Quote:
Originally Posted by blink  But anybody who understood odds would never deal, would they not? The banker never offers a fair shake-out and relies on fear to drive a poor statistical bargain.
(Whatever - it's a good ten-minute game, made unwatchable by 50 minutes of Noel Edmond's shite.) |
The offer was always below EV whenever I sampled the Australian version (I know people who swear it is sometimes +EV, but I suspect they can't add), but what's a good bargain for the contestant is a harder question. Is this a situation where we should apply Kelly reasoning, i.e. maximize the expected logarithm of our bankroll? If so, then accept the deal when
Code:
log(offer+A) > sum { log(box(i)+A) } / n
i<n Where A represents some measure of the player's pre-game bankroll (wealth).
For example, if the remaining boxes are worth 10k and 100k, the player should deal if the offer meets the following thresholds
Code:
A Offer
0 31.6k
30k 42.1k
1M 54k
I may have missed some wrinkles in the show because I never watched it from fart to spinach. I agree with the poster who said it is unwatchable. 80% is based on trying to spin something trivial (the choice of boxes) as somehow meaningful and exciting. It would be nice to get on and mock this premise by coldly selecting the boxes in numerical order.