21–30 of 47 posts
It uses data gathered from other players. I remember playing it at the time and it was creepy how good it was at beating me. Oddly it didn't do so well this time. Maybe because I've just read that article.
How to actually win at RPS: Memorize a long, truly random sequence. That is, assuming your opponent also does. Er... now I've gone cross-eyed.
> Humans are really bad at random
You could use the digits of some transcendental number, say, pi. Skip zeros, then each digit yields two moves. For the first move, lows(1,2,3) gives stone, mids(4,5,6) gives paper, and highs(7,8,9) gives scissors. For the second move use mod 3, so 0 gives stone, 1 gives paper, and 2 gives scissors.
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...
"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?
So - you play for 4-5 hours, folding on weak hands, and always raising on strong hands, and then, once people think you are a grinder, you start betting on weak hands; other players fold because they were used to you betting high stakes only on strong hands, you take their money.
This article reminded me of a Rock-Paper-Scissors AI from a while back (requires Flash I think). http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/science/rock-paper-scisso... It uses data gathered from other players. I remember playing it at the time and it was creepy how good it was at beating me. Oddly it didn't do so well this time. Maybe because I've just read that article.
If we assume most players play similarly, and don't remember much more than the last three results, this works really well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>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?
Playing aggressively in poker usually means betting more than your hand would otherwise dictate - but your opponent doesn't know what your hand is. So - you play for 4-5 hours, folding on weak hands, and always raising on strong hands, and then, once people think you are a grinder, you start betting on weak hands; other players fold because they were used to you betting high stakes only on strong hands, you take thei…
For example, you might always fold low pairs 22-66 initially (and perhaps conspicuously reveal that you folded them) but then start raising with them later. If your opponents were paying attention, then (a) they will think you have a good hand, and may be scared into folding right now, but (b) even if they don't, they won't suspect you of having a low pair, so that if e.g. a 2-6 comes up on the board and gives you three of a kind, you have an advantage because your opponents won't consider that you have this hand.
>> 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.
If you replay when a draw occurs, then of course you have a 1/2 chance of winning.
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).
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...
>> 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.
Wouldn't that remaining 1/3 be the odds for it being a draw?