Printable View
ok your playing who wants to be a millionaire and your on the 250k question. You have absolutely no idea about the answer so you use ur last life line 50/50.
here are your options. gambool for the 250k and possibley drop to 32k or take 125k
would you GAMBOOOOOOL or walk with the 125k???
take the 125k
ummm if I was say a doctor(what I want to be) I would gambOOl
In college right now I would have to say take the 125k because it would pretty much pay for schooling and leave me w/o a huge debt when I graduate.
Mathematically on the 50/50 your a 50% shot.
So the outcomes are
32
125
250
If you take 125, your always going to make 125k. If you gamb000l, then half the time you make 250 (and MAYBE more if you know the next question) and half the time you make 32. Lets just say you never get the next answer correct. You still average about 140k if you gamble.
Gamble = ev+
very wrong because this isnt a long term game. its a once in a lifetime thing and thats why it makes more sense to take 125k.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoGGz
assuming you make 100k/year (random number) you greatly buttress your income in a no risk scenario. theres no reason to be a hero if youre not sure.
Who is the host? Regis Philbin or that woman? Regis' gives off more tells than the fish at a 3/6 B&M game.
Very Right, because the question was is this an EV decision. This is like telling me your at the WSOP FT and you won't make the EV+ decisions because it's a once and a lifetime chance. "Oh I don't want to bust 9th so I'll just fold all my hands til maybe I take 7th or 6th"Quote:
Originally Posted by journey075
no but it has to be impossible to make the show 2 times. poker is a game of long term decisions, 1 specific game show is not.
Doesn't matter if you're in that situation 1 time or 100, it's still +EV to go for it.
Two things I would consider are the tax implications with each choice and the odds that you would know the answer to the next question without any lifelines left.
life is a game of long term decsions. These odds are no different then a situation in poker where you have the same odds. So this in essense is just a continuation of all other decisions in your life. There are situations in poker where you will not see it very often, should you for that reason make a decision differently? The reason that this doesnt hold true for a situation wher eyou know you are 51% favorite, is because that question involves you putting up 100% of the money offered to you. However in this example you ALWAYS walk with money.
I guess it also depends what the money means to you. For me, at this point in my life 32k or 125k is the same thing to me. I know this doesnt make sense, but its just a feeling I have. I firmly beleive with either I can make my millions. For example, Im not going to run and play 2knl with 125k. Im not at that level yet, I would end up playing the same stakes that I would play with 32k, so yes it would be nice to have that extra ~100k but I wouldnt miss it that much, and Im going for an over 200k increase.
So I say "Ive got 12 outs, and 2 cards to come, lets gamb00l bitch"
From an economics viewpoint, you have to think about this in terms of marginal utility.
Is $250k really worth twice as much as $125k to you? Or does that next $125k past your first mean less to you? The answer is that the second $125k means less to you.
What does this mean? This means that you have to measure your value in terms of your utility rather than in terms of dollars. I'd say $250k is worth 1.30 times more to me than $125k. At the same time, $125k is just about worth 4 times more to me than $32k. Therefore, the decision to GAMBOOL is NOT +EV for me.
So there's your answer from an economics viewpoint.
GAMB0000000000000L
Realistically though, most people should settle for the 125k here.
As far as EV in a pure mathematical sense like we like to look at from a poker perspective, gamble is +EV here if you are 50/50.
I'm learning econ while trying to not study econ by reading FTR posts :shock:Quote:
Originally Posted by ensign_lee
Yay economics! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by courtiebee
There was a neat econ-ish post about gas prices and stuff awhile back. Gotta love the inelastic demand for gasoline :)
but in the long run, the demand is elastic .......Quote:
Originally Posted by daluchy
it has to be a really long term. inflation of gas prices in the next decade or two isnt really going to do that much.
First of all the question is not "Is this decision +EV?" It says in the title of the thread that this is +EV. The question is whether or not you would do it. Also, you don't always do something because it is +EV. Imagine you are going to play NL Holdem Heads up versus an opponent who is willing to play you one match and has an infinte supply of money. You're going to start with $1. The opponent is going to give you AA and he will be dealt 2 random cards. You will be all in every hand and you will either double up or bust. If you win the hand, you can either choose to move on to another hand where you will be all in again with AA vs 2 random cards or you can quit but your opponent will never play you again so this is a once in a lifetime opportunity. At what point would you stop? Obviously it's +EV to play AA vs 2 random cards so if you were going to always make the +EV decision, you would always choose to play another hand. However, you are guaranteed to bust at some point so it would be to your advantage to stop playing, declining the +EV of AA vs 2 random cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoGGz
The point of this is that not every decision is based simply on EV.
wildbob pretty much hit the nail on the head. it is more +EV to gamboool but say if ur friend rigged a roulette table so red wins 55% of the time would u put ur life savings on red? or go allin with your entire bankroll with AA preflop? no. so you should only take the gamble if you were allready a millionaire which you wouldnt be seeing as the show is called "who WANTS to be a millionaire" not "who IS a millionaire"
well... I dont think only millionaires can take the gamble. Like I said, 32k and 125k are not very different in my head. Both would solve a hell of a lot of problems, and I could utilize that sort of money to make my fortune either way. I know that sounds silly, but thats how I feel. Anything over 10k just in my head is the same thing. (this obviously cuts off somewhere... Im not really sure where... but it does cutoff...)
Regarding "utility" 32K is about half of 125K to me. 250K is about 1.5x 125K.
regardless, I go for the gamb0l. mainly beacause of the EV of knowing the next question. 500K >> 125K; $1M>>>125K
That pretty much sums it up for me. Good analysis. I walk.Quote:
Originally Posted by ensign_lee
That 128K is yours already. The question is: Do you want to spend 96K on a 50/50 chance of winning 125K + a possibility of 250/750 more. I'd probably go for it, since it's a once in a lifetime opportunity..
I go for it... the possible chance of knowing the next question tips it over the edge for me.
And yes, these decisions have to be measured in terms of marginal utility, not just monetary EV
nowhere in the original post was there anything about knowing the next questions. though a gambooler might tell himself that to rationalize taking a shot at it.
in fact, you've used up all your lifelines and the questions are getting progressively harder, so the chances of advancing are not that good.
Take the 125k, keep your 32k as play money, invest the other 93k and it won't take all that long to get your $250k.