Famous Rock Paper Scissors Moments
Four documented decisions and demonstrations, with the unsupported tournament, baseball, and poker stories removed.
Several consequential Rock Paper Scissors decisions have strong contemporary records. In 2005 Takashi Hashiyama asked Christie’s and Sotheby’s to choose who would sell a collection valued above $20 million; Christie’s chose Scissors and beat Sotheby’s Paper. In 2006 U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell ordered lawyers to use the game if they could not agree where to conduct a deposition. A University of Tokyo laboratory also published a high-speed robot demonstration, and a 2018 English football referee received a three-week suspension after using the game instead of the required coin toss.
The $20 Million Auction (2005)
Japanese electronics magnate Takashi Hashiyama needed to choose between Christie's and Sotheby's to auction his company's $20 million art collection, which included works by Cezanne, Picasso, and van Gogh. He didn't compare fees. He didn't review proposals. He told both houses to play Rock Paper Scissors.
Christie's consulted the 11-year-old twin daughters of their international director. The girls advised Scissors, reasoning that "everybody expects you to choose Rock." Sotheby's considered it "a game of chance" and chose Paper with no particular strategy.
Scissors cut Paper, so Christie’s won the right to conduct the sale. Contemporary reporting described several million dollars in potential fees without establishing an exact amount.
The Federal Court Order (2006)
Lawyers in a Florida federal case couldn't agree on even the most basic procedural matters. U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell had seen enough. He issued this order:
"...the Court will refer the disputed issues to a Special Master, i.e., a game of Rock Paper Scissors, to be played at the front steps of the Sam M. Gibbons U.S. Courthouse."
A sitting federal judge ordered grown attorneys to settle their dispute with Rock Paper Scissors on the courthouse steps. He called their inability to agree on trivial matters "a waste of judicial resources." The order went viral. The legal profession had mixed feelings. The RPS community did not have mixed feelings. We were thrilled.
The English Football Coin Toss (2018)
Before a Women’s Super League match between Manchester City and Reading, referee David McNamara left his coin in the dressing room and used Rock Paper Scissors to decide the kickoff. The Football Association suspended him for three weeks because the Laws of the Game required a coin toss; BBC Sport later reported that he withdrew his appeal.
Robot vs. Human: The Unbeatable Machine (2012)
Researchers at the University of Tokyo built a robot hand that could play RPS with a 100% win rate against humans. The trick: a high-speed camera recognized the human's hand shape within one millisecond of the throw and formed the winning gesture before the human could perceive the delay.
It wasn't really playing Rock Paper Scissors. It was reacting to Rock Paper Scissors. But it raised a genuine question about what "simultaneous" means when one participant can see the future. The robot has since retired undefeated, presumably to pursue other interests.
Why These Moments Matter
Every one of these stories has the same thing in common: people turned to Rock Paper Scissors because they trusted it. Whether the stakes were $20 million, a federal court case, or rain-delay boredom, RPS was accepted as a legitimate way to settle things. That trust has been built over centuries of global history. Rock Paper Scissors isn't just a game. It's a universal protocol for fairness. And occasionally for deciding who gets the Picasso.