

The secret to winning at rock, paper, scissors - nickb
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/12/19/sciscissors119.xml

======
dood
Well now everyone knows that rock is the most popular (suggesting you should
throw paper), meaning scissors is the best way to start, the smart money will
move to throwing rock, which of course means the really smart will start with
paper, so to really get the edge you throw scissors. No, wait...

Unfortunately the NS source article is paywalled, so we miss the part where
they give the (probably small) improvement in odds that scissors (currently)
gives.

The interesting part about RPS for me is the evolutionary/ecological/game-
theoretical implications, "Some of the male lizards (call their type "rock")
use force, invading the territory of fellow males to mate with females. Others
("paper") favor deception, waiting until females are unguarded and sneaking
in. Still others ("scissors") work by cooperation, joining together to protect
one another's females. The three types of lizard... are locked in a cyclical
sort of standoff. "

[[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/magazine/09rockpaper.html?...](http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/magazine/09rockpaper.html?ref=magazine)]

Also:
[[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071001145022.ht...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071001145022.htm)]

~~~
euccastro
You want to check out _Game Theory Evolving_ , by Herbert Gintis, if you
haven't already. It talks about exactly this kind of stuff.

~~~
dood
Looks interesting, thanks!

------
mattmaroon
Interestingly enough, I played in the World Series of Roshambo a couple years
back. In the second round I put what Gavin Smith calls the worst beat in the
history of the sport on him. It was best of seven, and he got me down 3-0. On
the fourth throw I balked, which is a permissible stall tactic. After that I
had a feeling he was going rock, so I threw paper. The same happened for the
next three throws and I moved on to the next round.

I've been told by a few people that if you look very closely, you can see me
throwing paper on the ESPN coverage.

------
jsomers
I just look at my watch and take the seconds mod 3. 0:rock, 1:paper,
2:scissors. Pretty sure random play (insofar as this method is random) is
best.

~~~
pc
That's optimal only if your opponents also act randomly. (Or in the absence of
any information.)

~~~
pixcavator
>That's optimal only if your opponents also act randomly.

By choosing the random strategy you force your opponent to do the same and you
have a draw. It is optimal, in this sense.

------
emfle
> Alternatively you could throw the move that would have beaten your
> opponent's previous move. The logic here is that players subconsciously try
> to beat their own previous move.

Wouldn't that mean you should throw the move that beats the move that would
have beaten the opponents previous move?

~~~
rms
This line of thinking happens in high level rock paper scissors. You need to
predict exactly how many levels deep your opponent is going. Professional RPS
players will often throw six or seven doubles in a row before someone wins.

See this 200 page guide for more info than you will ever want to read:
[http://www.scribd.com/doc/924991/The-Official-Rock-Paper-
Sci...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/924991/The-Official-Rock-Paper-Scissors-
Strategy-Guide)

~~~
euccastro
emfle is making a more straightforward point: if you anticipate your opponent
will try to beat his latest move, you should not try to beat his latest move
too; that would be shooting for a draw.

------
Tichy
"That means that your opponent is likely to choose paper, because they will
expect to you to start the game with stone."

So because stone is the most likely move, paper is the most likely move? Funky
logic...

~~~
lizherring
I think what they meant was that most people "think" that rock is the most
likely move and therefore choose paper.

------
jkush
[http://www.deepsblog.com/2007/08/29/world-war-ii-rock-
paper-...](http://www.deepsblog.com/2007/08/29/world-war-ii-rock-paper-
scissors/)

------
boucher
<http://worldrps.com/>

I've personally had pretty good success with the crescendo.

------
irrelative
Man, I really hate pop science. What will those crazy scientists do next!

