[ExI] alternative gambling game, plus epsilon

Adrian Tymes wingcat at pacbell.net
Thu Jul 1 02:23:53 UTC 2010

Quite.  The problem is, not all players will follow any given
strategy.  You know some people will do the
lightning-strikes-twice strat, just like some will do the
simple-numbers strat (111, 123, etc.) - but the
simple-numbers will likely draw a disproportionate number
of plays, just because those who follow it need spread
their bets across fewer numbers.

--- On Wed, 6/30/10, Gregory Jones <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

From: Gregory Jones <spike66 at att.net>
Subject: Re: [ExI] alternative gambling game, plus epsilon
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2010, 6:33 PM

--- On Wed, 6/30/10, Gregory Jones <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>... (Likewise, the last
winning number would likely be something to avoid, for the reason
you stated.)... Adrian
Ja, but of course if the others followed this line of reasoning, then a fewer than average number of players would choose the last winning number, which would increase its probability of being the least-chosen, and thus become a repeat winner.  But if other players followed this line of meta-reasoning, they might intentionally buy that number, reducing its chances of becoming a repeat winner...spike
If even 40% of the players followed the lightning-never-strikes-twice philosophy, then one's chances of winning are increased to about 29% by buying last round's winner.  However, if even a half of a percent of the players do the same calculus I just did, they compensate for the others and the chances of winning with that number drop to below nominal.   {8-]
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20100630/c68d1be8/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list