This is where we begin to swim in circles and folks seem to forget what the article explains about the "initial" odds and the importance of their focus on the words "initial" and the significance of some viewing the test as a 2 step process versus a view of the whole game and the requirements placed on the Host.

The Host is forced to drop a goat. I can't imagine that a ton of people here would try to argue that you have a 2/3's chance of picking the car if you are only picking between 2 doors with one containing a goat.

The only way this puzzle works is because of the way it begins, with 3 doors and 2 goats. That's the beauty of it. In reality, you can't ignore the beginning regardless of what follows.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by buckeye_vol

Member since Jul 2014

35255 posts

Posted on 2/23/15 at 4:48 pm to Monk

quote:
This is where we begin to swim in circles and folks seem to forget what the article explains about the "initial" odds and the importance of their focus on the words "initial" and the significance of some viewing the test as a 2 step process versus a view of the whole game and the requirements placed on the Host

Sure, but those that incorrectly assume the odds change will be wrong.

In fact, what may be most fascinating by this paradox in this scenario is it is the exact opposite reasoning that people apply to "runs" at the casino. In other words, they choose black because there has been 5 reds in a row because the assumed dependency of independent events. In the Monty Hall Problem, the assume step two is independent of step 1. So they assume independence of dependent events.

0 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board