No, it show that poker has a huge random aspect to it. It shows that bluffing doesn't really work in man vs. machine. There is no reading of the other person possible.

That's because poker is about odds, reading your opponent, luck. A computer can only do the first...unless of course you hook it up to a lie dector type setup then the "reading" part would be more doable. But still...there is ALWAYS going to be luck..so there will NEVER be a computer poker game that wins all the time. My 9 year old nephew could beat it once in a while and he know squat about odds and bluffing.

Chess on the other hand has NO luck..just skill. Only the best players will ever beat the best computers.

While I understand your arguments, I'm partial to poker. I enjoy a good game of chess, I simply find poker more challenging because of the human elements to the game, as opposed to the pure logic of chess.