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

[Alan Mendelson]

Setting the die as a two is the same thing as being told at least one of the two dice under the cup is a two. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

There are only two friggin' dice. Just use your imagination. If you're told at least one of them is a two pick a die and make it two. It doesn't change. That leaves the other die in the two dice problem to be your variable. That other friggin' die has six sides.

No one said you had to combine the six sides on both dice and there is no reason to combine the sides on both dice WHEN ONE OF THEM is a 2. And if BOTH happen to be a 2, the solution to the problem is still the same: you pick ONE of the dice and count how many friggin' sides it has.

Geesh.

[OnceDear]

Alan,
In your video, you slammed two dice under a cup. I can't recall the exact outcome, but there was a deuce and you held that die and pointed to it. It was fixed (in your mind) as a deuce.
You then proceeded to rotate the other die in your hand, presumably to show the 6 faces. Correct so far? What does that actually mean? What has having 6 faces got to do with probability?
Why did you rotate that dice? Was it to maybe show the equally probable ways that it could have landed?

But it had landed! It either was a deuce or it wasn't. We can agree on that can't we?

If it was a deuce, then the other 5 faces could not flip face up? If it wasn't a deuce, then again it wasn't going to magically fip around to become a deuce.
Probability of being a deuce while you were looking at it was either 100% or zero, depending on where it had landed.
The only opportunity that it had to land on anything different would be to roll again. We all know that both dice get rolled at the same time.
Wouldn't that roll give both dice a new chance to land however they wanted to. Thus giving the possibility that next time they would land you might have the other die being the one with the deuce?

Nothing flips, no sleight of hand.

Now... JbJb asks an interesting question. Peeker or no peeker, are the odds that the wizard offered favourable to him or to the player? That's what THIS thread is about.

If your web site promotes 'Best Buys' then are you doing a pretty rubbish job if you don't recommend and promote a deal where Wizard is offering to pay $9 for something which has $6 of value? With unlimited purchasing money available from Wiz or from me.

No-one has considered it a worthy deal yet?

[Alan Mendelson]

The Wizard's can't read; Alan's can't compute. Put them together, and you're left with people who can do neither but in an amusing manner. Television reporters, and gamblers who only talk about it.

Oh my! The bet will never happen. Good.

I can "compute." And the answer 1/11 is the correct answer to A DIFFERENT QUESTION.

Unfortunately those who think the answer is 1/11 to THIS QUESTION don't understand what they are reading.

[OneHitWonder]

The Wizard's can't read the 1/11; Alan's can't compute the 1/6.

Both are right, but for the wrong reasons.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan,
In your video, you slammed two dice under a cup. I can't recall the exact outcome, but there was a deuce and you held that die and pointed to it. It was fixed (in your mind) as a deuce.
You then proceeded to rotate the other die in your hand, presumably to show the 6 faces. Correct so far?
Why did you rotate that dice? Was it to maybe show the ways that it could have landed?

But it had landed! It either was a deuce or it wasn't.
If it was a deuce, then the other 5 faces could not flip face up? If it wasn't a deuce, then again it wasn't going to magically fip around to become a deuce.
Probability of being a deuce while you were looking at it was either 100% or zero, depending on where it had landed.
The only opportunity that it had to land on anything different would be to roll again. We all know that both dice get rolled at the same time.
Wouldn't that roll give both dice a new chance to land however they wanted to. Thus giving the possibility that next time they would land you might have the other die being the one with the deuce?

I am starting to think that you guys really have a problem with simple reasoning.

I set aside the die that landed on a 2 because the original problem told me at least one die was a two. That die now becomes the "constant" in our problem. That leaves the other die. I picked up the other die and rotated it to show it had only six sides -- and not eleven sides.

There was no reason to pick up the die with the two because that die was our "constant."

And even if both dice showed a two, you would use the same procedure. Set one of the two dice showing a 2 as your "constant" and use the second die as your variable.

This is not high math and probability -- this is common sense.

[OnceDear]

You forgot to acknowledge or answer this bit Alan.

If your web site promotes 'Best Buys' then are you doing a pretty rubbish job if you don't recommend and promote a deal where Wizard is offering to pay $9 for something which has $6 of value? With unlimited purchasing money available from Wiz or from me.

No-one has considered it a worthy deal yet?[/QUOTE]

[Rob.Singer]

You forgot to acknowledge or answer this bit Alan.

If your web site promotes 'Best Buys' then are you doing a pretty rubbish job if you don't recommend and promote a deal where Wizard is offering to pay $9 for something which has $6 of value? With unlimited purchasing money available from Wiz or from me.

No-one has considered it a worthy deal yet?

[/QUOTE]

He doesn't promote false advertising dear. WoVers have proven never to walk the walk.

[Alan Mendelson]

OnceDear I can answer that: I don't promote gambling. I don't object to sharing information about gambling but I would never suggest that anyone make a bet. Nor do I recommend stocks -- and never did in all the years I was a business news reporter at CBS or the local stations I worked at. Nor did I ever recommend that anyone invest in gold, though I reported on the gold market for decades and I was the reporter who broke the news that the Hunt Brothers failed to meet their margin call on silver which caused the metals market to tumble after its meteoric rise in the late 1970s.

[OnceDear]

You also forgot to answer or acknowledge this bit. It's a nice easy Yes or No. No need to explain or qualify your answer.

Now... JbJb asks an interesting question. Peeker or no peeker, are the odds that the wizard offered favourable to him or to the player? That's what THIS thread is about.

Remember from post 1

A person puts two dices in a cup, shake and slam the cup on the table.

A second person peeks under the cup and truthfully announces if there is at least one deuce showing or not (he will later lift the cup and show to all he wasn't lying).

If "at least one deuce" is announced, the 1/6-ers will wager 1 unit on the premise that there are two deuces under the cup( a one in six probability according to them). If they're right, they get 9 units back. If they're wrong, they lose the 1 unit wagered.

[Alan Mendelson]

Here's an answer for you that you won't like: I think it's a good bet for both sides.

[OnceDear]

Here's an answer for you that you won't like: I think it's a good bet for both sides.

OK. I'll bite.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?
I did not say 'GOOD' I said 'FAVOURABLE'.
So you answered a different question once again. And if you say they mean the same thing, I'll call you out.

[jbjb]

Here's an answer for you that you won't like: I think it's a good bet for both sides.

Then why aren't you betting the hard 4 at craps all day long? Less ways to lose there and get paid the same.

Edit that. I just looked at a table and 2-2 pays 7:1. Still better than the 6:1 odds you think it is.

[Alan Mendelson]

I can answer your questions:
Jbjb I don't bet the hardways and when I do I bet 6 and 8 for one unit only if I have 5x odds.

OnceDear: both sides have a good bet.

[OnceDear]

OnceDear: both sides have a good bet.

Which side do you believe has the favourable bet?
To be explicit, which party do you believe, the odds favour? It's a simple enough question. It cannot be both. You cannot be meally mouthed about it and bluster won't cut it.

Unless of course you think 8:1 or 9:1 are equally neutral odds and maybe mean the same as 5:1, 10:1 and 35:1?

Or don't you know yet?

[jbjb]

These people know nothing about AP gambling. Typical civilian wanna be's. Have fun!

[Alan Mendelson]

First of all OnceDear you have to present the exact bet for analysis. The bet I had with the Wizard is not the bet described on this thread. Check the WOV forum for my bet.

Secondly there is a big difference between 9-to-1 and 8-to-1.

[OnceDear]

First of all OnceDear you have to present the exact bet for analysis. The bet I had with the Wizard is not the bet described on this thread. Check the WOV forum for my bet. .....

Let's start with your own paraphrasing of that bet as per post 5 of THIS THREAD

Rob, it's spelled out. The only question is 9-for-1 or 9-to-1 and the Wizard says it doesn't matter to him.

Gone are the "old rules". This is a new bet and quite frankly I like it.

Let me answer your questions specifically and I am sure this will be the understanding:

1. Two dice are in a cup or other device, shaken and in the cup placed on the table.
2. A witness will peek. If a 2 is shown the bet is on.
3. If a 2 is not shown, there is no betting.
4. In both cases, the cup will be removed and the dice can be viewed. This will prevent the original dice from showing 2-2 and the witness lying.
5. With one deuce the bet is on (#2) and if there is not a second bet the "player" will lose their bet.
6. With one deuce the bet is on (#2) and if there is a second deuce the "bank" will pay either 9-to-1 or 9-for-1 (the Wiz doesn't care.)

My own personal thought: I can't imagine why the Wizard agreed to this? There is a 1/6 chance that when one die shows a 2 that the other will also be a 2 yet he is willing to pay 9-for-1 or 9-to-1.

Secondly there is a big difference between 9-to-1 and 8-to-1.

Indeed. But since wizard is a generous guy lets work with 9-to-1 as the offer.

[redietz]

These people know nothing about AP gambling. Typical civilian wanna be's. Have fun!

This hurts my feelings. Probably hurts arci's feelings, too. Or, to paraphrase Captain Kirk to Picard, "We were making money while you were in diapers."

[RS__]

Alan's never gonna figure it out. Soon he's gonna start saying, "Of course TWO fifths of a pizza is bigger than ONE half of a pizza.....TWO IS BIGGER THAN ONE!"

[Alan Mendelson]

I want everyone to know that I appreciate the learned contributions of the WOV forum members who have joined us. They add value to the discussions with maturity, insight and experience. No one can accuse them of spamming a message board. They are keeping the high standards of the WOV forum here.