Re: Re: The Monty Hall Paradox

A lot gets lost in type, but I'm going to believe in humanity and say that was sarcasm....right?!! Please say yes.

hahahah yes it was

IOkay, so it's a 2/3 shot you got it wrong on your first shot and chose a goat. Then they show you a goat and offer a switch. Since all that is left is the car and a goat and that two out of three times you have chosen wrong on the first guess and given that the other door is the car, switch and your odds are increased. Granted you man be screwing yourself...but the odds are with you to switch. I don't get the argument.

well the argument is that you are chaining 2 events and what yu get in the end is the same partition you had in the start 1/3 vs 2/3. it's an ilusion to think there's an advantage of switching as what you get is dependent of your inicial pick in reverse- the "switch" matter. it is simply semantic and not probability, you are still refering to first event. god please get it!

In fact the second step beeing inocuous (meaning no advantage cause you can't tell what your pick was) leaves you with the inicial oods, presented in reversed as to "switch", instead of "2n pick". Obviously semantic isuae because if it was a "2nd pick" you wouldn't doubt to call it 50/50, now would you?

The two events ARE chained, because you are makeing TWO choices! If something is done in series the past effects the future. I flip a coin twice, each flip is a 50/50 as to heads or tail, but .the odds of me getting heads both times is 1/4 right? Because the previous event has influence. Otherwise I'd be an idiot and say it was 50/50. and (before I get any kind of hate filled response) I'm in no way calling you and idiot, but you ARE dead wrong this time.

Ok you call them chained and you exemplify with the coins. well as with the coins the are INDEPENDENt events, one does not influeence the other's oods. In fact it could if the first pick was disclosed, but it NEVER IS so you cant call it an event, and you only make one choise in the end, otherwise ....yes :). so your second pick is as good as the first. and swicthing back would be the same!!! try it!cheers

Okay, as far the coin flipping problem each flip is indepedent, however if asked about a coin being tossed x amount of times in y order...each flip is independent but the chance of a certain outcome or winning outcome depends on the previous cases. You ask me to try it....have you? Your numbers are ass backwards, you just don't want to admit it.. Infact, if you honestly believe your odds to be true...I have a poker game every Tuesday. Your MORE than welcome to come.

as to pocker if someone flashes a joker on you your oods remain the same. .. but you know what they say "players win and winners play".have a lucky day!

huh?! IF I'm reading this right I'd argue that first, any respectable game of poker will never use a joker. But more importantly, if you're flashed any card, joker, ace, seven, or anything really....that card being flashed should effect decision. There is a reason people try to hide their cards you know. Whether spades, nines or whatever you are drawing out of a defined set. So what you know showing can not be drawn again. Like this Monty problem, the past events should effect future choices.