  Since the introduction of ChatGPT and GPT-4, these models have been tested
across a large number of tasks. Their adeptness across domains is evident, but
their aptitude in playing games, and specifically their aptitude in the realm
of poker has remained unexplored. Poker is a game that requires decision making
under uncertainty and incomplete information. In this paper, we put ChatGPT and
GPT-4 through the poker test and evaluate their poker skills. Our findings
reveal that while both models display an advanced understanding of poker,
encompassing concepts like the valuation of starting hands, playing positions
and other intricacies of game theory optimal (GTO) poker, both ChatGPT and
GPT-4 are NOT game theory optimal poker players.
  Profitable strategies in poker are evaluated in expectations over large
samples. Through a series of experiments, we first discover the characteristics
of optimal prompts and model parameters for playing poker with these models.
Our observations then unveil the distinct playing personas of the two models.
We first conclude that GPT-4 is a more advanced poker player than ChatGPT. This
exploration then sheds light on the divergent poker tactics of the two models:
ChatGPT's conservativeness juxtaposed against GPT-4's aggression. In poker
vernacular, when tasked to play GTO poker, ChatGPT plays like a nit, which
means that it has a propensity to only engage with premium hands and folds a
majority of hands. When subjected to the same directive, GPT-4 plays like a
maniac, showcasing a loose and aggressive style of play. Both strategies,
although relatively advanced, are not game theory optimal.
