English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-01 02:53:04 · 11 answers · asked by Shy Bear Who's Not Shy 1 in Education & Reference Words & Wordplay

11 answers

It means a game in which if you get one point, the other side loses a point. When the scores are added together (which isn't necessary for scoring it's descriptive) the result is zero.

2007-01-01 02:56:02 · answer #1 · answered by DelK 7 · 1 1

I know I've mastered the ability to walk, talk and read. There's nothing much left to learn in these fields, and I can do it all with complete ease. Doesn't mean I never stub my toe, slur a few words, or stumble on a sentence now and then, but I've reached a point where it's completely causal. I'm not an olympic sprinter, or a public speaker, or a speed reader -- those are all entirely separate skills -- but what I learned is plenty to get through life. I never forget that the martial arts are called an art, whether or not that's an Eastern interpretation, but in the West this does have a purpose. An art couldn't be something you perfect. Music, painting and sculpting all have near limitless potential, but stages of development that you would have to "master" to get better. A black belt, as we've explained before on here, is about having a firm understanding of the fundamentals, or "All basic movements and techniques, can be applied with extended force and proper application in basic combination." The key words here would be "all basic movements and techniques" and "extended force and proper application". I would say there is a mastery of having LEARNED the requirements and KNOW how to put them to use, just not anything further from the basics. I think people go a little too far with the word, using it mostly erroneously, but the intent of comfortably and casually using what you've learned is what they're all implying. As for the martial arts as a whole, that I believe is impossible, especially as an art.

2016-03-14 00:15:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is a "game" (which could be a historical event or any happening) where the positives and negatives (or gains and losses, advantages and disadvantages) cancel each other out, i.e. in terms of number or effect they sum or add up to zero. When everything is considered there is no net gain or net loss.

2007-01-01 03:13:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Zero-sum describes a situation in which a participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant(s). It is so named because when the total gains of the participants are added up, and the total losses are subtracted, they will sum to zero. Chess and Go are examples of a zero-sum game: it is impossible for both players to win.

2007-01-01 03:01:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Zero-sum describes a situation in which a participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant(s). It is so named because when the total gains of the participants are added up, and the total losses are subtracted, they will sum to zero. Chess and Go are examples of a zero-sum game: it is impossible for both players to win. Zero-sum can be thought of more generally as constant sum where the benefits and losses to all players sum to the same value. Cutting a cake is zero- or constant-sum because taking a larger piece reduces the amount of cake available for others.

Situations where participants can all gain or suffer together, such as a country with an excess of bananas trading with another country for their excess of apples, where both benefit from the transaction, are referred to as non-zero-sum. Other non-zero-sum games are games in which the sum of gains and losses by the players are always more or less than what they began with. For example, a game of poker played in a casino is a zero-sum game unless the pleasure of gambling or the cost of operating a casino is taken into account, making it a non-zero-sum game.

The concept was first developed in game theory and consequently zero-sum situations are often called zero-sum games though this does not imply that the concept, or game theory itself, applies only to what are commonly referred to as games. Optimal strategies for two-player zero-sum games can often be found using minimax strategies.

2007-01-01 03:00:58 · answer #5 · answered by subz29 1 · 0 1

It means the positives and negatives of a given scenario completely offset eachother, resulting in no movement. This is typically considered negative, as progress of some sort is the foundation of game theory.

2007-01-01 02:55:30 · answer #6 · answered by greeneyedprincess 6 · 0 0

zero-sum game (n.) A situation in which a gain by one person or side must be matched by a loss by another person or side:“It's not a zero-sum game in which either youth or pensioners must lose” (Earl W. Foell)

2007-01-01 02:54:47 · answer #7 · answered by Answer Champion 3 · 2 1

I was going to try to explain, but the link is pretty clear and I don't wan to repaste the whole article here.

2007-01-01 02:56:35 · answer #8 · answered by David G 5 · 1 0

When you added each sides' losses and wins nobody came out the winner.

No change. Nada. Stalemate. Nobody wins.

2007-01-01 02:55:51 · answer #9 · answered by Matthew L 4 · 0 1

At the end everything has gone to naught

2007-01-01 02:54:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers