Poll

8 votes (47.05%)
6 votes (35.29%)
3 votes (17.64%)
2 votes (11.76%)
6 votes (35.29%)
2 votes (11.76%)
3 votes (17.64%)
2 votes (11.76%)
8 votes (47.05%)
6 votes (35.29%)

17 members have voted

Ace2
Ace2
Joined: Oct 2, 2017
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 726
Thanks for this post from:
Gialmere
August 9th, 2020 at 4:11:21 PM permalink
200 m
Itís all about making that GTA
ksdjdj
ksdjdj
Joined: Oct 20, 2013
  • Threads: 78
  • Posts: 894
Thanks for this post from:
Gialmere
August 9th, 2020 at 4:36:56 PM permalink
My answer is 200 m ***

***: I got 200.00000000002351265624999861789 on the calculator

Note: I used variations of "a2 + b2 = c2" and the "Cosine Rule" to work this out (I forgot how to do it, so had to look up when to use cos and cos-1 on the calculator).
rsactuary
rsactuary
Joined: Sep 6, 2014
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 1698
Thanks for this post from:
Gialmere
August 9th, 2020 at 5:58:07 PM permalink
I tried to use similar triangles theorem to compare the bases of the smaller triangle and the larger triangle to the area. I thought they should be in the same proportion? I got 150m, but I'm guessing I've done something wrong. Can anyone enlighten me?

ETA: I figured it out.. the areas aren't proportional. But the sides are so I essentially did x/(100+x) = 100/150. Giving x=200
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 33
  • Posts: 2149
Thanks for this post from:
Gialmere
August 9th, 2020 at 6:13:13 PM permalink
Similar triangles does work (I'm assuming the line across the lake is NS and the others EW).

The base of the big triangle is 150m, and the base of the smaller triangle is 100m.
If the height of the smaller triangle is x (i.e. the distance across the lake), then the height of the larger triangle is 150/100*x = 1.5x.
We're told the difference in heights is 100m;so (1.5x - x)=100m; so x=200m.
Ace2
Ace2
Joined: Oct 2, 2017
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 726
August 9th, 2020 at 8:30:03 PM permalink
Deleted
Itís all about making that GTA
Gialmere
Gialmere
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
  • Threads: 37
  • Posts: 1659
Thanks for this post from:
ksdjdj
August 9th, 2020 at 11:27:05 PM permalink
Quote: Ace2

200 m


Quote: ksdjdj

My answer is 200 m ***

***: I got 200.00000000002351265624999861789 on the calculator

Note: I used variations of "a2 + b2 = c2" and the "Cosine Rule" to work this out (I forgot how to do it, so had to look up when to use cos and cos-1 on the calculator).


Quote: rsactuary

I tried to use similar triangles theorem to compare the bases of the smaller triangle and the larger triangle to the area. I thought they should be in the same proportion? I got 150m, but I'm guessing I've done something wrong. Can anyone enlighten me?

ETA: I figured it out.. the areas aren't proportional. But the sides are so I essentially did x/(100+x) = 100/150. Giving x=200


Quote: charliepatrick

Similar triangles does work (I'm assuming the line across the lake is NS and the others EW).

The base of the big triangle is 150m, and the base of the smaller triangle is 100m.
If the height of the smaller triangle is x (i.e. the distance across the lake), then the height of the larger triangle is 150/100*x = 1.5x.
We're told the difference in heights is 100m;so (1.5x - x)=100m; so x=200m.


Correct!
---------------------------

My dad taught me how to swim by throwing me into a lake.

The swimming part was easy but getting out of the burlap sack took some work.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Ace2
Ace2
Joined: Oct 2, 2017
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 726
August 10th, 2020 at 9:14:48 AM permalink
Quote: Ace2

Two craps players make a side bet on a side bet.

Player A always plays "All Small" and "All Tall". Player B always plays "Make em All".

Starting with a new shooter, A tells B he will win both of his wagers at least twice before B wins his once. In this casino, All Small, All Tall, and Make em All bets can only be made before a new shooter's first roll.

This is an even money bet. They will play until their wager is resolved. What is A's edge (or disadvantage)?

If anyone cares:

The overall probability x of winning the Small bet is 0.026354 and the overall probability y of winning the All bet is 0.005258. However, if the only three relevant outcomes are winning Small, Tall or All then the probability s of winning only the Small bet is (x-y)/(2x-y) = 0.44459. If we consider only two outcomes of winning Small or All then the probability m of winning Small (only) is (x-y)/x = 0.80049

Using linear equations where state a is 1 small or tall win, state b is 2 similar wins, state c is 2 distinct wins and state d is 3 wins we can say:

x = 2sa
a = s(b + c)
b = md
c = 2sd
d = m

Solve for x and the probability of player A winning is 0.5347 for a 6.94% advantage

However, itís easier to solve this by integrating the following equation from zero to infinity:

(e^(sx) - sx - 1) * sx/e^x * 2s
Itís all about making that GTA
unJon
unJon 
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 1871
August 10th, 2020 at 9:32:37 AM permalink
Quote: Ace2

If anyone cares:

The overall probability x of winning the Small bet is 0.026354 and the overall probability y of winning the All bet is 0.005258. However, if the only three relevant outcomes are winning Small, Tall or All then the probability s of winning only the Small bet is (x-y)/(2x-y) = 0.44459. If we consider only two outcomes of winning Small or All then the probability m of winning Small (only) is (x-y)/x = 0.80049

Using linear equations where state a is 1 small or tall win, state b is 2 similar wins, state c is 2 distinct wins and state d is 3 wins we can say:

x = 2sa
a = s(b + c)
b = md
c = 2sd
d = m

Solve for x and the probability of player A winning is 0.5347 for a 6.94% advantage

However, itís easier to solve this by integrating the following equation from zero to infinity:

(e^(sx) - sx - 1) * sx/e^x * 2s



Iím not quite following. How did you derive the conditional probability of hitting the All given that the Small has just been hit?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
Ace2
Ace2
Joined: Oct 2, 2017
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 726
August 10th, 2020 at 10:14:44 AM permalink
Quote: unJon

Iím not quite following. How did you derive the conditional probability of hitting the All given that the Small has just been hit?

I didnít. There are only 3 relevant outcomes:

Shooter wins small (only)
Shooter wins tall (only)
Shooter wins all
Itís all about making that GTA
unJon
unJon 
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 1871
August 10th, 2020 at 10:32:24 AM permalink
Quote: Ace2

I didnít. There are only 3 relevant outcomes:

Shooter wins small (only)
Shooter wins tall (only)
Shooter wins all



Oh I see. You actually implicitly have it: 1 - (x - y) / x.

How about this one: whatís the expected number of rolls for this bet between A and B to resolve?
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.

  • Jump to: