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

#31

Post by luckylion » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 1:56 PM UTC

codegladiator wrote: post #21

luckylion wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"not simply a game of luck". Of course there's luck involved. There's luck involved in tennis as well. Would you consider tennis a coin flip?

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 impossible to do perfectly, so we call it luck.

Tennis is mostly a matter of the body, rps or poker are games of the mind.

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

#32

Post by alehul » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 1:58 PM UTC

paulcole wrote: post #28

gruez wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that cheating?

If your opponent is playing poorly, it’s unethical not to take advantage.

I’d agree with “it’s fine to take advantage,” but “unethical not to”?

Would that line apply when playing your young child in a game?

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

#33

Post by Quanttek » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 1:58 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…

This does not hold true for the appellate court's decision:

> While it found the game may call up a certain measure of skill, "it seems evident … that the game also involves a large part of chance, so that it does not take 'only skill or bodily exertion on the part of the parties,'" the court concluded.

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

#34

Post by nabla9 » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:01 PM UTC

throw0101a wrote: post #7

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #2

Is RPS a game of skill?

> Is RPS a game of skill? If you do a 2/3, or 3/5, etc, then maybe. Numberphile did an episode on how you're more likely to win by following a particular strategy: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rudzYPHuewc Presumably this works best if the other person is not following the same strategy. The paper that they reference (PDF): * https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5199v1.pdf

20 years ago my friend made simple RPS computer game that always won iterated games against human player. It was relatively simple Bayesian algorithm (not naive Bayes exactly).

Humans really suck at producing randomness.

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

#35

Post by DennisP » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:04 PM UTC

Hydraulix989 wrote: post #2

Is RPS a game of skill?

If you choose your moves randomly in equal proportion, then you will always win 50% of the time no matter what the other player does (not counting ties).

But humans are bad at making truly random choices. If your opponent isn't random, you can exploit what they're actually doing.

And if you're exploiting what the opponent is doing, then you're not random anymore and your opponent can exploit what you're doing.

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

#36

Post by throw0101a » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:06 PM UTC

quickthrower2 wrote: post #16

throw0101a wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is RPS a game of skill? If you do a 2/3, or 3/5, etc, then maybe. Numberphile did an episode on how you're more likely to win by following a particular strategy: * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rudzYPHuewc Presumably this works best if the other person is not following the same strategy. The paper that they reference (PDF): * https://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5199v1.pdf

I just watched that video. Fascinating. Of course it means if the other person is playing the strategy, then you want to play the strategy to beat that strategy, which is just as simple. But if they realise you are doing that they might switch to the one that beats the one that beats the one. I guess it gets a bit like poker where you are trying to appear "loose" then suddenly play tight or whatever. I was wondering…

> You could also memorise a recently generate sequence of random numbers!

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 …

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

#37

Post by huhtenberg » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:09 PM UTC

> 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 the Bridge was ruled to be a game of skill.

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

#38

Post by codegladiator » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:15 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…

That's a nice explanation.

Tennis would also have some part of mind games right ? The more I think about it, obviously it definitely is a matter of body excellence, but if you can always predict where your opponent going to hit, wouldn't that be a sure win (considering the players equal in matter of body)?

I don't see any "reaction time" available in RPS (considering equal in matter of body), and no way to predict the choice of the other one (as you stated) so similar to coin toss (you can't influence the choice of the opponent).

Poker also gives you some amount of time to "react" to what others did. So I am still seeing RPS heavily biased towards luck.

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

#39

Post by jbarrs » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:18 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…

Influencing a coin flip is certainly possible. If you can reliably flip it the same way each time it's not hard to get 5-10 heads in a row, with a little practice.

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

#40

Post by john-shaffer » Sat, Apr 25, 2020, 2:24 PM UTC

codegladiator wrote: post #21

luckylion wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"not simply a game of luck". Of course there's luck involved. There's luck involved in tennis as well. Would you consider tennis a coin flip?

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.

> I can insist that there is skill in coin toss too.

There is a detailed analysis in 10.3 "How to cheat at coin and die tossing" of E.T. Jaynes's Probability Theory.