Personally, I think it would be much more interesting to see an AI compete in a multi-player game with, say, ten human pros at the table. Not just heads-up.
And what's wrong with heads-up, anyway? It's not as popular as multiway, but it's a fascinating game. In a full table game, you usually only end up playing 20-25% of your hands. Heads up you play 90%+. You end up in leveling wars with your opponent more often, too ("he knows that I know that he knows I usually wouldn't play a premium pair this way").
That could suggest the variance is manageable.
I'd like to see more players because we have seen so many two-player AI contests before (chess, go). It would for example be interesting to see MCTS in this setting.
As for tournaments, the variance is even greater, since it is closer to all or nothing. To mitigate this, pros "buy a piece" of each other. Or swap equity. If either wins they pay the other a percentage. If you do this with enough other pros, you even out your swings...
Playing 10% of your hands is very tight if you're up against other good players. At a loose table it might be very profitable though, especially if the other players aren't paying attention to how tight you are, and therefore don't give you enough credit for having a strong hand when you do play. That kind of table is pretty common at low limits.
It's worth noting that most poker pros will constantly re-buy in early rounds in big tournaments. It's a general recognition that it takes money, not skill to survive. Being at the later tables helps them maintain their fame, which is really their business.
Of course, if you're playing against amateurs or drunks, you can always win. But usually at the real tournaments they are few and far between.
It's a general recognition that it takes money, not skill to
survive.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_Series_of_Poker_...
Notice how there is never any repeat winners? (Well, except maybe Chan and one other.)
Try sitting down at a table in vegas and play tight. Watch as everyone leaves. They just can't make enough money, you just lose it all to the rake.
I play often enough. If the table is too tight, I go loose and take all the blinds. Sure, beating the rake can be tough, but it's not impossible.
In modern poker (not the old days where few were playing), the max bracelets anyone has won is 5. Assuming that past a basic threshold of skill it's a 50/50 crapshoot, there's a 1 in 32 chance you get that on luck. There are thousands of people above the basic threshold.
"Professional" poker really is about tourists and drinkers. The grind is too slow, painful, and volatile. I know a couple of people who support themselves on only poker. That's their strategy year round between tournies. The reason they play the big tournies is to get lucky, and parlay their fame into sponsorships and such.
A pro in an adjacent seat once remarked "There's so much luck in tournament play you'd need a dozen lifetimes to know if you're actually beating them."