Now that the Monty Hall Problem is fairly well known, a game show host could drastically reduce the number of winners by only offering the switch when the original selection has the car behind it.
Now that the Monty Hall Problem is fairly well known, a game show host could drastically reduce the number of winners by only offering the switch when the original selection has the car behind it.
Comments
[deleted]
But then wouldn’t you know if it’s being offered the car is behind it?
The monty hall problem only works because the guy is FORCED to open all doors minus 1 without the prize no matter if you have the prize behind the current door or not . Introduce basic common sense that a show host would probably open it in case of a winner behind your current door and wouldn’t open the door if you don’t have the prize and the whole scenario falls apart.
That’s more or less how the original game worked: Monty didn’t have to offer the switch. He still offered it sometimes, partly to play mind games with the contestants and partly because he knew he had to let some cars through or people would just stop playing. But by manipulating the odds and the players he could gain some control over how many people won.
This is obviously true regardless of how well known the Monty Hall problem is.
If you don’t give people who have already lost another chance to win, and only give another chance to lose to people who have already won, then yes, you’ll reduce the number of winners. You can only possibly increase the number of losers, and decrease the number of winners.
I would think the game show has already factored in the cost of the prize to the winner. They want the player to win because that brings more viewers to the show – both on TV and in person.
The moderators have reflaired this post as a crazy idea.
While crazy ideas are occasionally allowed as casual thoughts, they should probably be posted in /r/CrazyIdeas.
Please review each flair’s requirements for more information.
^^This ^^is ^^an ^^automated ^^system.
^^If ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^questions, ^^please ^^use ^^this ^^link ^^to ^^message ^^the ^^moderators.
Isn’t the point that the swap is always offered? There isn’t a game if you pucked wrong, and they’re like “oh too bad.”
You don’t understand the monty hall problem
Could work for a little while, but once people realize that he is only sometimes offering the switch, people will just simply refuse to take the switch, because they know he’s only offering it if they picked wrong
Heck, actual Let’s Make a Deal just got rid of the Switching mechanic after the Monty Hall problem became well known, and made it so you just get to pick 1 item randomly and get either the Grand Prize or one of 2 Small Prizes
It violates the precepts of the Monty Hall Problem in which the host has no idea where the prize is at, thus it would no longer be the same
The car is just a small part of the cost of a game show that they don’t care if the contestants win or not.
You overestimate the amount of people that know about this and the amount that understand it.
But even so, even knowing the problem it doesn’t help with how humans think. Our brains are illogical in many ways and this is one of those instances and a lot of people would still play it the “wrong” way.
Everyone pretty much knows that casinos are set up for you to lose, yet most people still participate in it and a large part of them think they can beat the system or know of a secret.
I don’t you’ve understood the Monty Hall problem yet. The issue is that the first door opened is always the one without the prize. The actual fair way would be to first open a random door not chosen which would have the prize 1/3 of the time. But then the game doesn’t have any substance.
That would ruin the show , when someone notices them doing that , everyone would assume they were cheating to prevent anyone from winning, which defeats their purpose since they should want more winners as that generates ratings.
wouldn’t make for very good TV if it’s not 33%. the Audience would see through it immediately
Then it would stop being the Monty Hall problem? I am not sure what the point of this is at all to be honest.
Imagine the game show host saying, You picked the car? Sorry, but let’s play a little switcheroo. Talk about a plot twist worthy of Hollywood.
So you should absolutely switch your case at the end of Deal or No Deal?
It is widely known you are more likely to get hit by lightning than win the lotto but people buy tickets every day. In Texas you are actually 25x more likely to be hit by lighting than win the Texas lotto.
The Monty Hall problem is also bullshit. It’s statistical fallacy dressed up as higher thinking. The odds of you having picked the correct door the first time will never change.
Instead of removing one of the three doors, if they chose to add a door, would your odds of picking the right door the first time change? Would you swap your choice to the new door?
No. An option being removed doesn’t change the fact that you had a 1 in 3 chance of getting it right the first time.
If Monty cheats, it’s not a math problem, it’s just psychological warfare.
I love this problem, because there are three solutions, 2/1, 1/2 or 50/50.
Now, every option but one, will give you an either 2/1 chance or a 1/2 chance of winning, but which one is the fabled 50/50, the ones all the arguments argue against.
Well, first up, how did i test it? Well, simple python code that run through about a 100 itterations, since i was using it online in a browser and wanted to test em all.
But when i set the selection method to be random, the win rate turned 50/50, meaning people who claimed it was a 50% chance of winning, was actually all correct all along, which means that anyone who argued against someone who made that statement was also wrong.
And since this is also the technically correct answer, as well all know to be the most right answer, that debate is finally dead.
By simply never offering a switch you also drastically reduce the number of winners. Since offering the switch and someone taking it would be a 2/3 odds for the player, having the player pick with no switch offered would be 1/3.
Once that happens a few times, people will than realise not to switch when offered and ask to switch if not offered.
“If the host is required to open a door all the time and offer you a switch, then you should take the switch. But if he has the choice whether to allow a switch or not, beware. Caveat emptor. It all depends on his mood.” -Monty Hall from a front-page NYT article written in 1991.
The Monty Hall problem has been common knowledge for almost as long as I’ve been alive. It’s also not how the show is usually run. An offer to switch doors is rare and became rarer once Monty Hall got wind of Selvin’s work.
why not just have no car at all sometimes.
If you are going to rig the game and screw over the players, why pussyfoot around with it. Want to cut the win rate in half, half the time have no win. Period. (obviously, just show the goat, and that’s all, you never do a reveal of a car).