2 fiddy

yes they do
thats what statistics are for

percentage you guess wrong = 33%

even if you got lucky and got it right, beat the odds, and subsequently defeated cancer and found jimmy hoffa

you still only had a 33% chance of it happening

The statistical data gathered by experiments only serves as empirical evidence to confirm the theory which holds what we are saying.

so if i'm throwing a dice....

I have 1/6 of getting 6

but you're telling me it's down to this:

50% of getting 6
50% of not getting 6


???

let me buy a shit load of lottery tickets LOL

yt, I will hook up with you in vegas! let's bet on a single number at the roulette! we have 50/50 chances! :Graucho

You can fucking try to argue all you want. His logic does not allow him to believe what you're saying.

However, the statistical probability suggests that Fake Nick is a dumbass who does not want to believe the numbers. Probabilities are set, and do not change, no matter how often you play the game. Whether once, or 10,000 times.

jesus...:1orglaugh

you're making too much sense for this thread :(

whatever you flip a coin 1 time or 1000 times...the odds are always 50/50


in the Monty case..they are always of 66/33

:warning

you have 50 % chance that your 33% wins when there are two options


claiming that you should change based on the 66% chance of winning is claiming that your 66% is equal to 100%

and yet again that is based on one try

no
you have a 33% chance of your 33% chance hitting
thats why it is a 33% chance

the number of elements (two boxes) does not alter the ultimate probability of the entire equation

if the coin is ideal and all that crap

It seems that you don't quite understand the concept of probability and what exactly it holds.

you should try thinking outside of the box


if you put your theory down to one case and one case only you can only conclude that changing or not changing does not matter

saying that you SHOULD change would be equal to claiming your 66% chance = 100%

flipping a coin... of course it's .5 for either side, because you do have two sides which equates to 1/2. In the dice case, P(1)=P(2)=1P(3)=P(4)=P(5)=
P(6) = 1/6.

I believe the empirical evidence that P(win|switch)= 2/3 - however let me try to work this out by myself.

P(win at first try) = 1/3
P(miss at first try) = 2/3 - evenly distributed.

You do not switch - P(win) remains at 1/3.

If you missed with P(miss)=2/3, the prize is behind one of the remaining doors. If you miss and switch, your probability to win equates

1 - P(picked winner at first try) = 1 - 1/3 = 2/3.

So if you don't switch, your P(win) equates P(win picked at first try) which is constant at 1/3.


That sounds reasonable to me. :thumbsup

does your 66% chance win 100% of the times ? if so you cant lose if not you have 50% chance of the 66% winning

It seems just way too convenient to believe that you will have a fiddy/fiddy chance to pick the right door. But the problem is...

the second pick is DEPENDENT on the first one

And nobody has mentioned this yet.

It is NOT an independent draw in the second round. If it were, then yes .5 chance for each door.

But it ain't. Case closed.

No, you can't conclude that. That is what probability holds - it does matter. In this case, switching makes it more likely for you to get the prize.

well thats what a choice is
youre not saying that its 100% for it to be there
youre saying that based on math
it should be there

i have mentioned this
100 times

worded differently

ive said that the empty box the host chooses is the basis for the entire equation

people are just forgetting it ever existed when in reality it is the key to the whole puzzle

Actually, I did kinda mention it when I wrote about immunity in the other thread.

Sorry folks, didn't mean to take your credit. I didn't read the whole thread. :thumbsup

ok either way I dont have time to discuss this further an icq buddy of mine who I explained this thread to and showed link just showed me this

http://www.derrenbrown.co.uk/roulette_press.asp


have to read this first :Graucho

nononono not at all

im just saying that
there is 100% chance that some people will never understand this
no matter how many times we spell it out

that is probability for you

The two events of picking the doors are not mutually exclusive.

Sigh, I am done with this topic really. Good night!

LOL getting kinda frustrating isn't it??

I had difficulties to believe it at first but fuck..I did what you just did a couple of post above...can't go wrong LOL....

dunno whether the chance is 100%, because then all the participating members reading this thread would not agree to our assumptions. But I bet the margin's quite high! :thumbsup

the fact is you dont understand the difference between one time and 100 times

you claim the outcome for 100 will always be equal to the outcome for 1

yes i do

probability doesnt change based on the frequency of the event

So far, it seems like those who understand it are almost all people with a fairly good knowledge about programming and that sort of stuff.

exellent explanation :thumbsup

no im not

im claiming the probability of the outcome will be equal
not the outcome itself

it does and it does not

the 33% has 50% chance of winning on one try even though it is only 33%

We are talking about the statistical probabilities here damnit, and not the outcome of an event when it happens once. Trying an experiment once is not going to give you the correct insights on the probabilities of the events, does that not go into your fuckin brain?

We have now proven that you are wrong, the chance is better to switch and that's the end of the story, no matter how ignorant you are towards the subject.

I proved it to you running 10 million iterations of the experiment and you still don't get it?

The fact is that you don't know what probability means...

when you flip a coin, the probability is 50/50...... whatever you flip it 100 times or 1 times...does this mean you will ALWAYS get tail on the first shot? NO...but the odd is still 50/50


Same thing with this problem!
the odds are 66/33

does it mean you will ALWAYS win by switching? no...but you have a greater chance....whatever you play 1 or 10000000000 times....the probability is still THE SAME

the thread was about one try :) I am basing all my claims on one try and one try only

hahahahahahaha

sorry to dissapoint you but it has been proven that because both sides of a coin are not equal there is no 50% chance with coins :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

and it's no 33% becoming 50%!

by switching, you actually take 2 boxes out of 3..... the 33% becomes 66%

you toss a coin once and you will claim that the probability of getting heads is 0.0?

nigga please. your logic is faulty.

no its not statistisc win by doing it multiple times


66% = 1

33% = 0


it will be either 1 or 0 if you try once >> 50 % says 1 50 % says 0

ok....

that's it.....



i'm out of here......

no

it has a 33% chance

im not pulling 33 out of my ass here
no one is

Methinks Fake Nick is trolling, and is in fact doing this merely for entertainment. Nobody could seriously claim that "33% has 50% chance of winning" :2 cents:

I am saying it is not equal with coins , there have been studies that because both sides are not equally heavy there is no 50% chance with coins :)

again...if you have 0.00005% chances of winning at lottery...

0.000005% = 1
99.00005% = 0

it will be eighter 1 or 0, 50/50??

ok you just suck at math... nothing we can do about it! :1orglaugh

yeah no shit... this is getting ridiculous

dont have to believe me but its true

1 out of 3 is not equal to 1 out of 1 000000


and you claim I am bad at math :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

later folks, have fun explaining principles of simple probability to this braindead monkey. :)

word...he can't be serious....

saying 33% chance becomes 50% becuase it's only 1 attempt is really clueless......


think of a fucking dice LOL....if you make only one throw, you have 50% chances of getting a 6??? come on LOL.... now you'll say that the dots on each face do not interfer with the wind equally or some bullshit like that? come on admit that you are kidding LOL

i'm just following your logic!

you're saying 1/3 = 1/2

which is just as stupid