re: Going for 2 in that situation.

Here is a practical version of the explanation of why it is correct.

So you need 2 touchdowns. So we are only concerned about when you do score those 2 touchdowns. Otherwise, none of this matters anyway.

Going for PAT after each score give you a 50% chance of winning, as it just goes to overtime.

Going for the first PAT and then going for 2 on the second one gives you a 50% chance of winning, as it just comes down to that 2 point conversion after the second TD.

Going for 2 after both. Let's look at the possibilities.

Miss - miss. You lose. This will happen 25%
Miss - make. You go to overtime. This will happen 25% of the time.

If there were no informational advantage, then make - miss and make - make should round out this decision matrix. Make-make being a win and make-miss being OT. Hence an aggregate chance of 50% OT, 25% win in regulation. 25% lose in regulation.

But make - miss DOES NOT EXIST because of an informational advantage. You would never try a second 2 point conversion if you made the first one. So the actual matrix is.....

Miss - miss 25% - loss
miss - make 25% - OT
Make - pat 50% - win

That is 50% winning in regulation, 25% losing in regulation, and 25% going into OT. Assuming you are 50/50 to win an OT game, you have to add 12.5% to the regulation win and regulation loss percentages. That gives us a final total of......

62.5% win
37.5% loss