Ever wondered which framework fits better when players make irreversible moves? Is it the aggressive posturing of a mad dog strategy, forcing others to back down? Or does it lean closer to a prisoners dilemma setup—but with a twist, where commitment devices lock in decisions before anyone can defect? The answer might reshape how we think about strategic positioning in high-stakes environments.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

11 Likes

Reward
11
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

CrossChainMessenger

· 12-01 19:03

In simple terms, is it a gamble for life or a kidnapping? Once you place a bet, there is no turning back; this is the true essence of the game.

View OriginalReply0

SybilSlayer

· 12-01 18:55

Once a move is made, it cannot be taken back; this is the real test. The mad dog strategy sounds fierce, but it is essentially betting that the opponent will blink, often resulting in mutual destruction. It is better to directly use a commitment device to make the decision set in stone, which is more persuasive.

View OriginalReply0

StakeTillRetire

· 12-01 18:53

To be honest, this mad dog strategy can't work on-chain at all; the commitment mechanism is the core.

View OriginalReply0

SchrödingersNode

· 12-01 18:49

The mad dog strategy sounds tough, but when it really matters, it depends on who can hold their ground.

View OriginalReply0

ETHmaxi_NoFilter

· 12-01 18:48

Mad Dog Strategy vs Prisoner's Dilemma... Simply put, it's about who dares to bet first. This commitment device gameplay has been played on-chain for a long time.

View OriginalReply0

NftMetaversePainter

· 12-01 18:44

ngl this is just game theory wrapped in web3 language... commitment devices as blockchain primitives? now we're cooking. the immutable nature of on-chain decisions literally IS the prisoners dilemma solved through algorithmic enforcement. mad dog posturing is so web2.

Reply0

GasWrangler

· 12-01 18:40

honestly the mad dog framing is just sub-optimal game theory tbh. if you analyze the data, commitment devices are mathematically superior because they eliminate the defection vector entirely—it's empirically proven in mechanism design literature. the real play is base layer optimization of your threat credibility, not just posturing. most people don't even understand the mempool dynamics here smh

Reply0

Trending TopicsView More
#JoinGrowthPointsDrawToWiniPhone17
246.63K Popularity
#DecemberMarketOutlook
39.75K Popularity
#PostonSquaretoEarn$50
2.88K Popularity
#LINKETFToLaunch
6.66K Popularity
#SharingMy100xToken
6.04K Popularity

Hot Gate FunView More

1
SYNSynexia
MC:$3.78KHolders:2
0.71%
2
GCHADGIGA CHAD
MC:$3.65KHolders:1
0.73%
3
GETGESIA
MC:$4.46KHolders:4
4.28%
4
MLGDMilo Gold
MC:$3.9KHolders:3
0.20%
5
DOGHATDOGHAT
MC:$3.68KHolders:1
0.62%

Sitemap