- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Marilyn vos Savant and the history of the Montel Hall question
Posted on 2/23/15 at 3:37 pm to Monk
Posted on 2/23/15 at 3:37 pm to Monk
Thanks Monk for proving my point.
In your explanation, you are absolutely correct--but only because you consider it all one game.
However, the problem is always described by asking what the odds are of choosing the car once one door is eliminated (and is always a goat). That IS a new game, and the probabilities are 50/50. If mathematicians don't like the fact that people perceive it correctly to be a new game, that is fine, they can continue to run it all together as one multi-stage probability exercise. But that is mere slight of hand, not math.
In your explanation, you are absolutely correct--but only because you consider it all one game.
However, the problem is always described by asking what the odds are of choosing the car once one door is eliminated (and is always a goat). That IS a new game, and the probabilities are 50/50. If mathematicians don't like the fact that people perceive it correctly to be a new game, that is fine, they can continue to run it all together as one multi-stage probability exercise. But that is mere slight of hand, not math.
Posted on 2/23/15 at 3:56 pm to link
quote:
Thanks Monk for proving my point.
Thanks, but I think you made your point about as clearly as can be done in this situation. I just tried to conceptually elaborate on what I thought was your point.
I can't really say that the original solution involves treating it as one game or running "it all together as one multi-stage probability exercise."
In the linked article, they explain that
"The short answer is that your initial odds of winning with door #1 (?) don’t change simply because the host reveals a goat behind door #3; instead, Hall’s action increases the odds to ? that you’ll win by switching."
To me, they are admitting that the "initial" 1/3 odds do not change simply by dropping the goat. I read it has saying that the Host allows you an extra chance of winning by giving you another bite at the apple when you consider that the Host will never drop a car so you effectively get a 2nd chance to pick the car, with 1 less goat to choose from.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News