More Price is Right Updates

[Brian44]

Huh? What if everyone wins their game? Someone still has to spin first.

Fourteen years after the fact, I'm still irked that I won Bonus Game and had to spin the Big Wheel before the contestant who won Bargain Game.

On the other hand, I'm 1,000 times more thrilled that I played Bonus Game instead of Bargain Game.

[parliboy]

[quote name=\'clemon79\' post=\'246811\' date=\'Sep 3 2010, 10:47 PM\'][quote name=\'MikeK\' post=\'246792\' date=\'Sep 3 2010, 01:41 PM\']I'll play the Devil's Advocate.  I'd risk $1000 (less, after taxes) for a one time only, over 10% chance at increasing your money at least 5-fold.  It's a once-in-a-lifetime chance to risk a modest amount of money to win enough for a nice new car.  If I'm a college student living off of ramen noodles, the situation might be different.[/quote]
Except this is my exact point: you're placing a value on the money based on your financial position in life, not based on a pure mathematical formula.
[/quote]
If I'm basing my position on a pure mathematical formula, I know that the board has an average return, on any hole punched, of $1,280 not counting second chances.  And from a utilitarian perspective, the risk is worth it.

[J.R.]

[quote name=\'parliboy\' post=\'246853\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 02:10 AM\']If I'm basing my position on a pure mathematical formula, I know that the board has an average return, on any hole punched, of $1,280 not counting second chances.  And from a utilitarian perspective, the risk is worth it.[/quote]
This sounds like something jybt would say.

[chris319]

Because you only get to play the game one time. Pot odds only work when you are applying them to multiple iterations of the same event.

c.f. the Monty Hall problem.

Back in the olden days one of the criteria for a pricing game was that the value of the prize(s) should not exceed those of the showcases. I'm sure that rule went out with Barker and Roger; I mention it here only for historical perspective.

[TLEberle]

[quote name=\'J.R.\' post=\'246855\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 01:58 AM\'][quote name=\'parliboy\' post=\'246853\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 02:10 AM\']If I'm basing my position on a pure mathematical formula, I know that the board has an average return, on any hole punched, of $1,280 not counting second chances.  And from a utilitarian perspective, the risk is worth it.[/quote]
This sounds like something jybt would say.[/quote]Not even close. Gene is saying that for him, punting the money is worth it to him because he would derive more utility out of the chance at more money than just the $1,000. Jvbt would say that the contestant failed in playing Punch-a-Bunch if he kept $1,000 because it is below the "expected value" of one P-A-B slip not counting extras, even if during the proveout it was discovered that the remaining slips were $50, $100, $50.

[Matt Ottinger]

[quote name=\'chris319\' post=\'246859\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 08:19 AM\']c.f. the Monty Hall problem.[/quote]
I believe what Mr. Lemon is saying is that choosing to take a gamble depends on more than just odds.  Mostly, your own personal feeling about whatever risk you might be taking.  In a game where you're already expected to make a choice (i.e. the Monty Hall problem), you might as well make the choice that yields the best odds and gives you the best chance to win.

In other words, if you're twice as likely (or ten times as likely, or a hundred times as likely) to win the game by doing 'A' instead of 'B', then you should do 'A'.  Doing 'B' because "I'm only going to do it once, so the odds don't matter" makes no sense.

[chris319]

you might as well make the choice that yields the best odds and gives you the best chance to win.

Again:

Pot Odds are meaningless on a single attempt.

Pot odds only work when you are applying them to multiple iterations of the same event.

Unlike a casino, on a TV game show you get just one attempt. See the above two statements about pot odds.

Can you predict the outcome of a single coin flip? Neither can I. Can you predict the outcome of 100 coin flips? Yes: approximately 50 heads and 50 tails.

[Matt Ottinger]

Pot Odds are meaningless on a single attempt.

This line is being seriously misused.  A coin flip is one thing, that's 50/50 no matter what.  If you're rolling a single die, and a million dollars was on the line, would you want to bet on the number '1' coming up, or would you want to bet on ANY of the numbers 2-6 coming up?  If you're saying it doesn't matter because you're only going to make a single attempt, then your definition of "it doesn't matter" is seriously flawed.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'Matt Ottinger\' post=\'246865\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 08:14 AM\']I believe what Mr. Lemon is saying is that choosing to take a gamble depends on more than just odds.  Mostly, your own personal feeling about whatever risk you might be taking.  In a game where you're already expected to make a choice (i.e. the Monty Hall problem), you might as well make the choice that yields the best odds and gives you the best chance to win.[/quote]
Absolutely on both counts. I'm applying this solely to "stop and take the sure thing" versus "play on and possibly win more or less." If you are forced to make a choice between two discrete options, both with an uncertain outcome, that isn't a pot odds situation.

[That Don Guy]

[quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'246696\' date=\'Sep 1 2010, 08:55 PM\']I will bet cash on the line that the money grows $1,000-$5,000-$100,000 or some such. They play Golden Road all of three times last year, for a game that is really a one-in-twelve crapshoot to win the big prize. Does anyone really think that 1) the player has a snowball's chance at the top money or 2) that the consolation money is going to rival the top prize of Grand Game, Half-Assed or Punch-a-Bunch?[/quote]
I don't put my money where my mouth as, as more often than not my foot ends up there, but I wouldn't be surprised to see PTR as a $10,000 game where the player has to choose between keeping the $10,000 or risking it for some relatively long shot (1 in 10 or so) at the million - similar to the $10,000,000 round in Power of 10.

(My idea for PTR, if it wasn't so close to Let 'Em Roll: have a set of five "red" dice, each with a 0 and five blanks, and four "blue" dice, each with a different number of sides with 0s (2, 3, 4, 5); price four items (e.g. Bonus Game or Plinko style), and for each win, replace a red die with a blue one (the one with the five 0s first, then the four, the three, and the two); roll the dice, take the ones showing 0, and put them next to a 1 to display the final amount won.  Even if all four blue dice are won, there's only 1 chance in 64.8 of winning the $100,000, but about 1 chance in 7.5 of winning $10,000.)


(Somebody refresh my memory - what pricing game had the items with two prices, each of which was the other's digits reversed (e.g. $58 or $85)?)

-- Don

[gwarman2005]

[quote name=\'That Don Guy\' post=\'246918\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 08:30 PM\'][quote name=\'TLEberle\' post=\'246696\' date=\'Sep 1 2010, 08:55 PM\']I will bet cash on the line that the money grows $1,000-$5,000-$100,000 or some such. They play Golden Road all of three times last year, for a game that is really a one-in-twelve crapshoot to win the big prize. Does anyone really think that 1) the player has a snowball's chance at the top money or 2) that the consolation money is going to rival the top prize of Grand Game, Half-Assed or Punch-a-Bunch?[/quote]
I don't put my money where my mouth as, as more often than not my foot ends up there, but I wouldn't be surprised to see PTR as a $10,000 game where the player has to choose between keeping the $10,000 or risking it for some relatively long shot (1 in 10 or so) at the million - similar to the $10,000,000 round in Power of 10.

(My idea for PTR, if it wasn't so close to Let 'Em Roll: have a set of five "red" dice, each with a 0 and five blanks, and four "blue" dice, each with a different number of sides with 0s (2, 3, 4, 5); price four items (e.g. Bonus Game or Plinko style), and for each win, replace a red die with a blue one (the one with the five 0s first, then the four, the three, and the two); roll the dice, take the ones showing 0, and put them next to a 1 to display the final amount won.  Even if all four blue dice are won, there's only 1 chance in 64.8 of winning the $100,000, but about 1 chance in 7.5 of winning $10,000.)


(Somebody refresh my memory - what pricing game had the items with two prices, each of which was the other's digits reversed (e.g. $58 or $85)?)

-- Don
[/quote]

Joker

[That Don Guy]

[quote name=\'gwarman2005\' post=\'246919\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 05:31 PM\'][quote name=\'That Don Guy\' post=\'246918\' date=\'Sep 5 2010, 08:30 PM\'](Somebody refresh my memory - what pricing game had the items with two prices, each of which was the other's digits reversed (e.g. $58 or $85)?)[/quote]Joker[/quote]Thanks - I knew I was forgetting one...

-- Don

[Dbacksfan12]

[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'246651\' date=\'Sep 1 2010, 12:48 AM\']I think Plinko's fine in that regard. Where the lower amounts fail is Punch a Bunch, where $1,000 hardly stops anybody anymore.[/quote]Sorry for the bump, but someone contacted The Wizard, a well-respected figure in the casino gaming world about this very topic.

With 2 or 3 punches left, he says you should give up any prize less than $5,000; but with only one punch left, quit with $1400 or more.  View the full report here, filled with data about expected wins with and without the second chance.

[alfonzos]

With 2 or 3 punches left, he says you should give up any prize less than $5,000; but with only one punch left, quit with $1400 or more.

Then, there is the guy, who during the Barker era, gave up $5000 to win the top prize of $10,000. Even Barker was stunned.

[clemon79]

[quote name=\'alfonzos\' post=\'250291\' date=\'Nov 5 2010, 12:32 PM\']Then, there is the guy, who during the Barker era, gave up $5000 to win the top prize of $10,000. Even Barker was stunned.[/quote]
Proving the adage that fortune smiles on fools.