Are Autistics Good at Poker?

Post Reply New Topic

This is one I find interesting. Poker is a very interesting game, based on probability, and social strategy. It is advantageous in Poker not to be read by others by putting on a "Poker Face." It is also advantageous to be able to "read" others and tell when they're bluffing.

I was wondering if autistics because we're used to trying to decode social interactions, and because our facial expressions tend to be misread by NTs were "naturally" good at Poker or, if because we're not as good at getting non-verbal information naturally are "naturally" bad at poke? Or perhaps we have a mix of traits that are both advantageous or disadvantageous in the game.

I can’t say that I’m ‘good’ at poker, only that I break even or better most of the time. My flat affect makes for a near-perfect “poker face”, but I can’t bluff very well -- I can’t over-play my hands as well as the others.

I always assumed that aspies would be bad at poker played at the high level because we are impaired at "reading people's faces" (to quote Kenny Rodgers), but good at counting cards in blackjack. Not all aspies are poker faced, but some are, and so it might even out.

My theory is that we would be good at poker, because we are bad at reading faces - so we don't rely on that information, rather the other persons betting pattern and range. I can beat bad to average poker players but struggle with very good poker players who 'mix it up', but am working on my strategies to improve my game. Knowing odds and pot odds is also very helpful and some Auties are good at maths (but not all). I have mixed results in that area. Can make awful mistakes with mental arithmatic but am extremely good at detecting patterns.

Personally I love playing poker, I find it a great pastime.

My cousin once told me that I have a really good poker face. I'm not good at poker, but if I have some innate trait that helps me succeed at it, then that's pretty cool.

I've only played poker once, in Spain over 20 years ago. I actually finished ahead of the other two players, and won 22,000 pesetas (actually only about £100) off one of them (which he was unable to pay). I think the main reason for this success was that they were even more drunk than I was (we were drinking cheap Spanish Cava from about 11 pm to 5 am, I recall throwing up afterwards.... ).

not at all good at it, it is a game [this aspie is lousy with any kinda game], it has rules [this aspie is lousy with any kinda rule] and requires theory of mind [ditto] and the ability to conceal one's emotions.

I've studied things about strategies like properly betting before the flop and in position, and also of course about continuation betting. It seems like you're mostly supposed to play only about 10-15% of hands and try to isolate a single opponent through the initial betting strategy.

That makes calculating the probability of your hand being victorious over any other possible hand much easier. As you acquire more winnings you widen your opening hand range (what you are willing to bet initially on before the flop) and squeeze the other players in terms of permitting play with increasing sacrifice, done in a balanced way and ramping in intensity as advantage snowballs.

I've never played with people other than speed poker online for fun a few times. I wouldn't mind trying with small amounts to figure out whether I could play skillfully against players in a real setting.

That's actually an interesting question in terms of communicating extreme hands but not moderate ones.

I suppose you would realize by the lack of clattering when they are definitely not 1) Bluffing with a s**t hand, or 2) Playing for value with a genuinely strong hand.

That information would be somewhat valuable. You could probably bluff them off the table by being aggressive when they're playing their moderate hands (not clattering).