I’m looking at the game as a whole. The player has a 1 in 8 chance of winning 3 rounds overall.
I’m looking at the game as a whole. The player has a 1 in 8 chance of winning 3 rounds overall.
But the odds of the player managing to do so are proportionate. In theory, if 8 players each decide to go for three rounds, one of them will win, but the losings from the other 7 will pay for that player’s winnings.
You’re right that the house is performing a Martingale strategy. That’s a good insight. That may actually be the source of the house advantage. The scenario is ideal for a Martingale strategy to work.
Well, they have to start over with a $1 bet.
I don’t know if that applies to this scenario. In this game, the player is always in the lead until they aren’t, but I don’t see how that works in their favor.
You’re saying that the player pays a dollar each time they decide to “double-or-nothing”? I was thinking they’d only be risking the dollar they bet to start the game.
That change in the ruleset would definitely tilt the odds in the house’s favor.
Right, and as the chain continues, the probability of the player maintaining their streak becomes infinitesimal. But the potential payout scales at the same rate.
If the player goes for 3 rounds, they only have a 1/8 chance of winning… but they’ll get 8 times their initial bet. So it’s technically a fair game, right?
Also videos that weren’t intended for kids but superficially looked like they were got involuntarily flagged as such and had their comments removed.
A separate site would have been a much better solution.
Forget Sandy Loam. I want to know more about this “silly clay.”
That’s not true. The Hoover Dam contributes to Vegas’s power supply, but it’s nowhere near “almost entirely powered” by the dam, except in Fallout: New Vegas.
deleted by creator
What I can find all say seem to say more or less the same things about every candidate.
The US, but why? How does the answer differ in different countries?
But that’s true, isn’t it? Putting aside volume and shape.
No, 9 months community service.
I’ve seen some in the US that run slowly until you get close. I guess they think that if it was stopped completely, people would assume it’s non-operational.
Those are pretty awesome! Thanks, I think I can get a lot of benefit from them.
This is what I never understood. The principle of respecting the autonomy of other cultures is good imo, but what “cultural contamination” could be worse than the total extinction of the civilization you’re trying to protect?
Applying the Prime Directive in such extreme circumstances turns it from an anti-imperialist ideal to a Social Darwinist one.
Ah, hm… I guess that makes sense. Bringing people to the office raises the value of surrounding retail, which in turn raises the value of the office. Thanks, that explanation clears it up.
Buying something to create artificial demand usually isn’t a good investment strategy. A “pump-and-dump” can work if you can set off a buying frenzy and sell before it wears off, but it’s not a long-term strategy.
Besides, if that was the plan, leaving the buildings vacant would be just as effective as using them.
Not quite the same, since in my scenario the player loses everything after a loss while in the St. Petersburg Paradox it seems they keep their winnings. But it does seem relevant in explaining that expected value isn’t everything.