This April 2020 paper by Palomaki et al on the game of poker as a domain of expertise is great: it synthesises all that is known about expertise and uses it as a lens to look at poker.
Conversation
It also confirms something I've long suspected: that for all the talk about explicit decision analysis in poker training, when it comes to *actually playing poker* — expert players use trained intuition to perform under pressure.
1
3
What interest me about this topic is that poker is a beautiful blend of two kinds of decision making ability — the intuitive recognition primed model that underpins so much of expertise, and the cognitive bias avoidance type of thinking we see in good finance and forecasting.
2
1
Replying to
Would you say that "explicit decision analysis" is more of people who are just less of an expert with what should be intuitive?
I would think along the lines of Chess where they make decisions based on patterns that they've done multiple drills on rather than having to "think"
1
Replying to
In domains where expertise is possible, explicit decision analysis is definitely a marker of not having expertise.
But in domains where expertise is difficult or impossible (stock picking; political forecasting), explicit decision analysis is all you have.
Replying to
Interesting delineation. With the examples you used, explicit decision analysis looks more evident as explanations used are always linked to frameworks
1