Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Here's how to beat anyone at rock-paper-scissors

According to a Chinese mathematician.

AP / Press Association Images AP / Press Association Images / Press Association Images

THE QUESTION OF how to win at rock-paper-scissors has, believe it or not, plagued mathematicians and game theorists for some time.

While they previously had devised a theoretical answer to the question, a new experiment by Zhijian Wang at Zhejiang University in China that used real players, has revealed an interesting wrinkle to the original theory.

In the experiment, Zhijian noticed that winning players tended to stick with their winning strategy, while losers tended to switch to the next strategy in the sequence of rock-paper-scissors, following what he calls “persistent cyclic flows.”

Here’s how it works in practice:

  • Player A and Player B both start by using random strategies. If Player A uses rock and Player B uses paper, Player A loses.
  • In the next round, Player A can assume that Player B will use paper again and should therefore use scissors to win.
  • In the round after that, because Player B lost, Player A can assume that Player B will use the next strategy in the sequence — scissors — and Player A should then use rock, thus winning again. 

Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizzard-Spock Jose C Silva Jose C Silva

If you take the game on a theoretical level, the most mathematically sound way to play rock-paper-scissors is by choosing your strategy at random.

Because there are three outcomes — a win, a loss, or a tie — and each strategy has one other strategy that it can beat and one other strategy that can beat it, and we don’t care what strategy we win with, it makes the most sense to pick paper exactly one-third of the time, rock one-third of the time, and scissors one-third of the time.

This is called the game’s Nash equilibrium.

While the Nash Equilibrium should be the best strategy in real life, Zhijian found a decidedly different pattern when he and some other researchers recruited 72 students to play the game.

They divided the students into 12 groups of six players and had them each play 300 rounds of rock-paper-scissors against each other.

Zhijian also added a payout in proportion to the number of victories.

Rock Paper Scissors Competition AP / Press Association Images AP / Press Association Images / Press Association Images

When Zhijian reviewed the results he found that students chose each strategy close to one third of the time, suggesting the Nash Equilibrium theory.

However, when he looked closer, he noticed a more unusual pattern.

The pattern that Zhijian discovered — winners repeating their strategy and losers moving to the next strategy in the sequence — is called a “conditional response” in game theory.

The researchers have theorized that the response may be hard-wired into the brain, a question they intend to investigate with further experiments.

For now, Zhijian suggests that exploiting the knowledge that most people use the conditional strategy may result in winning a lot more games of rock-paper-scissors.

Read: 12 beautiful maths-inspired GIFs that are dizzying to watch>

Check out all our Science Week and Maths Week brainteasers here>

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Published with permission from
View 22 comments
Close
22 Comments
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.
    JournalTv
    News in 60 seconds