Currently reading: Great Minds in Finance: The Efficient Market Hypothesis

I'm reading the fourth book in Colin Read's series Great Minds in Finance that describes the people and discoveries behind the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Since I'm an avid chess player myself, this quote stood out:

To better understand the meaning of a fair game of the type Bachelier modeled, contrast the analogy with chess and the card game poker. A game of chess can be resumed at any time by any player without disadvantage. All observers of a snapshot of the chess board have all the available information. The past history of moves and captures is immaterial. The only relevant issue is the position of the chess men at any moment. However, in poker, even if one could observe all hands at a time t or have all inside information belonging to each player at a given stage in the game, past history remains important. The composition of the pile of cards that have been discarded and swapped are only partially known, and only to individual players. And even if one were to know the cards they discarded, and hence had som idea of the cards remaining in the deck or in the hands of others, the information is imperfect. In fact, poker is an imperfect game of insiders information while chess or coin tossing are games that are informationally perfect, as Bachelier and the proponents of efficient markets have assumed of financial markets ever since.

So chess, not poker, would be the best analogy for an efficient market.