Game Theory, Prisoner’s Dilemma, The Choices we make each and every day
Of the concepts in Networks that are most frequently seen in day-to-day life, Game Theory is far and beyond one of the most frequent. One of the biggest things games that comes apparent in a person’s life is the Prisoner’s Dilemma. People each day contemplate the risk vs. reward of their choices, and will often weigh the value of decisions against the potential of any other decisions they could possibly make. In my personal life, I do this in terms of time management, when it comes to determining how much time I will spend studying for any certain course over any other course. Will me spending two extra hours studying Networks substantially detract from my performance in Statistics? These are thoughts I have both consciously and subconsciously each and every day, and are certainly not unique to just me.
A Wired article discusses the prevalence of Game Theory in life and focuses on the prevalence in the lives of professional sports athletes, a perspective most typical people don’t generally have access to. The article says to “Consider for example competing athletes Alice and Bob, who are individually deciding whether to take drugs or not. Alice thinks:
‘If Bob doesn’t take any drugs, then it will be in my best interest to take them. They will give me a performance edge against Bob. I have a better chance of winning. Similarly, if Bob takes drugs, it’s also in my interest to agree to take them. At least that way Bob won’t have an advantage over me. So even though I have no control over what Bob chooses to do, taking drugs gives me the better outcome, regardless of his action.’ Unfortunately, Bob goes through exactly the same analysis. As a result, they both take performance-enhancing drugs and neither has the advantage over the other.”
The article makes a direct correlation to an actual incident, in which Lance Armstrong was found to have blood doped to get an advantage in road race cycling, after spending years of vehemently denying any tie to performance-enhancing drugs. This was a Prisoner’s Dilemma for Armstrong; Is the potential risk of being caught and labeled as a cheater for the rest of his life worth cementing his legacy as one of the best Tour de France cyclists in history. The moral dilemma is altered to fit each specific individual and their situation, but there are tons of professional athletes that can be presented with this dilemma; Kevin Durant, who is considered one of the best players on the planet without performance-enhancing drugs, could cement himself into history as one of the best players ever, in addition to passing Lebron James as one of the best active players after spending years in his shadow, if he were to use them. Serena Williams, one of the greatest professional female tennis players, could set herself even further apart from the rest of her competitive field by using performance-enhancing drugs. Numerous athletes could obviously improve their performance by blood doping, using steroids, doing a plethora of competitively illegal activities. Yet most come to the conclusion that the risk is not worth the reward. It begs the question of “What was the thought process Lance Armstrong went through that he felt the right decision was to blood dope?” A question we may never have an answer to, but this is the dilemma a professional sports athlete may face, whereas a more standard person may have a less extreme situation. That is the frequency of the Prisoner’s Dilemma, and furthermore, the frequency of Game Theory.
Wired Article: https://www.wired.com/2012/10/lance-armstrong-and-the-prisoners-dilemma-of-doping-in-professional-sports/