Favorable Bet
Let’s say you get into an quarrel with a friend as to who owns the more expensive canine and decide to settle the spat by checking with the pet store where the two whelps were bought.
Meanwhile you also agree on a bet whereby the person who wins (owns the more expensive one) will give it to the loser. Thereafter you’re both tickled pink with this arrangement, because you’re both thinking, "If I win I’ll lose my hound, but if I lose I get a pricier pooch. And as the chances are obviously equal, the bet’s clearly to my advantage."
The problem is, how can a bet be favorable to both parties?
Meanwhile you also agree on a bet whereby the person who wins (owns the more expensive one) will give it to the loser. Thereafter you’re both tickled pink with this arrangement, because you’re both thinking, "If I win I’ll lose my hound, but if I lose I get a pricier pooch. And as the chances are obviously equal, the bet’s clearly to my advantage."
The problem is, how can a bet be favorable to both parties?
Labels: thinktank, trickofmind
posted by Rajesh Lal at
2:45 AM
14 Comments:
I personally do not think that it is possible since it works fully to the person with the cheaper pooch. It is equivalent to the "heads i win tails u lose situation"
yep, same thought here...
I'd be glad to lose the dog. No more stinky poo :) I'd be glad to win the dog, so I could sell them.
The reason that it is favorable to both parties is because the value of the stakes are changed by the outcome of the bet
Hi Anonymous. I like your statement; it's a good thought.
If I was one of the dog owners, I wouldn't have taken the bet on; it seems crazy to me. Owning two dogs is only a 100% better than owning one. Owning zero dogs is infinitely worse than owning one. I'm assuming that the dogs are approximately of the same value.
If the dogs were obviously greatly different in value, then if I was the owner of the more expensive one, I'd not take the bet on.
Rajesh's example doesn't cut it with me.
Can be win win situation if the parties are siblings living together. Then they can enjoy the marginal benefits of the additional dog. Hence it is favourable for both parties
Hi Rinaldo. In that case they already are sharing the two dogs.
Hmmm that's true. Is there an answer for this?
Hi Anonymous, I think that the example included in the problem is throwing nearly everyone of the scent - the bet seems to be insane. If the bet was the other way i.e. the owner of the more valuable dog gets both, that would make more sense, but then seems to be missing the challenge implied in the question. Sadly, neither Rajesh or ToM seem to bother to issue the official answer, so we'll probably never know what we should have done.
Not sure if it's you, but Anonymous Sept 16 1:41 PM made a very interesting point. I wish I could think of how to make a concrete example to exploit it.
i think you might be as simple as:
-if i win i get bragging rights.
-i lose i get a valuable dog.
some people have ego's and so the respect and pride that come with the bragging rights may be worth more than the pooch.
sorry i meant: "i think it might be as simple as ..."
Hi Huzzy, it's amazing how easy it is to make typos - they explain about a third of my deleted posts.
Your example makes sense. Although I'd rather own a valuable item than only being only able to brag that I used to own a valuable item. Anyone I bragged that to would probably doubt that I was sane.
With the example given, the winner loses and the loser wins. Rajesh seems to be implying that it is possible for the both the winner and the loser to win - I assume in such a way that most sane people would agree.
I've just noticed that the friends were having a quarrel. If it was going to lead to violence, then any bet that avoided that would be win-win.
The bet only seems favourable because the betters don't have enough information to estimate their chances. It's similar to a bet where two people throw a dice and the higher roller pays the other a number of dollars equal to the number of pips he rolled.
Another analogy that emphases the psychological aspect would be a heads up poker game where both players have a good hand.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home