Analysis Premium Point of Difference

[Philzsay]

OK, now if only Dr Who was to land his Tardis in my loungroom today and say to me:

"One of rookie priced forwards Kaiden Brand, Michael Close and Max Duffy are going to have a breakout season this year averaging 105 points a game from 22 games, you can select one and only one of them, who do you choose?"

I reply "Max Duffy".

Then Dr Who says "OK I am feeling generous, just to let you know it will not be Michael Close. Do you want to stick with Duffy or would you like to switch to Kaid...."

"KAIDEN BRAND, SWITCH TO KAIDEN BRAND" I would screem at the top of my lungs before Dr Who could even finish his sentence.

 

[SC FANATIC]

I cant see how switching would give you a better % of winning unless i am missing something. There are 3 doors one with the major prize. Which gives you a 1 in 3 chance of getting the major prize no matter which door you choose. When one curtain is opened with a minor prize it essentially changes nothing because no matter what door you pick there was always going to be a door with a minor prize. This now leaves 1 minor prize and 1 major prize. You have picked 1 of these and there is a 50% chance you have either one meaning if you swap there is a 50% chance changing will be beneficial. It seems logical to me that changing doors does not give you a better chance of winning, but correct me if im wrong

 

[Courtesans]

OK, now if only Dr Who was to land his Tardis in my loungroom today and say to me:

"One of rookie priced forwards Kaiden Brand, Michael Close and Max Duffy are going to have a breakout season this year averaging 105 points a game from 22 games, you can select one and only one of them, who do you choose?"

I reply "Max Duffy".

Then Dr Who says "OK I am feeling generous, just to let you know it will not be Michael Close. Do you want to stick with Duffy or would you like to switch to Kaid...."

"KAIDEN BRAND, SWITCH TO KAIDEN BRAND" I would screem at the top of my lungs before Dr Who could even finish his sentence.

This spells the end of Player X or Y...now is Player X, Y or Z. Makes it so much easier!!

 

[Philzsay]

I cant see how switching would give you a better % of winning unless i am missing something. There are 3 doors one with the major prize. Which gives you a 1 in 3 chance of getting the major prize no matter which door you choose. When one curtain is opened with a minor prize it essentially changes nothing because no matter what door you pick there was always going to be a door with a minor prize. This now leaves 1 minor prize and 1 major prize. You have picked 1 of these and there is a 50% chance you have either one meaning if you swap there is a 50% chance changing will be beneficial. It seems logical to me that changing doors does not give you a better chance of winning, but correct me if im wrong

Thats what I thought too but because the host HAS to reveal one of the bad doors by knowing what is behind each door already this in itself gives you extra information. The following picture I found explained it best.

 

[SC FANATIC]

Actually, it goes like this:

When you were first asked to pick a door, you had a 33% chance (1/3) of picking the right door, which means you also had a 66% chance (2/3) of picking the wrong door. So when one is revealed, it is in your best interest to switch, because odds are you picked the wrong door at the start (66% likely). When one door is opened, it doesn't really change much, but if you switch, you now have you a 66% chance of getting the major prize. The door being opened does not change the odds to 50/50. If you had to switch before a door had already been opened, then the odds would remain at 33% for each door. But because the host has opened another door already, the odds now swing in your favour. With two doors now remaining, one is worth 66% (the door that hasn't been opened yet) and the other is worth 33% (the door you picked).

You may have picked the correct door at the start and so switching would cost you, but there's only a 33% chance you did - odds of winning by keeping the same door you picked at the start aren't in your favour.

Thanks yeah when i saw Philzays photo i started to get i was looking at it the wrong way. Thanks for clearing this up guys

 

[hammo42]

I'm no stats person, but I think I understand the theory . . correct me if I'm wrong:

Original selection of 1 of 3 curtains = 33% chance of selecting the major prize.

After revealing one of the curtains as a minor prize, you are then offered a 2nd choice.

By sticking with your original curtain selection, it means you have still selected only 1 of the 3 curtains = 33% chance of major prize - your odds haven't improved.

By selecting a different curtain, you have made 2 selections during the process = 66% chance of major prize.

This is the equivalent of making your 2nd selection before the minor prize curtain was revealed. 2 selections, 3 curtains = 66% of major prize.

The key is to not think of it in terms of odds for each selection event (1 of 3 curtains (33%), then 1 of 2 curtains (50%)), but to think of it in terms of the number of selections during the whole process (2 selections, 3 curtains = 66%)

*Edit - others have provided an explanation before i got this post up. It took me ages to work out, so I'm leaving this post up rather than deleting it. Now back to team selection . . . um I mean work.

Thanks for the statistical challenge Rowsus!

 

[Mr_Arrogance]

When he chose Door 1 the probability was 33.33 but there was condition applied after he chose door 1.

The probability of door 2 and door 3 together was 66.66 and the professor showed that door 3 did not have a car. This makes the entire 66.66 probability fall on door 2.

So switching doors doubles his probability.

I'm no stats person, but I think I understand the theory . . correct me if I'm wrong:

Original selection of 1 of 3 curtains = 33% chance of selecting the major prize.

After revealing one of the curtains as a minor prize, you are then offered a 2nd choice.

By sticking with your original curtain selection, it means you have still selected only 1 of the 3 curtains = 33% chance of major prize - your odds haven't improved.

By selecting a different curtain, you have made 2 selections during the process = 66% chance of major prize.

This is the equivalent of making your 2nd selection before the minor prize curtain was revealed. 2 selections, 3 curtains = 66% of major prize.

The key is to not think of it in terms of odds for each selection event (1 of 3 curtains (33%), then 1 of 2 curtains (50%)), but to think of it in terms of the number of selections during the whole process (2 selections, 3 curtains = 66%)

Not quite right, check above and below quotes to clarify

Correct.

Although its not so much the selection of more doors that increases your odds, it's more the simple fact that the odds are one of the doors you didn't pick is correct. So when one door is eliminated by the host, the remaining door automatically has a 66% chance of being correct.

Yes, door 2 has a 66% chance because originally door 2 & 3 combined had a 66% chance (door 1 has a 33% chance) but he has shown you that door 3 isnt right so therefore door 2 still retains the fact it is a 66% chance(due to door 3 being eliminated).

Door 1 = 33% chance
Door 2 = 66% chance
Door 3 = 0%

 

[Grant]

People get confused because half of the possible combinations result in staying with the original selection being the correct option. However, the probability of changing being the right option is 2/3. Think of it this way if you were initially wrong (2/3 chance) then switch you must be correct because the incorrect option is automatically eliminated (it's conditional probability).

For example if you pick a:
[table="width: 500"]
[tr]
[td]Pick[/td]
[td]Prize[/td]
[td]Eliminated[/td]
[td]Right Decision[/td]
[td]Probability[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]a[/td]
[td]b[/td]
[td]Stay[/td]
[td]1/6[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]a[/td]
[td]c[/td]
[td]Stay[/td]
[td]1/6[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]b[/td]
[td]b[/td]
[td]Impossible[/td]
[td]0[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]b[/td]
[td]c[/td]
[td]Change[/td]
[td]2/6[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]c[/td]
[td]b[/td]
[td]Change[/td]
[td]2/6[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]a[/td]
[td]c[/td]
[td]c[/td]
[td]Impossible[/td]
[td]0[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

 

[Brisbane Lions]

Back to the real discussion now guys?? haha

Any further questions just hop on to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_hall_problem and it will clear everything up.

K, Jack to pinch hit for me... I can see L, Shuey or S, Selwood or SOMEONE from WCE going BANG!

 

[OzRulesFootball]

I swear you are all as mad as cut snakes..lol

 

[supergirl]

I swear you are all as mad as cut snakes..lol

^^ Agree 100% OzRulesFootball. Omg you are all doing my head in. My brain is blonde enough without all these paraphrases and probabilities. On a more sombre note, I'll stick with tried and true with the possibility of upping the ante when I pick a researched player based not only on stats but form and fitness. I may even include the fact a player is in a team that is on the up.

*does a little jig*

 

[Mr_Arrogance]

K, Jack to pinch hit for me... I can see L, Shuey or S, Selwood or SOMEONE from WCE going BANG!

Shuey, Selwood and Gaff all look like ready to breakout but I have no idea which one(or more) will so I will pick none

 

[Rowsus]

OK, now if only Dr Who was to land his Tardis in my loungroom today and say to me:

"One of rookie priced forwards Kaiden Brand, Michael Close and Max Duffy are going to have a breakout season this year averaging 105 points a game from 22 games, you can select one and only one of them, who do you choose?"

I reply "Max Duffy".

Then Dr Who says "OK I am feeling generous, just to let you know it will not be Michael Close. Do you want to stick with Duffy or would you like to switch to Kaid...."

"KAIDEN BRAND, SWITCH TO KAIDEN BRAND" I would screem at the top of my lungs before Dr Who could even finish his sentence.

Ok, I read the first line, and literally laughed out loud before I could read the rest. I read the rest, and laughed even harder.
Gold, Phil, pure gold!
If there was a capability to give multiple thumbs up, I'd give this 10!

 

[Rowsus]

You guys have no idea what a wonderful surprise it is to wake up in the morning and see that discussion.
I had no idea I'd generate such a response.
Hopefully the point I was making was not lost in the most entertaining discussion in ages:
Don't let the fear of your original pick succeeding stop you from changing to what all signs point to be being a better option!
Fight that human nature urge of holding onto that first decision, just because it was your first decision!
Thank you all so much. You have truly put a big smile on my face!

 

[OzRulesFootball]

lol i knew you'd be in for a shock when you woke up and read all this

 

[Rowsus]

Shuey, Selwood and Gaff all look like ready to breakout but I have no idea which one(or more) will so I will pick none

Totally agree on the first point Mr A. The WC Mids are a gold mine waiting to be tapped. Your point about "do we dig here, or do we dig there?" is also spot on, but I can't help myself. Someone pass me my shovel, I'm going to see if I can find that hidden nugget!

 

[supergirl]

Please make it stop. there is ringing in my ears!

 

[whateverittakes]

I like the value Mundy represents. Looks ready to average around 100 or more once again. Montagna also has been a surprise this preseason. I know Impromptu likes Dal Santo what do people think of Montagna? and Mundy?

 

[IDIG]

Funny thread hijack.

Knew i'd heard of this before, if Kevin Spacey says it's right, it's right!

One of my favourite scenes from 21 i must say

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rl_p3JlSd0

 

[Philzsay]

Ok, I read the first line, and literally laughed out loud before I could read the rest. I read the rest, and laughed even harder.
Gold, Phil, pure gold!
If there was a capability to give multiple thumbs up, I'd give this 10!

You guys have no idea what a wonderful surprise it is to wake up in the morning and see that discussion.
I had no idea I'd generate such a response.
Hopefully the point I was making was not lost in the most entertaining discussion in ages:
Don't let the fear of your original pick succeeding stop you from changing to what all signs point to be being a better option!
Fight that human nature urge of holding onto that first decision, just because it was your first decision!
Thank you all so much. You have truly put a big smile on my face!

lol i knew you'd be in for a shock when you woke up and read all this

No worries mate! I was thinking that you would wake up and think 'What on Earth has my triggered off here!'

I think the biggest lesson here for myself is to never ever for a second question the maths from Rowsus!

Back onto the topic of the thread there are a few mentioned that I am giving considered thought to. Firstly NDS as his record is fantastic, I realise that the Saints are on the way down and some may think he is getting old but he is still actually only 29. Secondly some of the Eagle boys in particular Shuey and Scooter as I think the Eagle's midfield as a group will keep on improving. And lastly Kieran Jack simply for the fact that I realised I have none of the reining premiers in my side at the moment and that just for some irrational reason seems wrong!