The Wizard will bank this bet: 1/6 vs 1/11

[regnis]

Told you he didn't understand the bet as Alan described. When I put things in plain, simple English they cry foul.

[jbjb]

Everyone is making this too hard. If the bet is as Alan says and there is no action unless a 2 is rolled, and to satisfy Rob that once there is a 2 it will be set aside, then cut out all the dead rolls. Set one on 2, and just roll the second one and make your bets. Again---I'll make the bet all day.

Clearly, the 1-11's can't make this wager and therefore don't understand the wager as Alan describes, just like they don't understand the original riddle.

The original question on WoV had the dice rolled once. Not a second time. Your way I'd be all over it as well. Apparently you guys can't comprehend as well as you think you do.

[regnis]

JBJB- I'm addressing the wager as described by Alan--not the original post that has been argued ad nauseam. I knew that there wasn't a meeting of the minds regarding the wager as Alan described. Once I clarified the wager, you obviously would not take the bet. I guess I just put us back to square one-unless any of you still want to make the bet.

[Alan Mendelson]

The question comes down to this: what are the chances of rolling a 2 on one die. That's all it's ever been.

The current bet asks the same thing except the bet isn't made unless a second die shows a two.

I'm sticking with 1/6 as the chance for a 2 showing on that die.

[regnis]

Just to further clarify JBJB, if we do it your way and roll both dice, but exclude all the rolls where there is no 2, that is the same as what I have described above. As long as we know that one die has a 2 showing, we are now betting on what the second die shows. 1 of 6 all day.

[Alan Mendelson]

Regnis do you accept the bet as written?

[regnis]

Like you I don't wager with friends or other people (although pari-mutuel wagering I guess is just that)--I only wager against the house.

While I believe the wager as you describe it is clear, the others obviously do not so I can't say that I do. If we all understand the wager as you and I seem to, then yes.

[Alan Mendelson]

Actually that was my question: do you agree that the wager accurately portrays the original question? I say it does and you say it does. Rob is in the twilight zone, I guess and can't make up his mind.

So I will participate in the bet with anyone if the stakes are lunch and I suggest a $100 cap on lunch to keep this friendly. I can be in Vegas late Friday night. Anybody interested?

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, when will you get that my position has been the same all along. Just go back and read about the interpretations. It was you who kept getting.g drawn into the BS served up on WoV and now, even with the likes of arci trying to explain where the 1-in-11 comes from, you just show disappointment because the WoVers are mixing you up. You're better than that.

One more time, the bet that you are seeing them offering is the exact original interpretation as made by the wizard. It is not what my interpretation has been. And for some reason, they think that if you roll two dice at the same time the results would have been different than rolling them separately. Geniuses....every one of them.

[kewl]

Like you I don't wager with friends or other people (although pari-mutuel wagering I guess is just that)--I only wager against the house.

While I believe the wager as you describe it is clear, the others obviously do not so I can't say that I do. If we all understand the wager as you and I seem to, then yes.

The latest wager as described here and on WoV is FINE.
Put your money or peanuts, or kudos points, or whatever. Then, upon resolve, be man enough to confess whether you were right or...wait 4 it...yeah - WRONG.
Or better yet, just spend an hour or two and familiarize yourself with probability basics and then put some 20 minutes - no more - into thinking about it and you'll see how simple and logical it is. No parlor tricks. Just plain logics. Which applies in our every day's life. It took me one day or two to grasp the logics in the Monty Hall problem solution, but I was open minded and willing to understand. And in a single moment - boom , there it is - I got it.

Same thing here. Nothing fancy or sophisticated or tricky. Just a plain simple thought process and will to understand. Sometimes can be difficult though.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, when will you get that my position has been the same all along. Just go back and read about the interpretations. It was you who kept getting.g drawn into the BS served up on WoV and now, even with the likes of arci trying to explain where the 1-in-11 comes from, you just show disappointment because the WoVers are mixing you up. You're better than that.

One more time, the bet that you are seeing them offering is the exact original interpretation as made by the wizard. It is not what my interpretation has been. And for some reason, they think that if you roll two dice at the same time the results would have been different than rolling them separately. Geniuses....every one of them.

Rob I am 1000% honest here. I haven't got a clue as to what you're saying. So let me be point blank with some questions:

1. If two dice are rolled at the same time and one die shows a 2 do you think the chance that the second die rolled at the same time is 1/6 for also showing a 2 ?

2. If you said "yes" to question #1 why won't you accept the wager?

And leave out all of your criticism about foreigners, WOV, the Wizard, the WOV forum members, Obama, and anybody else. Answer the two questions.

[Rob.Singer]

Maybe that's something else that Alan was missing.
Rob has used his contribution to both threads (and his comments page on Alan's site) solely for the purpose of badmouthing and attempting to insult the members of WOV. Rob's only meaningful contribution to the 'answer to the original question' has been to finally agree that Alan got it wrong (and is still getting it wrong). Cheers Rob.

Anything to add Scoblete?

OD, name a better group of people who ask for and deserve to be ridiculed more than the WoV crowd. They're all cowards, it's their way or the highway, and by them having to constantly take out their frustrations over me by posting lies, only tells me how much I've stayed inside their heads over the years. It's a true badge of honor. So now I know the torture they suffered by rushing to the casinos every Tues. morning just to read my Undeniable Truth column in Gaming Today--and they had to do that for nearly 8 years! You would have loved getting it in the UK. I lived in Peterborough for 2 years and I know how there's no good gaming papers to read over there.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob I am 1000% honest here. I haven't got a clue as to what you're saying. So let me be point blank with some questions:

1. If wo dice are rolled at the same time and one die shows a 2 do you think the chance that the second die rolled at the same time is 1/6 for also showing needa 2 ?

2. If you said "yes" to question #1 why won't you accept the wager?

And leave out all of your criticism about foreigners, WOV, the Wizard, the WOV forum members, Obama, and anybody else. Answer the two questions.

No and I never have, not under that premise, which is the same way wizard interpreted the problem and not my interpretation of it. You need to understand that if one die is a 2, it's not a function of simply how many faces that 2nd die has. They work TOGETHER to form one of the possible 11 combinations remaining where a 2 is on at least one of the dice. Arci laid them out for you. I don't know how else better to show it to you.

[kewl]

No and I never have, not under that premise, which is the same way wizard interpreted the problem and not my interpretation of it.

What is YOUR interpretation of this, exactly:

You have two 6-sided dice in a cup. You shake the dice, and slam the cup down onto the table, hiding the result. Your partner peeks under the cup, and tells you, truthfully, "At least one of the dice is a 2."

What is the probability that both dice are showing a 2?

?

[Rob.Singer]

[QUOTE=kewl;27566]What is YOUR interpretation of this, exactly:

You have two 6-sided dice in a cup. You shake the dice, and slam the cup down onto the table, hiding the result. Your partner peeks under the cup, and tells you, truthfully, "At least one of the dice is a 2."

What is the probability that both dice are showing a 2?

Obviously, the answer is 1in36. You see, WoVers thrive on spoofing and arguing ad nauseum. And your egos are thru the roof. Well, now you have to realize that while all you geniuses were busy solving mathematical problems and theorizing about this and that, the rest of the world was busy experiencing reality. So the answer to your question is I took the question in its purest of forms, unaffected by any of the aforementioned assumptions simply because none of those assumptions were mentioned in the question.

See how it is when you get held to the fire? Now accept my vp bet up here in Tahoe this weekend, or go back to WoV and cut him another check.

[jbjb]

What is YOUR interpretation of this, exactly:

You have two 6-sided dice in a cup. You shake the dice, and slam the cup down onto the table, hiding the result. Your partner peeks under the cup, and tells you, truthfully, "At least one of the dice is a 2."

What is the probability that both dice are showing a 2?

?

You should know better than to argue with ploppie

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob I am 1000% honest here. I haven't got a clue as to what you're saying. So let me be point blank with some questions:

1. If two dice are rolled at the same time and one die shows a 2 do you think the chance that the second die rolled at the same time is 1/6 for also showing a 2 ?

2. If you said "yes" to question #1 why won't you accept the wager?

And leave out all of your criticism about foreigners, WOV, the Wizard, the WOV forum members, Obama, and anybody else. Answer the two questions.

No and I never have, not under that premise, which is the same way wizard interpreted the problem and not my interpretation of it. You need to understand that if one die is a 2, it's not a function of simply how many faces that 2nd die has. They work TOGETHER to form one of the possible 11 combinations remaining where a 2 is on at least one of the dice. Arci laid them out for you. I don't know how else better to show it to you.

Rob Singer from April 18th on the original thread:

"Once dear, "RS", and any other wizard form members now here--the clear answer to the OP's scenario/question, is of course 1 in 6. All you math enthusiasts try to do in these type of "problems" is wordsmith your ways around the very simple question just so you can present more of a theoretical event than it really is. Which die is "peaked at" is irrelevant. The true intention of the question is to determine what the odds of the other die being a deuce is after knowing that one of them is a deuce. But being that it was purposely asked in a loose way--very similar to how the Monty Hall problem created such a firestorm--all the theory-heavy mensa aspirationists on wizard's forum, led by him, chose to lay this issue out into a more complicated calculation. Egos are very heavy over there. I saw that when all the geniuses ran away from my challenge a few years ago, then convinced the wizard to permanently ban me so I couldn't make them look foolish any longer.

Guys, think of it this way. If the problem was presented as "two six-sided dice were shaken & rolled, and when they were peaked at we were told that both dice showed a deuce" with the corresponding question being "what are the odds that both dice would show a deuce?"--Those who look at the question as if we're being asked about "right now" would obviously say 100%. That's because we all know that reality is far more important & meaningful than theory. But the ones who choose to overthink the issue and want to create conflict just so they can believe they're the smartest ones in the room, would say 1 in 36. Why? Because to that group they would rather talk about theory than reality, so they spin the words to fit their agenda.

And I understand that. Wizard's, of course, has the very foolish & misleading tag line on each of his posts about how making a "good bet" is more important than whether the bet is won or lost. Again, math people choose theory over reality because it's the safer choice. But it's not surprising seeing that self-proclaimed AP wizard, who gives the THEORETICAL perception that AP's are winners, had to instead beg for donations, then sell out to online casino foreigners. What will it take and when will you people learn that theory only yields phantom bucks? And you can't use those to buy groceries.

I saw some offers for a bet on the 1 in 6 vs. 1 in 11 issue and I'd like to get involved with this. But what exactly are the parameters, and who gets to interpret the OP's wording and /or intention?

[Rob.Singer]

Good, you see how similar this is to the Monty Hall problem with multiple interpretations possible because of wording. If not re-read . Now go back and read arci's table again. You shouldn't have any trouble understanding where 1 in 11 comes from any longer.

What's a "ploppie"? More namecalling....or not?

[kewl]

[QUOTE=Rob.Singer;27567]

What is YOUR interpretation of this, exactly:

You have two 6-sided dice in a cup. You shake the dice, and slam the cup down onto the table, hiding the result. Your partner peeks under the cup, and tells you, truthfully, "At least one of the dice is a 2."

What is the probability that both dice are showing a 2?

Obviously, the answer is 1in36. You see, WoVers thrive on spoofing and arguing ad nauseum. And your egos are thru the roof. Well, now you have to realize that while all you geniuses were busy solving mathematical problems and theorizing about this and that, the rest of the world was busy experiencing reality. So the answer to your question is I took the question in its purest of forms, unaffected by any of the aforementioned assumptions simply because none of those assumptions were mentioned in the question.

See how it is when you get held to the fire? Now accept my vp bet up here in Tahoe this weekend, or go back to WoV and cut him another check.

Mhm, but the answer is obviously not 1in36. Would you give me a 20 for 1 for a bet on these rules?

[kewl]

You should know better than to argue with ploppie

Yeah, but I'm in this mood today. Will stop in a short while, I promise