consider the actions of two players in a game of Texas Holdem. They are both dealt AQ off suite. We know statistically that this has a 14.87% chance of winning the game. But some players would wager a large amount with this hand, others would bet or raise to a high percentage of their bankroll, while others would bet minimally or fold. The reasons for the differing tactics are all based on the type of person they are, and how they perceive the other players. Their actions are most likely based upon some subconscious experience they have had with these cards in similar circumstances (i.e. position, bankroll, previous raises and other factors).
We can model the play of these four types of players to see which strategy works best. There are four possibilities of play and each player will make one of them. One will be the winner, and each participant may use different strategies at different points in the hand. Once each hand is analyzed, a player can be quantified and see how their performance rates against the model (or set of rules) of the winning player. We can also compare the player's performance based on his bankroll to see how his play changes under financial stress.
To use Texas Holdem poker as an example, an initial pair of aces has a 31% chance of winning the hand, whereas a pair of sevens has only a 13.36% chance of winning. A tight player (one who plays conservatively) might fold a pair of sevens in a poker game, versus a looser player who would play them. Methods of measuring tightness include but are not limited to; comparing the willingness to play cards dealt against the probability that those cards would win a hand, comparing the willingness to play cards dealt to other players in the game to determine which players are more likely to fold or play a given set of cards, comparing a participant's performance against a set of rules with varying degrees of tightness, or counting the number of times a player remains in the game through a given level of play. For example, in Texas Holdem, a loose player is one who sees a lot of flops.
Another player characteristic is player aggressiveness or willingness to bet large sums. Methods of measuring player aggressiveness include, but are not limited to; comparing the player's performance against a set of rules each having a different level of aggressiveness, counting the number of raises compared to the other players, counting the total amount wagered in total dollars, counting the amount wagered as a percentage of the players bankroll, counting the amount wagered as a percentage of dollars on the table or counting the number of times a player bets their entire bankroll in the course of tournament play.
Returning to the embodiment of
The analysis engine 30 can measure a poker player's traits like aggressiveness or tightness. Aggressiveness is how strongly they bet compared to other players and tightness is a player's willingness to play a given hand. A highly aggressive player is one who most often will bet or raise a bet. The results 70 include but are not limited to the following: graphing a player's performance by aggressiveness and tightness and plotting other player's performance on the same criteria, displaying hands lost from playing too tight, and displaying a player's performance against rule services designed with varying degrees of play.
References in the specification to “one embodiment”, “an embodiment”, “an example embodiment”, etc., indicate that the embodiment described may include a particular feature, structure or characteristic, but every embodiment may not necessarily include the particular feature, structure or characteristic. Moreover, such phrases are not necessarily referring to the same embodiment. Further, when a particular feature, structure or characteristic is described in connection with an embodiment, it is submitted that it is within the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art to effect such feature, structure or characteristic in connection with other embodiments whether or not explicitly described. Parts of the description are presented using terminology commonly employed by those of ordinary skill in the art to convey the substance of their work to others of ordinary skill in the art.
In another embodiment, the analysis engine 30 can review a game history and develop rules based upon the strategy of the winning player. In this embodiment the operation begins with the analysis engine 30 selecting the hands of a specific player from the database 10 or history file 20. The specific player's performance would be parsed into a rule service. In game conditions where different actions were taken for the same parameters an aggregate response can be developed wherein the action is the most probable action for the given parameters. Thus rule services are created based on the play of any particular player. If a winning player is selected, a rule service is created for the winning player. The advantage to this embodiment is that the play of winning players is collected into a rule service and used to measure the performance of other players. Thus a player can evaluate how they performed or would have performed against winning players.
In another embodiment the operation begins with the analysis engine 30 selecting the first hand from the database 10. The database 10 is a collection of poker games from an on-line casino game played among a plurality of participants. For any or all participants the selected rule from one or more rules services 40, 50 or 60 is applied for each action the participant makes. Each rule and rule service would be evaluated in turn against the history of the games. The analysis engine 30 would determine the number of incorrect actions for a given series of games. Participants would be rated against the rules service for compliance. The results 70 demonstrate how they performed against the rule services 40, 50 or 60, whether they are more or less aggressive in their play compared to the rule service, and if following the rule service would maximize the winnings from the game by causing them to win the hand or if following the rules in the rule service caused them to lose the hand. The analysis engine 30 would also determine which strategy is preferable for a participant's style of play along with the number of incorrect actions for a given series of games. For example a passive player might perform better if he became aggressive but played tighter.
It will be appreciated by one having skill in the art that each hand may be analyzed in turn and that the hands of any player or the game winners may be compared to effect a report showing play compared to the winning play. Thus not only may a player see how they played against one or more rule services but also how well they played as compared to the play of winners. It will also be apparent to one having skill in the art that the process described in
In another embodiment of this invention, the analysis engine 30 can track participant performance against the amount of money a player has available to wager in their bankroll. Often player's change their style of play depending on how well they are performing. Since the odds of winning a hand do not depend on the amount of a participant's bankroll, varying performance according to bankroll would indicate inferior play. Aggressiveness and tightness can be plotted against the relative size of the player's bankroll giving the player an indication of their actual performance.
For purposes of this patent, poker is defined as any number of games commonly referred to as poker by the gaming industry. These games take common names such as Five Card Stud, Texas Holdem, Stud, Seven Card Stud, Lo Ball, Omaha, three card poker and others. They are based on a deck of playing cards with 4 suites and a rank of cards. Participants and players are any entrants in these games capable of playing against people whether the entrant is another human or a computer program capable of acting as a player in an electronic game. The history of the games played is the data from actual historical games played where at least 2 of the participants are real people and not computers. Wagers and bets are any means of keeping score whether using real money, play money or other means of scoring in the games.
Blackjack is any number of games commonly referred to in the gaming industry as blackjack. The most common form is played against a dealer and each participant is dealt two cards and the objective is to reach but not exceed a numerical score of twenty-one by summing the value of the cards and drawing more cards if desired. Analyzing the games is any calculation or process beyond simple statistical analysis. This includes but is not limited to measuring participant performance against a rule, model or sets of rules. Results are any electronic or printed display showing the analysis of the games.
The above illustration provides many different embodiments or embodiments for implementing different features of the invention. Specific embodiments of components and processes are described to help clarify the invention. These are, of course, merely embodiments and are not intended to limit the invention from that described in the claims.
Although the invention is illustrated and described herein as embodied in one or more specific examples, it is nevertheless not intended to be limited to the details shown, since various modifications and structural changes may be made therein without departing from the spirit of the invention and within the scope and range of equivalents of the claims. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the appended claims be construed broadly and in a manner consistent with the scope of the invention, as set forth in the following claims.
Claims
1. A computer-based method of analyzing player performance in a game comprising the following steps in any order:
- creating one or more rules wherein the rules associate a recommended action to one or more game parameters;
- receiving one or more game histories containing at least one game parameter and at least one historical action;
- analyzing the player performance according to the rules and the game histories; and,
- displaying a result of the analysis,
- wherein the result of the analysis shows player performance as related to the rules.
2. The method of claim 1 where the game is played between participants over a computer network.
3. The method of claim 1 wherein the game is poker.
4. The method of claim 1 wherein the game histories are stored in a database.
5. The method of claim 1 wherein the game histories are stored in an electronic file format.
6. The method of claim 1 wherein the game is blackjack.
7. One or more processor readable storage devices having processor readable code embodied on said processor readable storage devices, said processor readable code for programming one or more processors to perform a method of analyzing player performance in a game comprising the following steps in any order:
- creating one or more rules wherein the rules associate a recommended action to one or more game parameters;
- receiving one or more game histories containing at least one game parameter and at least one historical action;
- analyzing the player performance according to the rules and the game histories; and,
- displaying a result of the analysis,
- wherein the result of the analysis shows player performance as related to the rules.
8. The method of claim 7 where the game is played between participants over a computer network.
9. The method of claim 7 wherein the game is poker.
10. The method of claim 7 wherein the game is blackjack.
11. A computer-based method of analyzing player performance in a game comprising the following steps in any order:
- receiving one or more game histories containing at least one game parameter and at least one historical action;
- creating one or more rules based on the game histories wherein the rules associate a recommended action to one or more game parameters; and
- storing the rules in a processor readable storage device.
12. The methods of claim 11 wherein the game is poker.
13. The method of claim 11 wherein the game is blackjack.
Type: Application
Filed: Jan 12, 2007
Publication Date: Jul 19, 2007
Inventor: Peter J. Tormey (Concord, CA)
Application Number: 11/652,801
International Classification: A63F 9/24 (20060101);