Pixelation 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 It's an interesting thing to discuss.But anyway, I don't really think its worth modeling the show to an equation or something because any given contestant is only going to be able play once.For example say there are 2 cases left, and the numbers on the board are $500,000 and $1, and the bank gives an offer of $220,000. If you were able to play this out over an infinite number of times, obviously picking a case would be the right decision. But because $220,000 is a life changing amount of money, the "correct" thing to do is often the mathematical incorrect to do.Anyway, i agree that the show is pretty stupid. I think the reason a lot of people watch it is because of the way the audience can side with the contestant, hoping they knock out lower cases etc. Link to post Share on other sites
TwoFourOffsuit 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 it saddens me that this inane show is popular.This comment has the nuts. This show is like the Price is Right on steroids. The premise of the show is so silly, and the worst part is how far they contrive to stretch it out over commercial breaks. You can actually play the whole damn game in 10 minutes, but they stretch it out over an hour for TV, with silly sideshow things like family members stand at the edge of the stage jumping around and screaming at their poor, moronic sister/wife/husband/cousin/brother to SAY NO DEAL or TAKE THE DEAL.Howie: So, Cletus, DO YOU WANT MONEY? Link to post Share on other sites
coesillian 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 This isn't a monty hall problem and it was discussed here before but I don't remember flamming Dane for it, but it wouldn't surprise me. He got flamed left and right by FCP, I'm surprised he lasted as long as he did. Link to post Share on other sites
Abbaddabba 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I see his point, if in fact, he believes all offers are less than the arithmatic average of the remaining cases.so, given that assumption, I"d put the burden back on you to explain the "Retarded" commentNah, they arent all valued less than the arithmatic average.In fact, the terms they offer become more favorable as you get closer to the end in the episodes that i watched.Not favorable enough to put $500,000 on the line if your annual income is otherwise $50,000. But they improve enough that you dont want to just take the first offer. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Yeah, I was actually watching one the other day, down to like 4 cases, and the offer was actually BETTER in terms of strict EV, and obviously much better in terms of overall utility for almost each of us. Link to post Share on other sites
AZWildcat 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I don't know about the rest of you, but I thoroughly enjoy watching 26 extremely hot chicks wearing next to nothing... Link to post Share on other sites
LongLiveYorke 38 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I don't know about the rest of you, but I thoroughly enjoy watching 26 extremely hot chicks wearing next to nothing...They have this new thing called porn that you may be interested in. Link to post Share on other sites
Mercury69 3 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 It's got it all: Excited, mathematically illiterate peopleHottiesBig piles of mobney that aren't going anywhereIdiot friends giving bad adviceA smart *** with weird facial hair wisecracking all alongSome guy in the shadows pulling all the stringsIt's America in a nutshell.I got to this post and knew I didn't have to read any further. QFT. Link to post Share on other sites
Scanner313 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 What's next? Televised Bingo hosted by Bobcat Goldthwait?Hey, mcpickl? What's wrong with Bobcat Goldthwait? Sure, the old act with the shaking and skreetching voice was annoying after the first time you saw it, but have you ever seen the movie "Shakes the Clown"? Comedy genius. And no, I'm not kidding. Link to post Share on other sites
oldskoopimp 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 i like this show never thought about it with all this math good stuff tho. Link to post Share on other sites
mtdesmoines 3 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 ...but have you ever seen the movie "Shakes the Clown"? Comedy genius. And no, I'm not kidding. Color me intrigued. I might have to rent this. Link to post Share on other sites
Teffy 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 I don't know about the rest of you, but I thoroughly enjoy watching 26 extremely hot chicks wearing next to nothing...Since when is an evening dress "next to nothing" I can think of plenty of shows to watch with women wearing less. Like porn. Link to post Share on other sites
ColeSLaw 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Thread jack:I have a theory that people who give themselves specific descriptive nicknames or identifiers almost never fit that description.I think when someone wants to be something, they look to others to reinforce that identity goal through the name. But, if you already in fact meet that description, you have no desire to be pigeon-holed into that identifier or it just isn't a big deal. I guess the exception is where someone is consumed by something and wants to be identified with it like DNA.For example, if someone on this site calls themselves a FootballChamp, I doubt they have had much success in football.More specifically, I would wager 1:100 in napkins that Actuary can not sign actuarial opinion statements. I'll offer 1:80 in napkins that he/she is not a member in one of the recognized actuarial societies, and 1:15 that he/she has passed 4 actuarial examinations.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 More specifically, I would wager 1:100 in napkins that Actuary can not sign actuarial opinion statements. I'll offer 1:80 in napkins that he/she is not a member in one of the recognized actuarial societies, and 1:15 that he/she has passed 4 actuarial examinations.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee.I'll take the action on both of those.If you replace "napkins" with "millions of dollars".Ship to Zach6668 on Stars, k thx. Link to post Share on other sites
SpiderGuard 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 i think SG was kidding.Smart this one is. I may not have a high post count, but I've been here a couple years. Link to post Share on other sites
fleung22 1 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 this thread is worthless w/o pix of the Deal or No Deal chixshow sux? yes.would i like to be a contestant? yes. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Smart this one is. I may not have a high post count, but I've been here a couple years.Yeah, I don't come to general much *************flueng...You are just on a content frenzy, aren't you... Link to post Share on other sites
fleung22 1 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Yeah, I don't come to general much *************flueng...You are just on a content frenzy, aren't you...you must be a white dude. only white dudes call me flueng.what is "content frenzy"? whatever it means i'm sure you're there too...else you wouldn't know now would you sir? Link to post Share on other sites
TwoFourOffsuit 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Thread jack:I have a theory that people who give themselves specific descriptive nicknames or identifiers almost never fit that description.I think when someone wants to be something, they look to others to reinforce that identity goal through the name. But, if you already in fact meet that description, you have no desire to be pigeon-holed into that identifier or it just isn't a big deal. I guess the exception is where someone is consumed by something and wants to be identified with it like DNA.For example, if someone on this site calls themselves a FootballChamp, I doubt they have had much success in football.More specifically, I would wager 1:100 in napkins that Actuary can not sign actuarial opinion statements. I'll offer 1:80 in napkins that he/she is not a member in one of the recognized actuarial societies, and 1:15 that he/she has passed 4 actuarial examinations.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee.Whatcha talking about? I ALWAYS play 24off and I always bet it huge Link to post Share on other sites
Jeepster80125 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Thread jack:I have a theory that people who give themselves specific descriptive nicknames or identifiers almost never fit that description.I think when someone wants to be something, they look to others to reinforce that identity goal through the name. But, if you already in fact meet that description, you have no desire to be pigeon-holed into that identifier or it just isn't a big deal. I guess the exception is where someone is consumed by something and wants to be identified with it like DNA.For example, if someone on this site calls themselves a FootballChamp, I doubt they have had much success in football.More specifically, I would wager 1:100 in napkins that Actuary can not sign actuarial opinion statements. I'll offer 1:80 in napkins that he/she is not a member in one of the recognized actuarial societies, and 1:15 that he/she has passed 4 actuarial examinations.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee.If you were more than just a troll, you would realize how foolish your statement is in general, and at Actuary specifically.So going with you're 'theory', I don't own a Jeep? Right. So along those lines, if someone had PokerPlayer845215, then unless he has won the main event, or millions in cash play, he doesn't have a right to use that handle? What a stupid, stupid 'theory'. You seem quite young, and quite ignorant, when you try to lump everyone in together like you have. And I don't mean to be an Actuary fanboy, but he's brought a lot to this place.Please go away, or at the least, lurk more and post less.The community thanks you.EDIT: If you are so sure of your 'theory', then why don't you put your money where your mouth is, instead of betting 'napkins'... Link to post Share on other sites
Speed Limit 0 Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 Yeah I find the math intereseting, I had never watched the show before until last weekend and realized that a lot of my poker math I've learned applies to the show. It was kinda cool I was going along doing the math. P.S. there def are some hot chicks I think it was #3 on the show I watched who was the best. Link to post Share on other sites
mcpickl 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Hey, mcpickl? What's wrong with Bobcat Goldthwait? Sure, the old act with the shaking and skreetching voice was annoying after the first time you saw it,but have you ever seen the movie "Shakes the Clown"? Comedy genius. And no, I'm not kidding. yes i have and i agree. very dark comedy.but that was his peak, which was 15 years ago. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Thread jack:I have a theory that people who give themselves specific descriptive nicknames or identifiers almost never fit that description............More specifically, I would wager 1:100 in napkins that Actuary can not sign actuarial opinion statements. I'll offer 1:80 in napkins that he/she is not a member in one of the recognized actuarial societies, and 1:15 that he/she has passed 4 actuarial examinations.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee.did this just come out of left field, or what?As I was reading, thought I was going to fall under the "consumed" category. After all my email and most usernames use "actuary" somewhere. All that aside, you are correct, exactly. I'm not sure why anyone feels that you have insulted me. I could have "Actuarial Student" as my username, as I'm going to be taking the exams once again. (I stopped taking them for a few years, while Mom was sick and I kinda sucked at life)I do comparable work as the ASA's in my area. Many of the older ASA's passed a set of exams under an old system that corresponds to what I have passed. That is fact.I never ever claimed to be an Appointed Actuary and have mentioned more than once on here the number of exams I have.ASA and FSA are well respected. I'm not one. Everyone who is one, was where I am at some point. Some Actuaries never achieve ASA, in fact most don't. I'll be sure to let you know when I do.Anyway, just odd. But accurate. Good job. Link to post Share on other sites
finztotheleft 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 Yeah, this pretty much hits the nail on the head. This show is about as entertaining as watching a random number generator spit out numbers (which, actually, is somewhat fun).Isn't that what I'm doing playing poker ?Thread jack:I have a theory that people who give themselves specific descriptive nicknames or identifiers almost never fit that description.For example, if someone on this site calls themselves a FootballChamp, I doubt they have had much success in football.Flame away, my breath stinks like coffee.You're correct ! My fins actually point to the right Link to post Share on other sites
SpiderGuard 0 Posted January 17, 2007 Share Posted January 17, 2007 did this just come out of left field, or what?As I was reading, thought I was going to fall under the "consumed" category. After all my email and most usernames use "actuary" somewhere. All that aside, you are correct, exactly. I'm not sure why anyone feels that you have insulted me. I could have "Actuarial Student" as my username, as I'm going to be taking the exams once again.Zach just lost millions of dollars Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now