TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > TiVo TV Talk > Now Playing - TV Show Talk
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-27-2014, 11:51 AM   #421
Stephen Tu
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 1,886
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrohip View Post
#1 had $18,900. #2 had $18,200. All she needs to wager is enough to beat him if he's wrong. #2 generally assumes if #1 gets it correct, he will wager enough to win. If he doesn't, he wimped out (or had a specific strategy in mind).

So she should bet $701. If he is correct, she's out. But if he is wrong, she wins! Instead she wagered all of it; had he been wrong, she would have lost anyway.
What's correct for her to wager, if she assumes #1 is betting to guarantee winning, is dependent on #3's status, not $701. $701 is only necessary if you think there is a significant chance of #1 betting nothing, which I don't think I've ever seen. People like to control their own destiny and even if the topic is out of your wheelhouse often you can work it out from the clue.

If #3 was not in the game any longer, #2 can rationally bet anywhere from $0 to $16800 if #1 is assumed to bet to cover the win with $1 win if both right. There's no reason to bet exactly $701.

Quote:
He bet for a tie, which makes no sense. Her bet in hindsight worked, but he had no reason to bet for a tie, he could have won this game outright.
Uh, how much did #3 have, and how much did #1 bet? Not sure what you meant by "he bet for a tie".

If you meant that #1 bet to tie #2 if she bet it all, so 17500 instead of 17501, that actually makes perfect sense from #1's perspective. If #2 knows this is #1's strategy, this gives her incentive to bet it all, since then if both find the correct "question", which is not uncommon, both come back and have won quite a lot of money. If #2 knows #1 always bets to not tie, then she has no incentive to bet it all, and should indeed bet just to cover #3, usually a small number in this situation. If #1 is known to bet for the tie, and can get #2 to bet all to cater to the "both right" situation, he gets to recover the winning position in the "everyone wrong" situation (if #3 isn't a factor). That's #1's incentive to bet for the tie, inducing an all-in from #2. For #2, it becomes a question of whether both right or both wrong is more likely, and also betting all wins you a lot more money in the "I'm right, #1 is wrong" situation.

Betting for the tie should become more common after the Arthur Chu publicity made the logic behind this strategy more publicized.
Stephen Tu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2014, 06:15 PM   #422
spartanstew
Thanks 4 the Update
 
spartanstew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wylie, Texas
Posts: 8,620
Yep, if I were in the lead, I would almost always bet for the tie (and not $1 more).
__________________
"the dream never dies, just the dreamer"
spartanstew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2014, 12:20 AM   #423
rifleman69
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrohip View Post
http://thefinalwager.co/

Especially this: http://thefinalwager.co/2013/09/17/h...ardy-part-one/

#1 had $18,900. #2 had $18,200. All she needs to wager is enough to beat him if he's wrong. #2 generally assumes if #1 gets it correct, he will wager enough to win. If he doesn't, he wimped out (or had a specific strategy in mind).

In general, if #2 has more than 2/3 of #1's money going into FJ, #2 wagers $1 more than the difference. This will give #2 the win if both lose, or if #2 is correct and #1 is wrong.

So she should bet $701. If he is correct, she's out. But if he is wrong, she wins! Instead she wagered all of it; had he been wrong, she would have lost anyway.

He bet for a tie, which makes no sense. Her bet in hindsight worked, but he had no reason to bet for a tie, he could have won this game outright.
Uh, you still didn't answer the question. She was #2 and bet it all...you're simply basing your conclusion on #1's bet which has nothing to do with #2's bet.
rifleman69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2014, 12:22 AM   #424
rifleman69
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Tu View Post
What's correct for her to wager, if she assumes #1 is betting to guarantee winning, is dependent on #3's status, not $701. $701 is only necessary if you think there is a significant chance of #1 betting nothing, which I don't think I've ever seen. People like to control their own destiny and even if the topic is out of your wheelhouse often you can work it out from the clue.

If #3 was not in the game any longer, #2 can rationally bet anywhere from $0 to $16800 if #1 is assumed to bet to cover the win with $1 win if both right. There's no reason to bet exactly $701.



Uh, how much did #3 have, and how much did #1 bet? Not sure what you meant by "he bet for a tie".

If you meant that #1 bet to tie #2 if she bet it all, so 17500 instead of 17501, that actually makes perfect sense from #1's perspective. If #2 knows this is #1's strategy, this gives her incentive to bet it all, since then if both find the correct "question", which is not uncommon, both come back and have won quite a lot of money. If #2 knows #1 always bets to not tie, then she has no incentive to bet it all, and should indeed bet just to cover #3, usually a small number in this situation. If #1 is known to bet for the tie, and can get #2 to bet all to cater to the "both right" situation, he gets to recover the winning position in the "everyone wrong" situation (if #3 isn't a factor). That's #1's incentive to bet for the tie, inducing an all-in from #2. For #2, it becomes a question of whether both right or both wrong is more likely, and also betting all wins you a lot more money in the "I'm right, #1 is wrong" situation.

Betting for the tie should become more common after the Arthur Chu publicity made the logic behind this strategy more publicized.
Yep, your assessment (and mine) make more sense.
rifleman69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoŽ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |