Not sure if troll or just stupid (you decide)

estebanrey said:
Do you think, that in this game, before any eggs have been picked that Holly stands a better chance of not losing than the others, yes or no?
Click to expand...

GOALPOSTS MOVED.

4 people stand in front of 6 eggs, every body at that point has exactly the same odds.

Until someone chooses an egg.
 
I think I get what the OP is saying, he is looking at the probabilities from the start of the experiment, whereas the rest of you are recalculating it after every turn.

I am ok at maths I guess, with an A level and almost an economics degree :p
 
estebanrey said:
I'm aware of that, you are still ignoring that each person has a chance of getting the bad egg thus making the chance of latter people picking at all reduces.

Do you think, that in this game, before any eggs have been picked that Holly stands a better chance of not losing than the others, yes or no?
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring the fact that everyone has a chance of getting the bad egg. I'm saying that chance increases the more good eggs are chosen.
 
if they all pick and egg each and smash them at the same time then the op is right. doesn't matter who picks first.
 
Dimple said:
Do you really believe what you're saying?
Click to expand...

Yes, because it's a mathematical fact.

Dimple said:
For your maths to work the 4 people choose from 6 eggs.
If Fern gets a hard boiled egg and then every body turns around and it is replaced by another hard boiled then the 3 people left are still choosing from 6 eggs.

However, if Fern gets a hard boiled there are 5 eggs left which is now a 20% chance of picking the bad one or an 80% chance of picking a good one.

The next person now has a 25% chance of picking a bad one or 75% chance of picking a good one

and so on.
Click to expand...

Again you are only looking at the chance of getting the bad egg IF everyone before picks a good one and ignoring the chances you won't have to go at all.

The question isn't "Does the person who goes third, after two others have eliminated good eggs, have the same chance of picking the bad egg at that point in time as the people who went before them", I perfectly understand that they don't; but the question is "Before any eggs have been picked, is there a statistical advantage to going first (as Holly thinks)" to which the answer is no.
 
estebanrey is correct, we're only dealing with the situation at the start of the game, as dictated by the statement 'If I go first, i've got a better chance'.

This is nonsense, going first offers no advantage at all, because whilst the odds of picking the bad egg get worse as the game goes on, it is completely counteracted by the odds of someone else picking it before you, thus whether you choose to go first or fourth offers no advantage at the start of the game.

By the time you get to the fourth go, the odds would be worse for you but that's a different scenario and you can't know at the start of the game that it will get to four goes at all.
 
Cleisthenes said:
I think I get what the OP is saying, he is looking at the probabilities from the start of the experiment, whereas the rest of you are recalculating it after every turn.

I am ok at maths I guess, with an A level and almost an economics degree :p
Click to expand...

He has also recalculated at every turn in his posts but now he is trying to move the goalposts.
 
Keyboards'Fear said:
It should be the chance they choose the bad egg (considering the way the game is played) that's when it increases. But (if) what OP is saying is that BEFORE the game starts they all have the same chance, then I agree with him.
But as soon as the first egg has been broken, then the rest of the players 'chances of getting the bad egg' before the game starts are thrown out and it becomes irrelevant.

So yea, OP you'd be right if only 1 person was to have a go, if 2 or more players were to go then the chances change.
Click to expand...

They all have the same chances at the start, we all know that but the OP is playing mental gymnastics here. It's pretty clear that the context is "If I go now, it's less likely I get the bad egg than if I go after others".
 
Kenai said:
estebanrey is correct, we're only dealing with the situation at the start of the game, as dictated by the statement 'If I go first, i've got a better chance'.

This is nonsense, going first offers no advantage at all, because whilst the odds of picking the bad egg get worse as the game goes on, it is completely counteracted by the odds of someone else picking it before you, thus whether you choose to go first or fourth offers no advantage at the start of the game.

By the time you get to the fourth go, the odds would be worse for you but that's a different scenario and you can't know at the start of the game that it will get to four goes at all.
Click to expand...

It's pretty clear that the point is "I'll go first as the chances of getting a bad egg are less than if I went fourth".

It's pretty simple and you don't need to perform ego massaging calculations to figure that out.
 
OP, your maths doesn't appear to take into account the progression of the game. Or is that the point?
I'm confused.
 
estebanrey said:
Holly = 1 in 6 chance = 16.6666%
Next person = 5 in 6 times (Holly not getting the bad egg) 1 in 5 = 16.6666%
Click to expand...

I think you confused things with those calculations, they're irrelevant

They all have a 16.6666% chance at the start of the game, so going first is no advantage.
Click to expand...

That is the main point, they've all got the same chance, going first doesn't change that. It just gets it over with quicker.

Would just try to explain that yes, the odds get smaller as more good eggs are removed from the game/more information is revealed but going first doesn't change anything, everyone had the same chance. As the game goes on they learn that they now have an higher chance of having the raw egg, but they're not at any disadvantage because they now know they've got a 1/4 chance etc... The chance that they would be in that situation is the same as any other situation.
 
spoffle said:
I'm not ignoring the fact that everyone has a chance of getting the bad egg. I'm saying that chance increases the more good eggs are chosen.
Click to expand...

Which is irrelevant at the start of the game and thus choosing to go first provides no advantage (contrary to Holly's claim), do we agree?
 
Kenai said:
estebanrey is correct, we're only dealing with the situation at the start of the game, as dictated by the statement 'If I go first, i've got a better chance'.

This is nonsense, going first offers no advantage at all, because whilst the odds of picking the bad egg get worse as the game goes on, it is completely counteracted by the odds of someone else picking it before you, thus whether you choose to go first or fourth offers no advantage at the start of the game.

By the time you get to the fourth go, the odds would be worse for you but that's a different scenario and you can't know at the start of the game that it will get to four goes at all.
Click to expand...

9wyVRHZ.jpg
 
spoffle said:
It's pretty clear that the context is "If I go now, it's less likely I get the bad egg than if I go after others".
Click to expand...

But that's not true, because before anyone has gone, the odds of that statement will get countered by the chance of other players picking it first.

There is no statistical advantage to picking first, your odds at the start of the game will be identical whether you choose first or last.
 
Kenai said:
estebanrey is correct, we're only dealing with the situation at the start of the game, as dictated by the statement 'If I go first, i've got a better chance'.

This is nonsense, going first offers no advantage at all, because whilst the odds of picking the bad egg get worse as the game goes on, it is completely counteracted by the odds of someone else picking it before you, thus whether you choose to go first or fourth offers no advantage at the start of the game.

By the time you get to the fourth go, the odds would be worse for you but that's a different scenario and you can't know at the start of the game that it will get to four goes at all.
Click to expand...
This.
 
spoffle said:
It's pretty clear that the point is "I'll go first as the chances of getting a bad egg are less than if I went fourth".

It's pretty simple and you don't need to perform ego massaging calculations to figure that out.
Click to expand...

BUT choosing to go first or fourth are identical. You're ignoring the odds of not even getting to a fourth go.

Saying "I'll go first as the chances of getting a bad egg are less than if I went fourth" is incorrect, the odds are identical at the point in time at which you would make such a statement.
 
estebanrey said:
Which is irrelevant at the start of the game and thus choosing to go first provides no advantage (contrary to Holly's claim), do we agree?
Click to expand...

Nope, because you're twisting things to suit your argument. At the start, when the first move hasn't been decided they all have the same odds of getting the raw egg.

Going first DOES provide an advantage with regards to the progression of the game, as you have a 1/6 chance of getting the bad egg. They are simply the best odds you're going to get.

But you don't seem to be able to see that, you seem to be fixating on the very beginning using calculations that only apply if the person taking the first turn hasn't been decided.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom