This goes back a ways. Even in Yes, Minister from the 1980s, we were told that the way to win is to “play the man, not the ball”. Rather than try to actually win the game, instead make the other fella lose. Understand your opponent. There’s probable some Art of War element to it too. But every school kid knows that rock, paper, scissors is completely fair and cannot be beaten, that you cannot work out a strategy, you can’t guarantee to win.

But you can.

Probably.

Just as Sheldon Cooper invariably chooses Spock in the extended rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock version of the game in The Big Bang Theory, so researchers have demonstrated that we make similar choices in similar situations:

A group of researchers from Chinese universities have written a paper about the role of psychology in winning (or losing) at rock-paper-scissors. After studying how players change or keep their strategies during multiple-round sessions, they figured out a basic rule that people tend to play by that could potentially be exploited.

Scientists find a winning strategy for rock-paper-scissors – Ars Technica (May 2014)

The rule is just that if someone makes a choice that works, they stick with it next time. So in theory you can always figure out what will happen in the second round of rock, paper, scissors. No use to you if everything was decided on the first go.

I have a continuing problem with this being called science when it feels more like statistics but the argument is that it is psychology. And that therefore understanding the psychology helps you beat your opponent.

I have a continuing problem with beating your opponent. It’s not that often that I have opponents, it’s much more often that I am my own one. So I read this full feature and I think about how it means I can prevent myself being predictable. And I read this full feature and it puts me in mind of The Big Bang Theory like this: