Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Jewish Poker


“For quite a while the two of us sat at our table, wordlessly stirring our coffee. Ervinke was bored. ‘All right,’ he said. ‘Let's play poker.’

‘No,’ I answered. ‘I hate cards. I always lose.’
‘Who's talking about cards?’ thus Ervinke. ‘I was thinking of Jewish poker.’
He then briefly explained the rules of the game. Jewish poker is played without cards, in your head, as befits the People of the Book.

‘You think of a number, I also think of a number,’ Ervinke said. ‘Whoever thinks of a higher number wins. This sounds easy, but it has a hundred pitfalls. Nu!’”


Jewish Poker is one of “those” games, games that both players play as a joke, smirks on their faces as they announce numbers like “negative four” and “square root of pi” and “Ackermann function of one billion, one billion.” The rules are really no more complicated than Ervinke made them out to be: each player thinks of a (finite!) number, and whoever thought of the higher number wins. Players can reveal their numbers simultaneously, or one after the other, whichever they prefer.


“We plunked down five piasters each, and, leaning back in our chairs began to think of numbers. After a while Ervinke signaled that he had one. I said I was ready.”


The game is stupid. (That’s what I meant when I said it was one of “those” games.) It’s stupid no matter how you play it, but it becomes even more stupid when the numbers are not revealed simultaneously, because the second player can just add one to the number that the first player revealed.


“‘All right,’ thus Ervinke. ‘Let's hear your number.’
‘Eleven,’ I said.
‘Twelve,’ Ervinke said, and took the money.”


It makes sense that there should be a second-player advantage in a game like this, but somehow it seems a little strange, doesn’t it? Because, well, eleven loses to twelve, so why not pick a number higher than twelve? That’s a number that beats all the numbers eleven would have beaten, and would have had the additional advantage of not losing to twelve. Maybe it wasn’t going first that sunk him; maybe our narrator just played badly.


“I could have kicked myself, because originally I had thought of Fourteen, and only at the last moment had I climbed down to Eleven, I really don't know why. ‘Listen.’ I turned to Ervinke. ‘What would have happened had I said Fourteen?’
‘What a question! I'd have lost. Now, that is just the charm of poker: you never know how things will turn out. But if your nerves cannot stand a little gambling, perhaps we had better call it off.’”


Of course this logic doesn’t make any sense. If the narrator had said fourteen, then Ervinke, the clever bastard, would have said fifteen. No matter how colossal the number you pick, it’s always going to be smaller than your opponent’s could be.


“Without saying another word, I put down ten piasters on the table. Ervinke did likewise. I pondered my number carefully and opened with Eighteen.
‘Damn!’ Ervinke said. ‘I have only Seventeen!’
I swept the money into my pocket and quietly guffawed. Ervinke had certainly not dreamed that I would master the tricks of Jewish poker so quickly. He had probably counted on my opening with Fifteen or Sixteen, but certainly not with Eighteen. Ervinke, his brow in angry furrows, proposed to double the stakes.”


So, what if we try playing simultaneous Jewish Poker, each player writing down their number before revealing? Something’s still wrong. Depending on your level of mathematical sophistication, you’ll cram your paper with nines, or you’ll search the Internet for the fastest-growing function you can find, and call it on a trillion. (In fact, it’s probably better to cram your paper with ones; you can fit more in.)


Now this is starting to look like a weird version of Rock-Paper-Scissors. In fact, it looks a lot like Rock-Paper-Scissors, doesn’t it? In Rock-Paper-Scissors, each strategy loses to and beats one other strategy. In Jewish Poker, each strategy loses to and beats an infinite number of other strategies…


“‘As you like,’ I sneered, and could hardly keep back my jubilant laughter. In the meantime a fantastic number had occurred to me: Thirty-five!
‘Lead!’ said Ervinke.
‘Thirty-five!’
‘Forty-three!’
With that he pocketed the forty piasters. I could feel the blood rushing into my brain.”


So are all strategies equivalent here, like in Rock-Paper-Scissors? Can we pick “at random”? (Whatever that means…) That doesn’t seem right. Some strategies just dominate others. Surely “Ackermann of one billion, one billion” isn’t equivalent to “Negative one times Ackermann of one billion, one billion.” Yes, they’re both much smaller than infinity, but from experience, I can tell you: one will win you more games of Jewish Poker than the other.

Of course, maybe your opponent doesn’t know fancy concepts like the Ackermann function; maybe you’re just better at writing small. But those seem like silly constraints, independent of the game itself, forced upon us by our sad, physical existence. One could conceive of deities playing this game, deities that could conceive of any, any, number they wanted, unconstrained by the finite bounds of our universe, and somehow even they seem to have problems with this game. Every number is an infinitesimal grain of sand on the vast beach of infinity; every number is so, so much smaller than what could have been said.

And yet a winner must be declared…


“‘Listen,’ I hissed. ‘Then why didn't you say Forty-three the last time?’
‘Because I had thought of Seventeen!’ Ervinke retorted indignantly. ‘Don't you see, that is the fun in poker: you never know what will happen next.’
‘A pound,’ I remarked dryly, and, my lips curled in scorn, I threw a note on the table. Ervinke extracted a similar note from his pocket and with maddening slowness placed it next to mine. The tension was unbearable. I opened with Fifty-four.
‘Oh, damn it!’ Ervinke fumed. ‘I also thought of Fifty-four! Draw! Another game!’”


It’s possible to make versions of Rock-Paper-Scissors with more strategies, with each strategy losing to half of the other strategies and beating the other half. See Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock, for instance. (Like the original, except Lizard beats Paper and Spock and loses to Rock and Scissors; Spock beats Rock and Scissors but loses to Paper and Lizard.) There’s even a version with 25 elements. So is that what Jewish Poker is? The limit of these games, approaching infinity?

Well, no, because you can make games of Rock-Paper-Scissors with infinite elements and not suffer from Jewish Poker’s bizarre defects. Take, for instance, the following game:

-Each player says a number simultaneously.
-The number must be positive.
-If the difference between the two numbers is greater than one, the player who said the smaller number wins. Otherwise, the player who said the larger number wins.

After a bit of thought, it becomes clear that saying numbers greater than 2 is pointless: You might as well have said the number you just said, but minus 2. (For example, don’t say 2.7; say 0.7. That beats everything 2.7 would have beaten, but avoids losing to 0 through 0.7 and 2.7 through 3.7.) And now we have a kind of “cycle,” looping back to 0 when it reaches 2, of an uncountably infinite number of different plays, each one beating and losing to half of the other plays. That’s what we really wanted to see, when we talked about Rock-Paper-Scissors with infinite elements.


“My brain worked with lightning speed. ‘Now you think I'll again call Eleven, my boy,’ I reasoned. ‘But you'll get the surprise of your life.’ I chose the sure-fire Sixty-nine.

‘You know what, Ervinke’- I turned to Ervinke –‘you lead.’
‘As you like,’ he agreed. ‘It's all the same with me. Seventy!’

Everything went black before my eyes. I had not felt such panic since the siege of Jerusalem.”


So what’s Jewish Poker then? Well, I don’t really know, but I’d say it’s probably a game best left to the deities.


“‘Nu?’ Ervinke urged. ‘What number did you think of?’
‘What do you know?’ I whispered with downcast eyes. ‘I have forgotten.’”




The full story, by Ephraim Kishon, can be found here.



-Adam

47 comments:

  1. A favorite game in the Physics Club at UW was a version of this with three people -- but you were trying to get the middle number. (Written on paper and revealed simultaneously.)

    -SW

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's kind of interesting--like in Jewish poker all plays seem in some sense "equivalent", even though some beat others, but it's not a clearly degenerate game...

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Similarly as with huge numbers of the overwhelming online poker player gaple online uang asli

    ReplyDelete
  5. A poker bot is limited to making decisions based solely on the party's game in relation to its statistical analysis of poker.https://www.jetwin.com/en-us click for more Facts about bitcoin casinos.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This blog had a to a great degree solid effect on me.
    Poker Online

    ReplyDelete
  7. I really like your writing style, great information, thankyou for posting. poker99

    ReplyDelete
  8. I read your blog frequently, and I just thought I’d say keep up the fantastic work! It is one of the most outstanding blogs in my opinion. Perkasa99

    ReplyDelete
  9. the article is very good, thank you for the article hopefully usefully, hopefully the other articles are more solid

    Prediksi Hk

    Prediksi Sdy

    Prediksi Sgp

    ReplyDelete
  10. This blog is so rational. Left its readers stun.
    click over here

    ReplyDelete
  11. Lets Join Us



    816 Agent



    816 Win



    Bokepindo 816

    Bonus new member 50%
    Bonus deposit 5%
    Bonus Rolingan 1%
    Komisi bola x3
    Bonus menang 10%
    Cashback Sportbook 5%

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thank you for your post, I look for such article along time, today i find it finally. this post give me lots of advise it is very useful for me. 카지노

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. 온라인카지노

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think it could be more general if you get a football sports activity 카지노사이트

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a team of volunteers and new initiatives in the same niche. Blog gave us useful information to work. You have done an amazing job! 바카라사이트

    ReplyDelete
  16. it was a wonderful chance to visit this kind of site and I am happy to know. thank you so much for giving us a chance to have this opportunity.. Dewapoker

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thank you very much for writing such an interesting article on this topic. This has really made me think and I hope to read more. judi online

    ReplyDelete
  18. Your website is really cool and this is a great inspiring article. http://megajoker88.net

    ReplyDelete
  19. superior make regarded, insist within the works inside the equal manner as this terrific take steps. it is pleasant to recognize that this subject matter is being in addition to blanketed upon this web web site correspondingly clapping for taking the epoch to discuss this! thanks long past greater and anew! Learn more

    ReplyDelete
  20. i never know the use of adobe shadow until i saw this post. thank you for this! this is very helpful. บาคาร่า

    ReplyDelete
  21. I finally found great post here.I will get back here. I just added your blog to my bookmark sites. thanks.Quality posts is the crucial to invite the visitors to visit the web page, that's what this web page is providing. dental implants near me

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is actually in addition such a fine writing most people certainly expert wanting by. Its not daily we certainly have probability to consider a little. 릴게임

    ReplyDelete
  23. I think this is an informative post and it is very useful and knowledgeable. therefore, I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. agen togel online

    ReplyDelete
  24. I am happy to find this post Very useful for me, as it contains lot of information. I Always prefer to read The Quality and glad I found this thing in you post. Thanks agen bola terbaik dan terpercaya

    ReplyDelete
  25. https://decembercorleyvx.blogspot.com/2009/08/wwe-gently-strip-poker.html?showComment=1562095595711#c2274830457152715942

    ReplyDelete
  26. I finally found great post here.I will get back here. I just added your blog to my bookmark sites. thanks.Quality posts is the crucial to invite the visitors to visit the web page, that's what this web page is providing. download 918kiss

    ReplyDelete
  27. A each and every one first rate blog publicize. we are in truth grateful on your blog call. you'll locate numerous techniques after traveling your say. BandarQ

    ReplyDelete
  28. Great article with excellent idea!Thank you for such a valuable article. I really appreciate for this great information.. daftar poker

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hi, I find reading this article a joy. It is extremely helpful and interesting and very much looking forward to reading more of your work.. Poker Indonesia

    ReplyDelete
  30. Your blog provided us with valuable information to work with. Each & every tips of your post are awesome. Thanks a lot for sharing. Keep blogging.. UFABET

    ReplyDelete
  31. i was analyzing your article and wondered if you had taken into consideration growing an ebook going concerning for this difficulty. Your writing would sell it sudden. you have lots of writing school. ceme online

    ReplyDelete
  32. I essentially thanks for the critical info re this supreme difficulty and spot deal with to greater significant posts. thanks plenty for taking part in this beauty article considering me. i am appreciating it very lots! looking lecture to to different large article. accurate success to the author! all the first-class! ceme online

    ReplyDelete
  33. I just want to let you know that I just check out your site and I find it very interesting and informative.. kosten schlüsseldienst

    ReplyDelete
  34. visit our site soon prediksi hk mbah ompong there are various kinds of interesting and useful things for your life

    ReplyDelete
  35. The heart of your writing whilst appearing agreeable in the beginning, did not work perfectly with me personally after some time. Somewhere throughout the sentences you were able to make me a believer but just for a short while. I nevertheless have a problem with your jumps in assumptions and one would do well to help fill in all those gaps. In the event that you actually can accomplish that, I will surely be fascinated. BandarQ

    ReplyDelete
  36. Sam you k1ke you, fucked us all with some jewish poker of your own

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Think of a number. Record it on your balance sheet.

      Delete

Contributors