I'd take enough sure cash over the chance of winning a more valuable merchandise prize in most situations. If I was on a primetime show, forget the five grand, I want to try for the showcase. If I'd won a five-figure cash sum already, I'd probably rather have the shot at the showcase.
[quote name=\'clemon79\' date=\'Feb 3 2005, 12:49 PM\'][quote name=\'Ian Wallis\' date=\'Feb 3 2005, 07:07 AM\']I'm always excited by cash! Along the same lines, if I was playing "Let Em Roll" (for example) and I wasn't too crazy about the car they offered, I'd consider taking the cash after the first roll and stopping (depending on how much it was).
[snapback]74138[/snapback]
[/quote]
I don't understand this logic. What you are essentially saying here is that you don't think you can sell the car for enough so that you clear, say, five grand after taxes. And THAT is assuming you won the full $7,500 consolation prize.
[snapback]74163[/snapback]
[/quote]
I read it as that he'd rather have the sure money than a car he doesn't want.
Drifting off-topic, there are situations in Let 'Em Roll where, mathematically, the better thing to do is stop, but, when I worked it out, I was surprised by how few situations there are. Treating a loss as nothing (thus making bailing look more attractive than it actually is), and using a $15,000 estimate for the value of a car, you need at least $3,560 for bailing to be the better option, if you have nothing showing. With one car, $4,746 is the point where the better option is to stop. With two or more cars, it's always better to try for the car.
