Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!jhunix!ins_apmj
From: ins_apmj@jhunix.UUCP (Patrick M Juola)
Newsgroups: net.startrek,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Is it logical to make random decisions?
Message-ID: <2297@jhunix.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Mar-86 14:47:54 EST
Article-I.D.: jhunix.2297
Posted: Thu Mar 20 14:47:54 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Mar-86 03:23:14 EST
References: <1661@mtgzz.UUCP> <24900128@uiucdcs> <4571MIQ@PSUVMA> <2293@jhunix.UUCP>
Reply-To: ins_apmj@jhunix.ARPA (Patrick M Juola)
Organization: Johns Hopkins Univ. Computing Ctr.
Lines: 39
Xref: watmath net.startrek:5102 net.philosophy:4640

In article <2293@jhunix.UUCP> ins_akaa@jhunix.ARPA (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>>>> A good way to confound a logical player is to make completely random
>>>> moves.  The logic involved in strategic game playing generally involves
>>>> predicting the other player's moves; this is quite difficult if the
>>>> other player is random.  Kirk's play was probably not random, but he
>>>> probably guessed every now and then, which was enough to throw Spock's
>>>> strategy off.
>>>In other words, this is a LOGICAL way to play against such a player, right?
>>You mean the logical thing to do is to play randomly, without logic?
>>Isn't that a contradiction in terms?  (Where have I heard that before?)
>The point is that randomly does NOT mean "without logic", that in fact 
>the most logical move can be a random decision.  I am cross-posting this to
>net.math to see if any game theorists can confirm this...  (can you?)
>-- 
>Kenneth Arromdee

If I have to post another games theory article....

All right, guys -- in the *general* case, there are games that the *best*,
read *most logical*, strategy is to play randomly.  Read any games theory, 
finite mathematics, or linear algebra text to find examples.  I'll mention
just one -- you and your opponent set a penny down, either heads or tails.
If you match, you win; otherwise your opponent wins.  The best strategy is
to play randomly.  No matter what he does, you will at least break even.

Now, on to the chess example.  First of all -- let's get something straight.
Spock is NOT infinitely intelligent -- he can be beaten (by the computer, by
Kirk.)  He is simply a damn good player, but Kirk can sometimes come up with
an attack that Spock didn't expect.  Heck, Spock may even make "blunders"!
To those of you who think Spock is never wrong, just remember that he
botched the acetylcholine test in "The Immunity Syndrome" or whatever the
cosmic amoeba was called....

The next person who posts a games theory article will feel the full force
of my wrath.... 
						Pat Juola
						Hopkins Maths

"Mr. Chekov, arm photon torpedoes!"