Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: The big compromise

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 14:30:52 04/10/02

Go up one level in this thread


On April 10, 2002 at 16:22:18, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On April 09, 2002 at 16:02:47, Roy Eassa wrote:
>
>>
>>Let's see what statements BOTH sides can agree on:
>>
>>1) In most highly open, tactical positions, the strongest computers are usually
>>stronger than even the strongest GMs.
>>
>>2) In many more-closed positions the strongest GMs are stronger than any
>>computers.
>>
>>3) A GM can maximize his chances and thus minimize the computer's chances by
>>avoiding the types of positions in #1 and creating those in #2.  THIS IS A SKILL
>>UNTO ITSELF.
>
>
>Here is a cute question:
>
>We are going to play a game where each of us (two player game) has a coin.
>I can show you either a head or a tail, and you do the same to me.  We both
>show our coins simultaneously.  If we both show heads, you owe me $1.  If we
>both show tails, you owe me $3.  If we show different (head for me tail for you
>or vice-versa) I pay you $2.
>
>Do you play this game with me?
>
>(Hint:  it looks evenly matched but it favors me)

If I have no mistake it favours me and not you.

Suppose that I choose tail with probability of p when p=3/8
If you choose tail all the time then my expected gain is 2(1-p)-3p=2-5p=1/8
If you choose head all the time then my expected gain is  2p-(1-p)=3p-1=1/8

For people who wonder why did I choose p=3/8:
I found p by solving the equation 2-5p=3p-1

Uri



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.