Wagering practice – Triple 5 digits
Here’s another Battle of the Decades contender: Tom Nissley, who took down eight regular games. This came from his fifth, with a favorable category for an editor such as he: 20th CENTURY NOVELISTS.
What do you recommend he wager here to maximize his chances of returning for a sixth game?
Click here for the answers.
(Thanks to the J! Archive)
Answers to Tuesday’s scenario:
(click to view as a slideshow)
-
- (1/7) We’ve got Ryan locked in a close one with Matt. What would you do as Abby?
-
- (2/7) Matt wagers at least 20,000 to cover Ryan,
-
- (3/7) while Ryan can wager no more than 19,200 to stay above Matt.
-
- (4/7) Ryan wagers at least 800 to cover a zero wager by Matt.
-
- (5/7) Ryan can wager no more than 1,200 to stay above Abby under all circumstances.
-
- (6/7) The only thing Abby can control is falling below Matt: she can wager no more than 8,200.
-
- (7/7) All three made sub-optimal wagers (although Matt’s was only by a dollar).
Now for some advanced game theory for our two top dogs:
-
- (1/5) Let’s start where we left off.
-
- (2/5) Matt’s “unsafe” 800 wager under Rule #3 …
-
- (3/5) … would leave him with 22,400 if he’s correct. Ryan could consider wagering more than 1,600 to cover this possibility.
-
- (4/5) If Matt thinks Ryan will wager at most 1,200, he could wager 400 to cover.
-
- (5/5) So now we have some additional, sub-optimal wagers to play with. Note that Ryan should wager no more than 2,800 so as not to fall below Abby’s “optimal” total.
Minor point: while the yellow font you use here looks great, it is all but unreadable on the email blog recap…thingy… 🙂
Ah, thanks for pointing that out! I’ll refrain from using colors “above the fold” in the future.