500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court • Hacker News Board

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#111

Post by jstanley » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:31 PM UTC

liamcardenas wrote: post #89

TuringNYC wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we do not know what would happen if the situation were opposite. They both entered into the agreement, presumably seriously. It seems like just playing the game qualifies both sides as jerks.

If the roles were reversed, I would have a similar criticism of the other guy. Clearly, the loser didn’t want to pay because he contested it in court — and the victor could have forgiven the debt. I wouldn’t even make my friend pay me back for lunch if they forgot their wallet — let alone put them through financial hardship for such a trivial, low-effort event as a game of RPS.

> I wouldn’t even make my friend pay me back for lunch if they forgot their wallet — let alone put them through financial hardship for such a trivial, low-effort event as a game of RPS.

That's a bit different. Your friend is presumably not deliberately forgetting his wallet while eating $500k lunches, and if he was I bet you'd expect him to pay you back. And the game of Rock Paper Scissors may be trivial and low-effort, but betting $500k on the game is very much not.

If I enter into a $500k bet on a game of Rock Paper Scissors, it's with the understanding that I stand to lose $500k if I lose the game, and I take that seriously. The only reason that risk is worth taking is if I also stand to win $500k if I win the game. If I win and you turn around and say "oh come on man I really don't want to pay", then you're basically saying you entered into the bet with the intention of scamming me out of an expected sum of $250k, so yes I'll insist that you pay up.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#112

Post by Gene_Parmesan » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:33 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #110

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

Yeah, after the dust settles on the legal battle, I would love to hear the Canadian version of "This American Life" get the full backstory on this. Were these guys pals playing in the living room or at the bar, or was it between strangers at some kind of underground RPS parlor? The latter seems ridiculous, but so does the former, since I imagine it would involve the loser saying "C'mon man you can't be serious?" for…

I mean, the pretty obviously missing link to all of this would appear to be "copious amounts of alcohol." Can you even imagine THAT hangover?

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#113

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:33 PM UTC

jon_elbrook wrote: post #92

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

>but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. vegans think meat eating is excessive. let's ban meat eating, then?

[deleted]

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#114

Post by alricb » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:33 PM UTC

dghughes wrote: post #60

Many times here in Canada when there are contests you often see (always really) "void in Quebec". It's like a Canadian Heritage Moment.

That's because of the Act respecting lotteries, publicity contests and amusement machines, art. 58 and following: http://legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/showdoc/cs/L-6?langCont=fr#...

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#115

Post by Stratoscope » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:34 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #31

codegladiator wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can insist that there is skill in coin toss too. I think what we want to look at is how much luck/skill percent is there. If tennis was luck overpowering skill, it wouldn't be an international sport in my opinion. So rock paper scissors is 90% luck + 10% skill. A kid can potentially beat a professional rock player. Same is not the case for tennis.

You can't influence the result of a coin toss, unless you're using a manipulated coin. I'd put rock paper scissors more into the poker category, but actually there's less of a luck-component in rps, because there's no drawing of random cards. You're only playing your opponent, and unless your opponent hast figured out a way to be completely random, you can "read" them if you're good enough. But that's very hard and i…

When I was a kid I learned how to reliably cheat at a coin toss. The trick was to use the popular method where you flip the coin into the air, catch it in the palm of the same hand, then flip it over on top of your opposite wrist. And you would have the other person call heads or tails during the toss.

Normally if the coin landed heads-up in your palm, it would then be tails-up on your other wrist. But with a little practice it was easy to sneak in a half-flip during that last maneuver, so heads-up in your palm would also be heads-up on your wrist.

If you did all this fast enough, the other person wouldn't notice that you got a peek at the coin as it landed in your palm, so you could decide whether to do the expected final flip or the sneaky one.

I got away with this for quite some time before anyone figured out what I was doing!

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#116

Post by ycombobreaker » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:38 PM UTC

michaelcampbell wrote: post #99

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

> IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. Good thing 'L' is not based on 'o' then. How many finger (not even hand) gestures does it take to click "buy" on a stock broker's app?

Not the same thing. The hand gestures of the rock, paper, scissors game constitute the entirety of the result. whereas, the actions of the entire company over time, coupled with immeasurably complex interactions with the rest of the world, constitute the result of a stock trade.

You can choose to gamble with stock by buying and selling randomly, but that is a property of your behavior, not the entirety of the system.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#117

Post by ta1771 » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:39 PM UTC

sircastor wrote: post #83

I want to know more about the circumstances that led up to this. What situation results in someone saying "I'll let you $500k I can beat you at Rock, Paper, Scissors..." And actually being willing to follow through?

I'm trying to figure out the circumstances that you'd make a promise and not follow through on it.

There's something to be amazed by, by this story, but it's not doing what you say you will.

This thread's...disappointing.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#118

Post by ta1771 » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:41 PM UTC

Stratoscope wrote: post #115

luckylion wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't influence the result of a coin toss, unless you're using a manipulated coin. I'd put rock paper scissors more into the poker category, but actually there's less of a luck-component in rps, because there's no drawing of random cards. You're only playing your opponent, and unless your opponent hast figured out a way to be completely random, you can "read" them if you're good enough. But that's very hard and i…

When I was a kid I learned how to reliably cheat at a coin toss. The trick was to use the popular method where you flip the coin into the air, catch it in the palm of the same hand, then flip it over on top of your opposite wrist. And you would have the other person call heads or tails during the toss . Normally if the coin landed heads-up in your palm, it would then be tails-up on your other wrist. But with a little…

Gross.

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#119

Post by kova12 » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:42 PM UTC

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #26

>The court also upheld the lower court's conclusion that the $517,000 wager was excessive. Quebec courts are not arguing that Rock Paper Scissors is not a game of skill. They only ruled that the bet was "excessive" which is against the law. IANAL, but betting half a million dollars on three hand gestures qualifies as excessive imho. I am thoroughly impressed that the loser actually made good on their commitment thoug…

I wonder if there's any legal prohibition against excessive bets in canada. Is there a law or doctrine that invalidates such contracts, or is it just courts saying "this doesn't look right to us, therefore it is invalid"

Re: 500K bet on rock paper scissors ruled invalid by Quebec court

#120

Post by thaumasiotes » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 5:49 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #62

huhtenberg wrote: post #37

> the game also involves a large part of chance I can't find the source right now, but I remember reading about a court case centered around whether Bridge (the card game) is gambling or not due to the influence of chance on its outcome. It was settled by holding a string of games that pitched players with varying experience against each other and the outcome was that better skilled ones _always_ prevailed. And so th…

Bridge is unfortunately rife with cheating at the highest levels. It's simply too easy to communicate information with your partner that you're not allowed to through subtle signals, and this is very hard to police except at the macro level using a statistical analysis of many games to determine if it seems like players are acting on more information than they should have. The only way to play Bridge without cheating…

> The only way to play Bridge without cheating is to isolate each player in a separate room, confiscate all electronics, and have them play on provided computers running electronic Bridge that only transmits bids and cards played.

You'll still have "cheating" in this scenario. The rules of bridge consider it to be cheating if partners have a bidding convention that they don't explain to the other team. It's stupid, but those are the official rules.