duffrageous (August 4, 2008 at 6:19 pm)

it's actually more effective to incorporate simple game theory because you can have an easy question in a hard category or a hard question in an easy category. for instance, you have $12,000 and your opponent has $6000. if you bet $1 and lose, you lose the match. your opponent will bet $6000, and by betting $0, you have a 50% chance of tying and 50% of winning outright. by betting $1, you have a 25% chance of losing and a 75% chance of winning.

Axidage (August 4, 2008 at 6:02 pm)

What some people obviously don't get is that you bet before you see the question. You're supposed to bet based on what you know of the category because that's the only thing you know before you bet.

damienmetalwind (August 1, 2008 at 3:16 am)

I love the look on the first chick's face. Like she just picked 6000 out of a hat and was waiting to see if she won. Then she found out she lost...sad story.

crimsonmarch (July 31, 2008 at 5:11 am)

fuck your dumb

littlemissperfect166 (July 28, 2008 at 6:31 am)

that mist of sucked first for chick

animfan1 (June 23, 2008 at 4:34 pm)

Based on Babatope's wager I had a feeling that he wanted Jennah to lose by $1 if he were right and she were wrong. Jennah should have wagered $4,201 if that were to happen.

unfasten (April 22, 2008 at 5:48 pm)

(You sucked me back in!) The assumption was bad, but because she would have won if it had been fulfilled, her wager was fine. I don't think I myself would ever risk making a small wager from first place, but I can't fault Joanne for hers.

duffrageous (April 22, 2008 at 3:57 am)

that's what srinivas did and he still won. knowing that the first place person is going to risk enough to cover double the second place person's score, the second place person would be foolish to risk anything. that occurs in less than 50% of the cases. the important factor is determining how much to risk to ensure your victory. joanne did not make a smart wager, not because she lost, but because she assumed she would get the question wrong and hoped srinivas would also get it wrong.

unfasten (April 22, 2008 at 3:00 am)

If a first place player always made a "good" wager, the second place player would never risk everything (since their only hope of victory is first place getting it wrong, and no one would jeopardize that with a wager that would guarantee their loss with a wrong answer). Indeed, ignoring Babatope, Joanne would have won if Srinivas had made a wager based on what a "good" wager from first place would be.But it's obvious we're not going to agree, so I'll stop now.

duffrageous (April 21, 2008 at 6:41 am)

i still think $5000 is a bad wager in that scenario unless the evidence proves most trailing players don't risk all of it.