May 26 2009

The Epic Unreality Comment War: Choose a Side

Published by at 10:00 am under Oddly Enough,Television

war.jpg

Ever since we started this site, I’ve held the firm belief that provoking fights with commenters is a bad thing.  If people tell me I’m a terrible writer, that my taste in everything sucks and I should just go kill myself, what’s the point of me even responding to that? If you don’t like my writing, that’s fine, enough other people seem to, and by the way, some people happen to LIKE The Fast and the Furious.

But recently I’ve been involved in another debate that I’d like to share with you all. All you math and philosophy people should tune into this one as it’s about probability and moral choices. Yes, it’s about Deal or No Deal.

A while back I wrote a post called “Eight of the Dumbest Game Show Losers Ever” where I showcased people who have thoroughly embarrassed themselves on national television. I chose this contestant from Deal or No Deal:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDOqDgDtc9w

And my commentary was:”Look, if I said to you, I will either give you $600,000 right now, or you could get a million dollars if this coin lands on heads, or zero if it’s tails, what would you do? This guy fails at not only probability, but life.”But someone (and I have my suspicions who), took offense to this, and decided to engage me in an all-out logic war. After exhausting myself in the comments, I wanted to turn to the rest of you to weight in on this issue. Here we go:

Andrew B: Want to call the Deal guy dumb? Then stop being dumb yourself, and research your information on Google when it’s obvious the montage was cropped.All you had to do was find this: http://www.gameshownewsnet.com/prime/dond4/102208.html. But you’re just too lazy to do that. You’re the one who fails at life.

Me: I read that entire thing and it comes down the fact that he had the chance to walk away with $400 grand and he bet it all on a coin flip. The article calls it “brave but foolish” but it’s just greedy.

Andrew B: It also happens that that article is also slightly inaccurate; the entire family except the mother was calling for No Deal. But there’s no better full account of it.It does prove that a $10,001 ceiling is plenty for many people. (Ed. note, I believe he means a “floor,” not a ceiling, where the guy got $10,000 earlier for doing a”Banker’s Challenge”)

Me: It’s you isn’t it? You’re the guy in the video.

Andrew B: Unless you can show me the piece of text where I said my name…and it is NOT the name I’ve posted….then no. How biased against this guy are you that you arrived at this conclusion without a single shred of evidence?

Me: Because no one else in the WORLD would care this much.

Andrew B: Um, how about a person who has kept a record of every contestant, and found this gross distortion of the truth online…?Even if I was this person, that does not excuse your use of this video, when you know the real thing…why don’t you tape this show when it airs again on GSN, and then show us the real thing?….or, replace your clip with this tool:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eZ4d3DKDqM

That’s the biggest bonehead move ever, and if you disagree, I want a defense.

Me: GAH. I want to leave this alone but your idiotic logic is frustrating me to no end.

In this new clip you posted, the girl has the exact same scenario the other guy (clearly you) had. Her last two cases are $25 and $1M. The banker offers her $340K.If someone offers you either $340K in cash right now, or they say you can bet it all or nothing to win a million dollars on a coinflip, the smart, not greedy thing to do is take the cash that’s offered.She made the right decision, but you’re saying she’s a “bonehead” because her case actually did have the million.

That’s like saying if I stay when I have 18 on a million dollar hand of blackjack, then I was an idiot to do so when the next card turns out to have been a 3. No, I still made the right decision, it’s just that I would have been extremely lucky (not smart) if I had hit.So these two people who had the exact same decision, the first guy (clearly you) made a stupid, greedy decision, and lost because of it. The girl in the second video made the right decision, and potentially lost $700K, but still won $340K as a reward for being smart and not greedy.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS NOW?

Andrew B: “That’s like saying if I stay when I have 18 on a million dollar hand of blackjack, then I was an idiot to do so when the next card turns out to have been a 3. No, I still made the right decision, it’s just that I would have been extremely lucky (not smart) if I had hit.”

No, the difference is that this person, in your hypothetical situation, said “I KNOW THE NEXT CARD IS A 3″, with FULL AWARENESS of the consequences of hitting, before she stood on 18. That’s the key difference, Paul!

According to her logic, there was no risk at all in going on, because a “possible loss” of -340,975, times 0.00, equals 0. Name one reason why she should choose to stop.

Oh, because she DIDN’T know? Well, then, you are still calling her an idiot.

Or, perhaps you didn’t read the comments thorougly enough, and I’d point out that despite her after-game claim that there was not one second during the entire game that she doubted the $1,000,000 was standing next to her, a brief clip…say about 6 minutes and 54 seconds in the video…contradicts that.

So she has absolutely no defense for her stupidity. “As a reward for being smart?” Get real, Paul. This sort of lack of foresight is why I came over here in the first place.

Me: I can’t even decipher what it is you’re trying to argue any more. The moral of the story for you is…what, trust your gut? Play to the end because you started with nothing anyways? None of that has any basis in logical probability. Explain how my coinflip analogy doesn’t make sense.So what did you spend your $10,001 dollars on?Also, congratulations, you annoying me about this has inspired an entire post for tomorrow, I want to hear what other people think about this.

Andrew B: The moral is…if it’s $1,000,000 or $341,000, please, please choose the $1,000,000 or you’re a moron. (Ed. note: What?) The “coinflip analogy” doesn’t make sense because, apparently, there is no coinflip according to what she’s said. /end debate

So how about it people? I think I’m in the right here, but I’m not really even clear what Andrew B is trying to say at this point, so maybe I’m arguing against something he doesn’t even mean. But what does he mean? Can you decipher it?  The fundamental issue for me is I can’t get past the scenario of someone walking up to me in the street and asking me if I’d like $400K right now, or if I’d like to bet it all on a coinflip, where if I lose I get nothing and if I win I get a million dollars. Sure, I started with nothing, so I’m technically not losing anything, but it’s the logically wrong decision to not take the money, yes?

Andrew B, I’ll give you space below if you want to chime in to give a coherent pitch for your side of the story if it differs from what I’ve already posted. Everyone else start firing away.





More Unreal Posts


56 responses so far

  • Lyre

    (clearly you)… LOVE IT. This guy obviously fell asleep halfway through all his high school math classes, and is basing his “logic” on that.

  • xtheenderx

    How do you not understand the coinflip analogy? Its so simple. Anyways, Andrew B’s arguments does seem to be all over the place. I could see why you’d end your debate with that last comment made by him and I commend you. You might as well have been talking to a brick wall.

  • http://fookhar.dk Marcus

    Yeah, Andrew seems kind of lost.

  • andrew b

    So out of $341,000 and $1,000,000, you two would choose $341,000? Who’s the guy who really fell asleep halfway through his math classes?

    And before you say that $25 is another option, you’ve already discounted that at 5:45, so no running scared from it. You don’t call a situation impossible and then avoid it like the swine flu. PERIOD.

  • andrew b is a cock

    he’d rather have the $341 000 than potentially have nothing. its not a choice between $341000 and a million. its a choice between 341 000 FOR SURE or a 50% CHANCE of a million.

  • wes

    Andrew B will you just shut the fuck up? You were clearly wrong.

  • andrew b

    Regardless of what led up to the decision itself, can you deny that claiming after the game that “I had absolutely no doubt at any point that the $1,000,000 was in my case” is the sign of a negative I.Q? I offer up 6:54 in the video as my evidence.

  • andrew b

    “Potentially” have nothing? Not after 5:45, and that is what you guys seem to be missing. It’s now, rather than 341,000 or a 50/50 shot at a million, a free choice between 341,000 and a million. And she picked the 341,000.

  • Mr Jim

    My god this Andrew B is an idiot.

    He talks as if the woman was wrong to give up the mil because *she knew* that it was the box. Um….how? Or maybe he meant an entirely different string of logic as his explanation is so incomprehensable it could have meant a myriad of other situations. Does he mean that there is an even chance the next card is a 3 or not a 3, or is he just a douche?

    Anyway, Paul you certainly are right.

    The coin toss analogy is perfect.
    You are given 400 grand.
    You are then offered to participate in a coin toss game.
    If you win you will gain 600 grand.
    However, if you lose you will lose the original 400 grand.
    And the chances of heads or tails appearing is equal.
    You also do not know what side will come up (I include due to our friend).

    This is the situation.

    Yes, if you bet and win you get 600 grand more, and yes, if you lose there is no harm as you have only lost money that was given to you earlier. And of course if you do win you have all that lovely money.

    BUT, the facts are if you are wise you shouldn’t risk it. Well, I suppose it all matters on how much 400 grand is worth to you personally. If you’re a multi-billionaire that paltry sum doesn’t really matter, and its worth the risk. But, if you’re a common joe then 400 grand is a lot of money and shouldn’t just be treated willy-nilly. Then again even in that position you could say to yourself ‘I’ll never have this chance again’ and go for it. And it also matters how much there is to play for, as if it was the difference between 900 grand and a mil if you won or lost I’m sure anyone would take the chance. But the thing is it wasn’t those numbers. It was the difference of 0 and 400 grand instead.

    It’s easy to say that the woman was a dumb ass because she didn’t risk it for a biscuit, that because of her ‘cowardice’ she should be openly mocked, perhaps even have rotten vegetables thrown at her. So the guy, who in a blind fit of ‘I’m lucky DUH’ decided to bet it all was a really smart guy….up until the point where he went away with virtually nothing. You can cry out to the heavens that he was right to take the chance to win, but when you have one measly dollar in your hand and you could have had 400 grand, you don’t look half as clever.

    Sometimes, it is better to sacrifice a momentous win for a good win as opposed to risking and losing it all. That woman was completely logical in her decision, and should be congratulated on being able to walk away with such a huge sum. Similarly however, sometimes it’s worth it to risk it to get the big win. But to be honest in this case it is a DUMB move.

    Last of all, wtf? He keeps a record of every person on the show?…….weirdo……….and I mean WEIRDO!!!!

  • andrew b

    “The coin toss analogy is perfect.
    You are given 400 grand.
    You are then offered to participate in a coin toss game.
    If you win you will gain 600 grand.
    However, if you lose you will lose the original 400 grand.
    And the chances of heads or tails appearing is equal.
    You also do not know what side will come up (I include due to our friend).”

    IF you lose….and then the coin-toss analogy is correct. According to this player, though, she cannot lose – the equivalent in the coin-toss analogy being she knew which side would come up – which completely strikes through the entire reasoning.

    If it is impossible to lose, is she making any sort of gamble by refusing the deal?

    If you have to choose between true and false, with double or nothing at stake, and you believe 100% that the answer is true, your reasoning says you should choose false.

  • Mr Jim

    First of all IF you lose? Yes of course if you fucking lose! With this game there is the actual chance of losing!

    Right, lets get this straight: there is no possible way that she can know which box has which money. Unless she cheated, the equivalent of which would be to look at the coin before calling what side it shows.

    Yes, yes, she ‘believes’ that the box has big money in it. Who in their right minds if she umm-ed and arrr-ed as to whether the box had big money in it or not, or if she kept the stead fast holy divination from the lord almighty that this box was the chosen box. It doesn’t have any basis on this game.

    This game is a game of chance. And not destiny or strategy, well there is some strategy in correctly analysing the probabilities laid out.

    The fact is she can believe all she wants that a box has money in it, it doesn’t make it true. Furthermore, it’s sensible that she did not take her beliefs, and carry out a decision on them even if her beliefs were true. Because the fact is there is a difference between believing in something and knowing something.

    She believed the box would have the mil in.
    She believed the other box had the low money.

    She did NOT know which box had which money.

    And as such there was a 50 % probability for her to walk away with nothing. Despite her ‘strong inkling’ about where the money was.

    So instead of blindly giving in to her clairvoyance, she considered her options:

    Either going for it and having:

    a 50 % chance of winning big.
    a 50 % chance of losing it all.

    Or backing out and having:

    a 100% chance of winning a decent amount of money.

    So instead of blindly giving in to her clairvoyance, she made the prudent decision.

    Similarly, the male contestant had a stong belief that he was choosing the right box, but he did NOT know if it was the right choice. He chose the reckless approach hoping blind luck and godly divination would see him through.

    It did not.

  • andrew b

    “Yes, yes, she ‘believes’ that the box has big money in it. Who in their right minds if she umm-ed and arrr-ed as to whether the box had big money in it or not, or if she kept the stead fast holy divination from the lord almighty that this box was the chosen box. It doesn’t have any basis on this game.”

    So, even if you were to be right about that…you’re still calling her a moron.

  • 408 Alumn

    Andrew,

    The question is not, which would you pick if you could, otherwise the show would be pretty boring:

    Contestant: Hello Howie, I’d like the million please

    Howie: Are you sure I can’t interest you in some of the lower values?

    Contestant: Nope, I know what I have so should we just skip the next couple cases so I can choose the million?

    See, the purpose of the show is CHANCE…

    Clearly Andrew B is a psychic and therefore should be eliminated from eligibility for the game show….

  • Mr Jim

    “Yes, yes, she ‘believes’ that the box has big money in it. Who in their right minds cares if she umm-ed and arrr-ed as to whether the box had big money in it or not, or if she kept the stead fast holy divination from the lord almighty that this box was the chosen box. It doesn’t have any basis on this game.”

    I’m saying she was an intelligent person to make the choice she did.

    She believed that the box had big money in.
    She did not know if the box had big money in.

    She was sensible for making the logical approach instead of going with blind belief without actual fact.

    The male contestant did not take the logical approach.

    He believed that the box had big money in.
    He did not know if the box had big money in.

    He went for the box anyway. I’m sure if he had won you would be calling him clever. He would only be lucky.

    The reason he is called a dumb guy is the fact he did not apply the same logic the woman did, and instead of accepting a more than decent middle ground, he lost it all by risking it for the high ground.

    I am in no way calling the woman a moron.

    She had a belief, just as the man did that their box was THE box.
    They both, considering the circumstances, should’ve have settled, so that a decent amount would be reached without fear of losing that good middle amount of money.

    It’s easy to say afterwards, if only she had picked the box silly woman, but the fact is she just as easily could have picked the wrong box just as the man did. She was intelligent for making the action she did, if i was in her position i would have done the exact same act. Instead of going on a ‘gut feeling’ and potentially losing it all, EXACTLY as the man did.

  • Under the Bridge

    Logic Troll detected.

  • Fernando Malk

    Actually guys, I can show some interesting mathematical facts about this 400k-or-shot-at-a-million choice.

    Before that, just give it up guys, Andrew is somehow convinced that she somehow “knew” there was a million on the case, like if someone on the show told her before choosing. It makes no sense.

    Everyone’s choices was to get the 400k. But, what if you had to make the choice many times over, say, 10 times or more?

    Then the “best” choice is to take the chance every single time.

    In 20 times, 50-50 chances to win, you “expect” to win 5 million. If you pick 400k all times, you get 4 million. As long as you win at least 4 times in 10, you have a profit.

    The “great” thing about offering 400k is that, mathematically, it’s expected for you to win 500k for every choice, on average. If you focus ON JUST THAT, choosing to go for the million is “correct”.

    What makes choosing the 400k right is that “the average” is an illusion, since you have just ONE single shot. Risk is too great.

    It was indeed a stupid move, even down to math and odds.

  • IcemanD

    Mr. Jim is absolutely right. If I was was in either contestants shoes I would ahve took the money…period.

    Honestly, I wouldn’t even have made it to the last two cases.

  • Gregg

    Mr. Jim speaks wisdom. . .

    Andrew B . . . not so much.

  • JPM

    Wow….. Okay….. ummmmm…. I don’t even know where I would start if I wanted to continue this argument now.

    Andrew has clearly demonstrated a complete ignorance of chance and logic… Every argument pitched to him has been met with some illogical nonsense about how the woman KNEW which one had the million in it…..

    Andrew B— just so you know…. in case you didn’t pick up on this…. they do NOT…. let me say that one more time… NOT… tell you which case has the million in it before the show…. The woman did not KNOW which case it was, she just believed she did….

    I know I just repeated what 3 or 4 other people have said but I wanted to lay it down one more time in terms that were as clear as mud, just in case *someone* still didn’t quite get it.

  • andrew b

    “Andrew has clearly demonstrated a complete ignorance of chance and logic…”

    Here’s the chance, according to this person: Holding the 1,000,000 is 100%. Logic determines that you choose the guaranteed $1,000,000 rather than the guaranteed $341,000. You don’t call winning $25 impossible and then try to avoid it.

    “Every argument pitched to him has been met with some illogical nonsense about how the woman KNEW which one had the million in it…..”

    Is 5:45 “illogical nonsense” to you? It sure sounds like she said that she knew which one had the million in it…

    “The woman did not KNOW which case it was, she just believed she did….”

    I thought she said “I KNOW I have the million”, rather than “I BELIEVE I have the million”. If she “believed” she had the million, then that’s exactly what we should hear.

    “What makes choosing the 400k right is that “the average” is an illusion, since you have just ONE single shot. Risk is too great.”

    The “risk” itself is an illusion, if you know you are holding the 1,000,000 case.

    She’s a POKER PLAYER. And that is the ultimate failure. No poker player would fold a hand if they knew it was a royal flush. No matter WHAT the stakes are.

    Nobody has answered this either: No matter what happened on the stage, her post-game comment that she had no doubt at any point is unbelievably stupid, because her touching the deal button shows that she did indeed have doubt, at the very least for that one second.

  • Madison

    Wow. I’m really, really enjoying these comments.

    I love our readers – even the ones who have nasty things to say – but andrew b is so completely out of his mind that I think he must be playing a joke and seeing how far he can push it.

    I mean, andrew b, does your argument really hinge on the assumption that the woman KNEW which case held $1,000,000? Either you’re being incredibly obtuse or are so far removed from sanity that it’s frightening.

    Anyway, thanks for reading, participating, and entertaining me.

  • andrew b

    Yes, Madison…that’s how powerful one word can be.

    But fine. You guys want to disagree with me? Go ahead. But at the very least, Paul, change the clip of Ritchie Bell to the RIGHT one, if you want to use his example.

  • Madison

    @ andrew b:

    What you’re failing – or choosing not to – see, though, is that just because the woman said she KNEW which box had $1,000,000 doesn’t make it true. Basing your argument on that assumption does nothing, since we can all (hopefully) agree that this woman did not in fact know which case held the $1,000,000.

    It’s an incorrect assumption on your part, andrew b, and because of that, your entire argument falls to pieces. It isn’t hard to see how.

  • IcemanD

    After reading Andrew’s comments it is obvious he is a troll.

    That lady DID NOT know if her case had a million dollars in it. Cause if she did, she wouldn’t have took the smaller amount…period.

  • Mr Jim

    OK OK OK, I know what this is.

    Andrew is playing us.

    He knows only too well the futility of his statements. He is poking at the hornet’s nest that is our compassion to let people who are not quite ‘all there’ to slide through with their idiotic comments.

    “I thought she said “I KNOW I have the million”, rather than “I BELIEVE I have the million”. If she “believed” she had the million, then that’s exactly what we should hear.”

    OMG! I feel hungry. Actually I meant to say I haven’t eaten for days and I’m dying of starvation. I guess because I didn’t say it correctly it rounds completely different. OK maybe a bad example.

    A better one: I believe it is going to rain today. I do NOT know for certain I can use my gut instinct, and analyse the probability. But even this statement has more chance of being true.

    A christian could say I believe/know there is a god. In this case the use of the believe and know is synonymous with each other.

    It is the exact same case. If she had said “I believe/know/think/have a good idea/am pretty sure/know it must be this box right here” or any other good synonyms what she really meant was:

    I believe this box has the mil in.
    But I do NOT know if it does.

    IF she knew it had the million in, she would have gone for the bloody box!

    Any person that has any grasp of how the english language is used or how inter-human relationships are they would know we are prone to hyperbole i.e. exaggeration. Wow Andrew is the most stupid person I know! You see this could be inferred as hyperbole, then again it might not.

    “She’s a POKER PLAYER. And that is the ultimate failure. No poker player would fold a hand if they knew it was a royal flush. No matter WHAT the stakes are.”

    OK this is not poker. She is not trying to ‘bluff’ someone out. She, hopefully for the last time, does NOT KNOW what is in her box. And you talk about the stakes? It’s 400 grand we’re on about here!

    “Nobody has answered this either: No matter what happened on the stage, her post-game comment that she had no doubt at any point is unbelievably stupid, because her touching the deal button shows that she did indeed have doubt, at the very least for that one second.”

    Seriously? No one cares.

    I got 5 numbers on the lottery last week, I was one number off one of them. I knew it was a 3 instead of a 2 I just knew it. Why, oh why did i ever do it?

    The thing is her “I had no doubt” comment comes from no where and is just the human psychology at work. She builds herself up to believe in this, consciously, subconsciously, maybe even non-consciously. Why? Because she’s stressed, because she’s scared of losing, because she’s excited about winning, all of these factors sum up to make her mentally believe and ‘know’ the box is the box for her.

    So when she found out her suspicions were right all along, that when it did come up, all her inner belief that she could tell the future is now some how divine. However, if she had say thought the other box, for whatever reason, had for ‘definite’ the mil in and she found it out to be false she would have just shrugged it off as ‘meh guess i was wrong, guess I don’t have super powers after all’.

    Furthermore, I’m sure the other guy had a feeling, I’m sure he thought for definite he had the right box, I’m sure he had that overwhelming thought, I’m sure he ‘knew’, I mean obviously he must have had to have known he had a winner….he knew…he knew…oh wait a minute. HE WAS WRONG!

    Also, of course she would have doubts, of course she would have to mull it over about dealing or not, of course she would at the very least dealing, this manifested in touching the button. Perhaps this actually gave her an anchor to reality.

    The chances were:

    if she went for it:

    50% she would win big
    50% she would lost it all

    and 100% for getting a decent amount of money.

    Thank god she chose the sensible option and at least went away with some money. She was very clever to do so.

    The guy was in the exact same position and as Paul said acted with greed and was very much so gambling with high stakes. He may have believed he had the right box, just as the woman did. But the fact is he was wrong. He should’ve played it safe and walked away with a life-changing sum of money, instead opting for greed and wanting the whole mil, which ultimately was his downfall.

    That is why the guy was dumb, and the woman was smart.

    Furthermore, may I say that Fernando Malk is completely right in his theories or at the very least very close to the truth. If you have multiple chances of this situation, the odd’s are that if the system is repeated often enough you will win big money. However, and I’m not exactly sure about the equivalent here but there is a similar theory in Roulette called the D’Alembert System, where every time you bet red/black continuously, once you lose you bet double on the opposite colour. It apparently is actually mathematically unfavourable to play roulette in this way…but then ask my friend, who ended up winning 5 grand using this method, if this method doesn’t work.

    Again I don’t the exact mathematics but I do believe if you did have enough goes on this particular deal or no deal scenario you probably would win out. So many kudos to Fernado Malk.

    Finally, Andrew, what ever you believe, hell whatever you ‘know’ to be true for a ‘fact’ about the woman’s predilection for the box she was sure that had the million in, that she knew where the money was. The simple fact is:

    She didn’t.

  • just shutup andrew

    andrew, you are beyond dumb.
    just because she said shes knows she has the million in the case, doesnt mean the million is ACTUALLY in the case.
    shes basing it on hope and positive thinking obviously.

  • andrew b

    “IF she knew it had the million in, she would have gone for the bloody box!”

    Why do you think I’m calling her this dumb? Because she DIDN’T go for the box. That’s my final argument…just think of what you would do if you were in the situation of believing you had “some sort of divine assignment”…

  • Mr Jim

    Andrew, you really are trying my patience and everyone elses.

    She didn’t go for the fucking box because she DIDN’T know it had a million! And if I was ever in the situation where I believed I had a divine assignment, I would get professional help in the form of therapy.

    I’m a man of science, and the idea of a divine message telling which to go for is ridiculous. I’ve already mentioned the most obvious, that it was all in her head, you obviously are not listening to reason. Perhaps you have a voice in your head telling you we are all liars? Wouldn’t surprise me.

    Anyway, get this thorugh your thick skull:

    SHE

    DID

    NOT

    KNOW

    SHE

    HAD

    A

    MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • I farted . . .

    . . . and my fart has a better grasp on logic than Andrew b

  • andrew b

    BUT

    SHE

    SAID

    SHE

    DID.

    And if she apparently “didn’t” know, then the thought doesn’t belong on the stage…okay?

    You can’t deny that that was beyond sense for her to say it…

  • i thought your point was that she was stupid for dealing not that she was stupid for saying that she knew she had a million

  • Connor P

    Andrew you fucking idiot

  • Tom

    andrew b, your yellow banana shirt is gay, and your argument is invalid

    … and i wasted precious time in my life reading your stupid comments, i would like that time back

  • Connor P

    and andrew wondering if you could just help me out… so you believe that the woman who walked away from the same situation with $341,000 more than the other contestant is the moron? just trying to get things clarified

  • ryan e

    Jesus fucking Christ Andrew, could you get any more stupid?

  • Matt M

    “I thought she said ‘I KNOW I have the million’, rather than ‘I BELIEVE I have the million’. If she ‘believed’ she had the million, then that’s exactly what we should hear.”

    Andrew, I KNOW you’re wrong.
    By your “logic,” I AM 100% CORRECT.

  • Matt M

    “IF she knew it had the million in, she would have gone for the bloody box!”
    Why do you think I’m calling her this dumb? Because she DIDN’T go for the box. That’s my final argument…just think of what you would do if you were in the situation of believing you had “some sort of divine assignment”…

    ^–and one more from the great Andrew B.

    Now she BELIEVES she had “some sort of divine assignment?”
    What happened to KNOWING? 8O

  • chelsea

    if she really did KNOW that she had the million dollars, she would have stuck with her case.

    obviously, she had doubts and weighed the pros and cons.

    you are retarded…. as you can see from this chain of comments telling you how stupid you are.

    of course, your feeble mind will probably not take any of this into account. you will simply tell yourself “i am the only smart and correct person on this site”…. another misstep in your grasp of numbers and odds….. according to my research, 100% of people besides you think that your arguments are invalid. probably not enough to sway you, though…. good luck with life, buddy. and by “luck”, i mean chance, not certainty.

  • Mr Jim

    Not sure if I want to drag myself down to his level again, it might be damaging to my health. First, of all I have given plenty of valid reasons why she said what she said. Second of all, it doesn’t matter.

    If she said “I know I am a Martian and I’m going to suck your bone marrow from your bones like a martian vampire!!!” I’m sure you would be the first to grab a few stakes, pitchforks, torches etc and round up the villagers. Because obviously she knows this to be true without doubt.

    Let’s get this straight you stuck up simpleton, why do you think she is stupid? Because she dealt to gain 400 grand when if she had said no deal she would have won 1 million? Or is it that she said ‘OOh I know the million is in this box!’ and then didn’t go for the box?

    She was right to deal at that time because she wanted to go away with something, and losing it all would have been the truly dumb move just as the guy did. He is the idiot.

    The fact is she didn’t know the million was in her box. She may have said *i believe/know the million is in this box* but she did not. I’m finding it hard, to understand where you get this logic from.

    You talked about poker about the fact she knew she had a ‘royal flush’. The equivalent WOULD have been knowing either you or your adversary has a royal flush and the other has a measly pair, but you do not know who has what.

    Because if she actually fucking knew that she had a million/royal flush for definite without a doubt, that some how she knew, that god told her, that she cheated and found out, THEN she would have gone for it because she would have actually KNOWN, instead of just ‘knowing’ i.e. having a good idea it was in the box, but saying ‘know’ to emphasise her prediction.

    OK, Andrew, homework time, answer me this question: how do you know she knew the million in the box? And something a bit more to base on than hoo haa rubbish that she said ‘she knew’ because that is no evidence whatsoever.

    And please make it a little thought out. I mean come on you really are embarassing yourself here.

  • iain

    look, andrew B. u r an idiot, the point is that she may have “knew” but she didnt really know, she just really wanted it to be.
    if she had opened it and it hadnt been there then we would be calling her nearly as big a bonehead.

    shes smart coz she wasnt greedy and thought that 1/3 of a million would be better than $25

    hes dumb coz he was greedy and thought ok, i could take 2/3 of a million which would change my life, or i could risk it all for a million dollars. ultimately greed made him take the stupid move

  • andrew b is a loser

    andrew b, pick heads or tails, if u win ill give you 1 million dollars

    btw, i know its going to land on heads

  • ampac

    andrew b you make absolutely no f-ing sense! but damn if reading these comments was not extremely entertaining! obviously you are a troll, and no reason or logic can persuade you to acknowledge what is so clear even to my 5 year old nephew.

  • andrew b

    So what if you guys seem to think I make no sense, I’m a troll, I’m a moron, or with absolutely no sense of math…it does not change the fact that Paul’s example is a falsely cropped montage that puts the wrong offer at the final two cases while removing the real offer entirely (thus comes the dumb comment “hes dumb coz he was greedy and thought ok, i could take 2/3 of a million which would change my life, or i could risk it all for a million dollars.”), ignores one key piece of Richie’s winnings, cuts out the reasoning behind Richie’s decision which is your key piece of evidence, and is also captioned as if all of this was the real result.

    Now THAT, if nothing else, can be proved wrong. Obviously no one else read the GSNN article on the game.

  • JPM

    Okay, I think I am slowly getting stupider just reading this thread…

    Andrew, time for a real life application of your knowing vs. “knowing” vs. believing logic, ready?

    I am a Christian. Okay, there’s the first piece of info.

    Here is the second piece of info…..

    I KNOW God is real and sent his Son to save us from hell etc.

    Now Andrew, what is your immediate response to my statement “I know God is real”?

    I’m going to guess that your response will be one of these listed;

    A) “Good for you.”

    B) “How do you know? Prove it!”

    C) “You mean you believe God is real? Because there is no way you can possibly KNOW that.”

    D) “Well whaddaya know! I’m a Christian too! God is as real as you and me!”

    E) “He said he knows God is real, that proves it! God must be real!”

    Now Andrew, you simply choose the letter that is closest to your own immediate reaction.

    If none of the above fit your reaction, please tell us in detail how you responded.

  • andrew b

    I was only referencing a “divine assignment” as a hypothetical cover-all for situations like this.

    This type of situation is different from the one we’ve seen. Though people can claim they know God exists, like I do (D), there isn’t a “full knowledge” of the consequences. When Marybeth removed the 500,000, she had full knowledge of what “claiming” to know she was holding the 1,000,000 might do, was asked if she really did by Howie, and continued to ignore him. She got herself into this mess completely on purpose, so she should have to get herself out of it by making good on it.

    Don’t make this sort of claim on this show if you are unable to follow through on it in any possible board situation; yes, even with a penny as the smaller amount. The offer situation may change this if it goes beyond the mean, at which point you can go ahead and take it. But if you can’t finish, don’t start.

  • Mr Jim

    OK Andrew, NOW you actually have been proven to be a monumentous dumbass! I’ve looked at the GSNN article on the very game the male contestant was on.

    He played through the game, getting various boxes taken away. Then he got to the penultimate round. This is something you have completely neglected to mention to this point, and I haven’t been bothered about this before because I assumed we were only on about the very final round and that this was secondary material. And now this is the final nail on the coffin of your twisted logic. Anyway I digress. He had a situation:

    He had a million box.
    He had another million in a box.
    And he had a 1 dollar box.

    He was offered $603,000 to back away.

    RIGHT, now it somewhat makes sense to say no deal because there is now a 2/3 chance of winning a million. Let me get this straight: this is not the case. The fact is, he only has a 1/3 of a chance now of going away with a guaranteed million.

    If he says no deal:

    There is a 2/3 chance he will lose a box containing a million, thereby losing his advantage over the banker.
    There is a 1/3 chance of getting the very much sought after 1 dollar.

    So, the most likely circumstance that will happen is that a million will turn up, which it did. Anyone with half a brain would realise that as soon as those two millions turn to only one, the offer would go down, which it did. It went from 600 grand to 400 grand.

    The fact is he could have walked away with 600 grand. He decided to make a no deal that most likely would see him be dramatically reduced in the money that he could walk away with, just for a 1/3 chance of winning the million. This is what makes him even more blindly idiotic than before. I mean I thought with the previous scenario we’ve been talking about, i.e. only the last round, made him look dumb but this takes the cake.

    The fact is he had a guaranteed 600 grand. He could have walked away with it there and then. He then decides to greedily bet away what apparently is a mere million for the chance of getting that coveted 1 dollar.

    The situation:

    100% chance of walking away with 600 grand.
    33.3% chance of getting a million.
    66.6% chance of fucking up your stronghold, going down to 400 grand and then being left with the god awful position of having a dollar and a million.

    The fact is he shouldn’t have sacrificed his 100% chance of 600 grand, for a 33.3% chance of winning a million. Even then with just that knowledge he should have realised that if he lost that 1 million (which was most likely) that despite having that 1 million to play for, it would mean the odds of winning well would be dramatically reduced. In all cases it would have been much better to grab the 600 grand and leg it out of there.

    So yes he was dumb for not taking the 600 grand. He was dumb for trying to hope that that 1/3 chance of getting a million would win out.

    “(paul‘s example) ignores one key piece of Richie’s winnings, cuts out the reasoning behind Richie’s decision which is your key piece of evidence, and is also captioned as if all of this was the real result.”

    His final winnings were 10,001 which is nice but lets get this straight is nothing compared to what he could have won: 600 grand. His decision was based on the fact he had a “two-out-of-three chance that he’s a millionaire” this is misinformation. The fact is he had a 1-out-of three chance he would become a millionaire in his next move.

    Do you still not understand that he was wrong to do this? I mean you’ve already accepted you have no understanding of the concept of mathematics and probability. I mean the only thing you’ve got correct, in fact, is that Pete’s analogy is not quite complete.

    In this case the analogy should be changed further.

    You are given 600 grand.
    You are given the opportunity to participate in a bet.
    In this bet a dice is thrown.
    If it is a 1 or a 2 then you will immediately win 1 million.
    If it is a number between 3 and 6 you will lose a sum of money (This sum of money lost represents the decrease in the banker’s offer, this turned out to be 200 grand, which is quite a lot.)

    If you go for it and find out it was between 3 or 6, a new situation crops up:

    You now have 400 grand.
    You are given the opportunity to participate in a bet.
    In this bet a coin is thrown.
    If it is heads you will win an additional 600 grand.
    If it is tails you will lose the 400 grand that you have.

    NOW THAT is the reality of the situation.

    The fact of the matter is he should have gone for the 600 grand. His options:

    100% chance of winning 600 grand.
    33.3% chance of winning a million.
    And a 66.6% chance of losing 200 grand, and increasing his chances of walking away with nothing.

    Sounds like I’m repeating myself? That’s because, being the generous person that I am, I’m trying to convince you of the error of your ways. Again, and again, and again. The fact that going for that small chance of winning makes sense to you, is appalling. All I can say is a nomination for the Darwin Award is surely most deserved upon your resume.

    Anyway! Now is the main problem that we fellow numerates have concerning the last round. The problem that has been the subject of conversation that you seem to believe is not the case you are trying to argue for some reason. Well just consider this next scenario, with no consideration of what came before.

    You have 400 grand.
    You are given the opportunity to participate in a bet.
    In this bet a coin is thrown.
    If it is heads you will win an additional 600 grand.
    If it is tails you will lose the 400 grand that you have.

    The fact is you now have a 1/2 chance of losing it all. Run! Run the fuck away! You have a life changing sum in your hands don’t give into greed to win that extra money when there is the much too great chance of losing it all! Yeah sure he has 10 grand to fall back on but lets be honest that’s nothing. The fact is the smart move would be to take the decent amount of money before potentially losing it all.

    THAT IS WHY HE IS DUMB.

    If you still argue with the logic of this situation please have the decency to argue your actual fucking point instead of blaming it on explanations missing key figures, or key pieces of evidence. Please, for the love of god, bring your stupidity to light.

    And the last thing: the woman.

    She said she knew, she knew, she knew, she knew, she knew, SHE KNEW!!!! But the fact of the matter is she got to that final stage. She had a million and a dollar. She considered her actions. Despite strong feelings of ’knowing’ the box of hers was THE BOX, she did not know. She did not know because she hesitated. Because she thought about it reflectively and realised she did not know for certain she did or did not have the winning box. Instead of playing this risky game of ’does my godly power work?’ she chose to walk away with a decent some of money. Instead of recklessly betting away and potentially losing everything.

    She did not know. As much as she thought she did. As much as she would have liked to believed she had the box she did not KNOW. Why did she make this claim? For several reasons. Reasons that I am reluctantly telling you again because you didn’t listen the first time you inbred hack.

    Positive thinking (allowing herself the courage to move on with the game)
    Pressure (contorting her own ideas of how she perceived reality)
    Excitement/Fear of Winning/Losing (with that much money it is hard to stay fully sane)
    Trying to scare the banker (which is the most likely reason, but kinda backfired seeing as he didnt like her tune and went for 340 grand)

    She had every right to make any claim that her box was. You do not have the right to persecute her because she didn’t keep to those beliefs.

    She’s not an idiot.

    She thought she had the box. The fact is there was a 50% chance she did not.

    If she took that chance and was wrong, she would lose everything. So she decided not to take that horrible chance and left with a huge sum of money and should be fully congratulated.

    Not called a moron by an idiot like you.

    Now, if you really, really want to refute this evidence, please actually try to make some sort of sense.

  • ryan e

    I was gonna respond to Andrew B’s latest comment, but it’s too fucking stupid to waste my time on.

    As for the one before it, yes, the fat guy (you) had the choice between $400,000, $1, and $1,000,000 and not $600,000 as the clip suggests, but the fact is he walked home with $10,001 instead of $410,000. Ergo, he is a fucking idiot because he missed out on 400 grand.

  • andrew b

    “The fact is he shouldn’t have sacrificed his 100% chance of 600 grand, for a 33.3% chance of winning a million.”

    What you touch on is that there is a 66.7% chance of dropping to $400,000, and a 33.3% chance of going up to $1,000,000. 200,000 * 2/3 = 400,000 * 1/3…so you’re not right at this point.

    Ritchie would not have gone for such a huge gamble at the end if he were not satisfied with the smaller result.

    All of these reasons, of course, can be justified under normal means, but Marybeth conveniently enough destroyed every one of them with some type of action.

    “Positive thinking (allowing herself the courage to move on with the game)
    Pressure (contorting her own ideas of how she perceived reality)
    Excitement/Fear of Winning/Losing (with that much money it is hard to stay fully sane)
    Trying to scare the banker (which is the most likely reason, but kinda backfired seeing as he didnt like her tune and went for 340 grand)”

    A) What positive thinking does she need after the offer is given? Maybe before the offer is given, but not after…without positive thinking, she’d just take the deal anyway.
    B) You might think she was influenced to make the claim by being under pressure, but she still did the same thing after the game, WITHOUT the pressure (I never doubted, etc.), and still being just as contradictory.
    C) She stayed fully sane when $404,000 was offered…now she falls apart when $341,000 is offered. Besides, she knew what she was getting into when she signed up for the show. There’s something on the DonD application which asks what the applicant would do if the board were .01/500,000/1,000,000, so there is no excuse for “coming to reality” when the stakes turn up like this. Sheesh…you’re going to see millions of dollars playing in the WSoP. If you can’t control yourself over this bet, you might want to get out of the kitchen.
    D) Again, maybe it would scare the banker before an offer is made, but after the FINAL OFFER, it’s just stupid, because there’s no more banker left to scare.

    Arguably just as effective is revealing absolutely nothing and letting the banker guess what to do, rather than bluffing all the time (as we know everyone seems to do) which causes the banker to be accustomed to bluffing, not being fazed by it, and getting away with steals on the player’s case like this one. After watching this show throughout its soaring height turned catastrophic run of failure, I practically know every time what a contestant will do in any sort of big decision situation, and although I didn’t want to believe it, I knew she’d take this deal. And yes, she did. Mindless destruction followed. I’ve never seen worse TV. EVER.

    These guys need to either put up or shut up when it comes to this sort of activity.

  • ryan e

    I didn’t see that Jim had responded in far more depth than I had, but I have another example for you:
    The man from the first clip (henceforth known as Andrew B) is given the choice between eating a cake and not eating a cake. If he eats the cake, he will become morbidly fucking obese and hideously unattractive. If he decides not to eat the cake, his mouth will not taste like cake but he will also not be a disgusting greedy pig.
    As we all know from the first clip, Andrew B took the cake, and he ate it too, and all it got him was super fat and $1 richer.

  • andrew b

    As we all know, the person in the clip was not $1 richer, and his name apparently wasn’t anything related to mine…so there you go. Every other assumption you make is under question.

  • ryan e

    False ya tard. The lowest Andrew B could’ve gotten was 10000 dollars, therefore he was $1 richer than the $10000 that he could’ve gotten, rather than 400 grand richer. Once again, you’re fucking wrong

  • Matt M

    Andrew, please.
    Your latest A-D of refutes are just getting really stupid.
    “B) You might think she was influenced to make the claim by being under pressure, but she still did the same thing after the game, WITHOUT the pressure (I never doubted, etc.), and still being just as contradictory.”
    Of course she’d say she never doubted it, because it was TRUE. Put yourself in her shoes? If you made a miraculous guess like that would you walk around on camera saying “oh golly gee, i suppose that was a lucky guess!”

    And as for whatever you said regarding “D)”, she’s not just going to completely alter her mindset after spending a grueling amount of time on stage in front of a television audience just because it’s no longer necessary and thusly “stupid.” The very same goes for argument “A)”.

    I can see that you’re /trying/ to put common sense into your logic, since we’re having such success with it, but you really aren’t thinking anything you say through.

  • Mr Jim

    “Ritchie would not have gone for such a huge gamble at the end if he were not satisfied with the smaller result.”

    That is why he is dumb. That is why he was greedy.

    Not satisfied with 400 grand? My god, that is a massive amount of money. A MASSIVE amount. To not be satisfied with that is just stupid, especially when the alternative is losing it all.

    The fact is if he had been left with this situation it would just make him stupid. The fact is:

    He had a 100% chance of leaving with 600 grand
    If he went for it:
    He had a 33.3% chance of leaving with a million.
    he had a 66.6% chance of going into the next round with only 400 grand.

    The smart thing to do would be to take the 600 grand, realising that would be the greatest amount of money you could make, without having to bet between a million and 0.

    “200,000 * 2/3 = 400,000 * 1/3…so you’re not right at this point.”

    What the fuck does this mean? It doesn’t mean anything! ITs like me saying well 1,000,000*2/3 = 666666.6. It doesn’t actually mean anything. You just don’t understand fucking probability you inbred, low-life scum. I can’t believe you’re telling me I’m not right. I’ve got fucking qualifications in Statisitics you fucking hick.

    The fact is he had a 66.6% chance of losing a million box. This would lower him down a sizable sum of money, which he didnt know the amount of but it was pretty certain that it would be sizable, it turned out the offer reduced by 200 grand to 400.

    So the options were 600 grand, a 1/3 chance of winning a million, and 2/3 chance of going to the next round where he could potentially lose it all.

    “All of these reasons, of course, can be justified under normal means”

    What normal means? Some shitty divination? Mental retardation? People telling him its a good idea? Common sense trumps any of these ideas. There is no evidence whatsoever other than him being an idiot for him to act in the way he did.

    OK lets get this straight. It doesn’t matter, what she said. Are you saying if she had been a mute, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation? Are you saying that she’s an idiot for merely what she said, or for making the choice she did? Is it for believing in a box that was true? Is it the fact she didn’t listen to the wisdom of her idiot colleagues? Is it because of some other random reason?

    Let’s get this straight andrew b you moron.

    We are only interested in the actual game none of the bullshit surrounding it, because frankly it has no discussion here, where we are just trying to analyse the actual game of probability.

    The probability was:

    100% chance of leaving with 340 grand.

    50% chance with leaving with a million.
    50% chance with leaving with nothing.

    Given those odds, she was incredibly right to go for the 340 grand. You know I’ve asked everyone of my work mates if they were in this position would they take the money? They all said yes. The fact is the chance of losing it all is just too high, when you could always leave with a decent amount of money.

    One last thing.

    “There is no excuse for “coming to reality” when the stakes turn up like this.”

    How many times are you given the opportunity to win 340 grand. THAT will hit you like a fucking reality h-bomb. The fact is it was possible for her to lose. YES it fucking was possible. There is no fucking way she could know where the money was!!!!!!

    I mean, how could she know, answer me that? HOW?!

    She said she knew? That doesn’t mean anything! I could say I know its going to rain today it doesn’t mean its going to rain. Why can’t you understand she did not actually know?

  • Mr Jim

    One last point, before I have to reply again to your stupidity.

    “Ritchie would not have gone for such a huge gamble at the end if he were not satisfied with the smaller result.”

    OK I may have misinterpreted this as the 400 grand. Instead of the 1 dollar.

    So he was satisfied with getting a dollar? But just not 400 grand? What an IDIOT.

  • GAR!

    Oh, man…

    I have seriously enjoyed wasting my time on these comments.

    Mr. Jim, I don’t have the words. You must be a teacher in a Special ED class, to be patient enough to deal with Andrew b. That, or a saint.

    Drew, I’ll even give you a bit of credit. Having courage and conviction is definitely necessary to get to the final rounds in DoND. What will save you from looking retarded once you get there is COMMON SENSE. It’s nearly impossible to have on a gambler’s high, but absolutely critical.

    She had it, he didn’t.

  • Mr Jim

    Let this (hopefully) be the last comment:

    We, the righteous people of the interweb, have won the epic unreality comment war.

    And Andrew B lies within a crevice with rats picking at the remains of his body.

    REJOICE!

Categories

Celebrity Toob

Celebrity Gossip, Pictures, Videos, Net Worth & Bios

TVOvermind

TV News, Reviews, Recaps, and Spoilers

Archives