Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to win at rock-paper-scissors

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#11

Post by yeukhon »

jakobe wrote: post #6

TLDR: Players are more likely to pick the move that just won. To exploit that, the best strategy would probably be to always pick the move that wasn't played. Should give you an edge until your opponent notices your pattern :)

But now everyone starts picking the move that wasn't played. I am not saying I am very good at this game (well who can claim that...), but I mostly win well by observing opponent's reaction and their habit. I try to exploit them by giving them some false sense of my next move. Too abstract? Random pattern. And honestly, the best strategy is don't get frustrated and enjoy the game :)

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#12

Post by yeukhon »

ars wrote: post #2

Or in other words "Humans are really bad at random."

The question is, are you sure that true random is always the best move? I say some random strategy, but totally random, like perfect random? I am not sure that actually has a big improvement...

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#13

Post by ars »

yeukhon wrote: post #12
ars wrote: post #2

Or in other words "Humans are really bad at random."

The question is, are you sure that true random is always the best move? I say some random strategy, but totally random, like perfect random? I am not sure that actually has a big improvement...

If it's anything other than perfect random your opponent can figure out your pattern and use it against you.

The only time to differ from true random is if you figured out your opponent's pattern.

Which can lead to some interesting strategy of making your opponent think he figured out your pattern. Then use your knowledge of what he thinks you will do to win.

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#14

Post by cyborgx7 »

I hope to see some replication of this. It sounds like they just looked through the numbers for patterns, instead of making a prediction beforehand and then trying to falsify it. That's fine but there needs to be replication for that kind of conclusions.

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#15

Post by brusch64 »

oliwary wrote: post #3

Interesting how the pattern "rock-paper-scissors" is followed. If this is because of the name, Swedish people, for example, would follow another patterns as they call the game "rock-scissors-paper" (Sten-sax-påse).

in German it is "scissors-rock-paper" (Schere Stein Papier). I guess all combinations are possible...

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#18

Post by vishnugupta »

valdiorn wrote: post #9

"The game of rock-paper-scissors exhibits collective cyclic motions which cannot be understood by the Nash equilibrium concept." This is complete bullshit. It is well understood that if your opponent is not playing an optimum strategy, you can gain an advantage by shifting away from the Nash equillibrium yourself. Example: Image a player that always picks "Paper". By shifting away from a random choice (Nash optimum)…

>This is a common trick utilized in poker, where good players will apply a certain playing style, while placing smaller bets, let their opponent adjust to your style and then suddenly change to a more aggressive style.

Pardon my ignorance of poker, but won't the opponent notice that you have suddenly raised the stake and that something could be afoot?

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#19

Post by oliwary »

alextingle wrote: post #16

If winners tend to stick with their last winning move, then shifting forward after losing is the correct strategy. Only the winners are playing irrationally here.

Wouldn't shifting backward make more sense? That way you beat the other instead of playing equal.

Re: How to win at rock-paper-scissors

#20

Post by avaku »

>> What are your odds of winning rock-paper-scissors? Simple - one in three. At least, that's what chance predicts.

I thought the chance of winning with no prior is 1/2... Otherwise, okay, you win with 1/3, your opponent wins with 1/3, and where is the other 1/3? :) I know what the article means, but they phrase is wrongly.

Post reply on HN