View previous topic | View next topic

Finger games

Page 4 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Flash
325388.  Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:56 am Reply with quote

The theory was used to model the Cold War, eg which missile siloes should we take out in a first strike? What if they are bluffing and have kept all their warheads in one of the siloes we didn't take out? Are we better off completely destroying half their siloes or slightly damaging all of them? etc etc

 
Flash
326185.  Sun Apr 27, 2008 4:21 pm Reply with quote

MatC wrote:
Oh, Sir, that's not a game! That's maaaaths!

I nearly sneaked it past you, though. Now cut along and show Matron that boil, young Coward.

 
Flash
326211.  Sun Apr 27, 2008 4:50 pm Reply with quote

This might do as the essay:
Quote:
What’s the best way to win at Rock, Paper, Scissors?

In the perfectly efficient world of Games Theory, the best strategy is to play each choice one third of the time at random. In the real world there’s lots of scope for psychology. Research shows that rock is the most commonly played, and scissors the least – so paper is the best call. If your opponent is at all experienced, though, he will know that rock is the most likely opening move by an inexperienced player (particularly if he’s male, as it’s perceived as a “strong” move: “rock is for rookies”, they say) so he’ll likely call paper – and so you should call scissors. It’s said that if your opponent plays scissors first, you can predict the type of player he is by the angle of his scissors. For instance, if he does a wide scissor then he is aggressive and may throw lots of future rocks, but if it is a thin scissor, he is experienced and you can expect lots of deceptive throws.

This kind of reasoning can go on forever, and you may prefer a sneakier strategy, such as this one: make your first call extremely (and obviously) late. Your opponent will accuse you of cheating, and you say, "Sorry, my fault. Let's do it again." You’ll find that there’s a strong tendency for your opponent to make the same choice the second time as the first, based on the assumption that you will be expecting them to change.

The game exists in many cultures under various names: Jan Ken Pon (Japan), Shnik Shnak Shnuk (Germany), Ching Chong Chow (South Africa), or Farggling (US). In India and Indonesia the game is played with elephant, human and ant, where elephant beats human and human beats ant – and, somehow, ant beats elephant.

Etiquette is important; the clenched fist movements before making your call are called "primes", and it’s very bad form to call paper with the hand held vertically.

 
WB
327294.  Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:25 pm Reply with quote

Sounds to me as if you're going beyond Game Theory. Perhaps you're ready for the next step.

Try:

Quote:
Drama Theory is a Problem Structuring Method of Operational Research. It is based on game theory and adapts the use of games to complex organisational situations, accounting for emotional responses that can provoke irrational reactions and lead the players to re-define the game.

 
MatC
327617.  Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:37 am Reply with quote

Is the world yet ready for Panel Game Theory?

 
Ian Dunn
741971.  Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:51 pm Reply with quote

I've just come across another version of rock, paper, scissors from Japan. It is called Kitsune ken or "Fox fist". There main difference is that it involves both hands.

Quote:
A variation of the "scissors, rock and paper" game was played by geisha and their customers from the late Tokugawa to Meiji periods. In this game, called Fox Fist (kitsune ken), two people play and the three roles are fox, headman and hunter - symbolised by hands cupped behind the ears, hands on thighs, and hands holding a gun, respectively. The headman loses to the fox, who bewitches him; the fox loses to the hunter, who shoots him; and the hunter loses to the headman, who outranks him. The interesting point is that the fox plays a dual role as the real fox, which can be shot, and the spirit fox, which can bewitch. The fox can bewitch the headman, but not the hunter, who kills his natural form - perhaps obliquely indicating the importance of both the natural and spirit forms.


I should point that foxes appear a lot in Japanese folklore. Kitsune were intelligent beings, could shapeshift, had infinite wisdom, and could have up to nine tails.

Sources

* The fox and the jewel: shared and private meanings in contemporary Japanese inari worship, by Karen Ann Smyers, p. 98.
* Kitsune from Wikipedia

 

Page 4 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group