[Disclaimers: I am an employee of Bristol Myers Squibb. The views expressed here are my own. Also, I am not a particularly good poker or chess player. It is one reason I am a popular invited guest to poker nights with friends.]
I posted on poll on Twitter to ask the question is drug discovery more like poker or chess. There were over 300 responses, with the results split nearly equally (54% poker, 46% chess).
My answer to the question, “Is drug discovery more like poker or chess?”, derives from the following truths:
Poker is a game of skill and chance, where critical information about how to win is hidden. In poker, one has to make probabilistic decisions with incomplete information.
Chess is a game of pure skill, where all information is available and – for the best players – decisions are deterministic. Unlike poker, chess contains no hidden information and very little luck.
Thus, my “answer” to the question is drug discovery is more like poker than chess – largely because of available information (poker = incomplete, chess = complete) and the importance on probabilistic (poker) vs deterministic (chess) decision-making. Here is more context.
Thinking in bets
I recently read the book “Thinking in Bets” by poker champion Annie Duke (@AnnieDuke).…