Drahflow comments on Rationalistic Losing - Less Wrong

4 Post author: MrHen 30 April 2009 12:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (17)
Tags: losing winning

Comments (17)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Drahflow 30 April 2009 07:12:06PM 1 point [-]

Fun fact - better strategy for memory: You play memory 1 vs. 1, and it's your move.

  1. If you know a pair, take it (this much is obvious).
  2. Chose an unknown tile at random.
  3. If you know the match take it (also clear).
  4. Take a tile known to both of you (if there is doubt, take one your oponent knows).

People don't do step 4 right usually.

Comment author: MrShaggy 01 May 2009 02:57:48AM *  0 points [-]

"Take a tile known to both of you (if there is doubt, take one your oponent knows)."

I don't understand the parenthetical comment: it seems to be saying "If you are not sure both of you know what a tile is, then choose a tile your opponent knows." How could you know your opponent knows what a tile is but not be sure you know? Or maybe I'm just not understanding?

Comment author: MrHen 30 April 2009 09:53:23PM 0 points [-]

I am not tracking why step 4 is good. Can you explain it in more detail?

Comment author: CronoDAS 30 April 2009 10:02:04PM *  0 points [-]

If you flip over a tile that matches some other tile that has already been revealed, your opponent gets to make the match first.

Comment author: MrHen 30 April 2009 11:55:49PM 0 points [-]

Oh. Apparently I have been playing memory wrong all these years? I thought the peeks were private. Or maybe I am just misremembering.

Comment author: MrShaggy 01 May 2009 02:56:07AM 0 points [-]

Or just a different version of the game. Seeing the peeks makes it feel more competitive.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit