vpFREE2 Forums

Horseshoe Double Dare Cash Giveaway

#1

The drawing is this Saturday. The rules state "If your ticket is
chosen you win $1000 and a chance to walk away, or DOUBLE it up to
$2000, of forfeit half." If you try and double, you chose one of two
envelopes...

My thoughts are you should always try and double. Assuming a fair
game (seems reasonable), half the time you will win $2000 and half
the time you would win $500. This averages out to $1,250...which is
better than the $1000 if you just walk away.

Any flaws in my logic?

Don the Dentist

#2

dds2124 wrote:

My thoughts are you should always try and double. Assuming a fair
game (seems reasonable), half the time you will win $2000 and half
the time you would win $500. This averages out to $1,250...which is
better than the $1000 if you just walk away.

Any flaws in my logic?

What ever happened to "A bird in the hand............." I would take the $1,000 and run. It reminds me of Let's Make A Deal. You give back the car for a pick of doors and wind up with a dozen pogo sticks.

Bob

#3

Don the Dentist wrote:
My thoughts are you should always try and double. Assuming a fair
game (seems reasonable), half the time you will win $2000 and half
the time you would win $500. This averages out to $1,250...which is
better than the $1000 if you just walk away.
Any flaws in my logic?

Bob Sommer replied:

What ever happened to "A bird in the hand............." I would

take the $1,000 and run. It reminds me of Let's Make A Deal. You
give back the car for a pick of doors and wind up with a dozen pogo
sticks.

No flaws in your logic, Don, but deep flaws in Bob's. Making the
simple assumption that you don't desperately need the $1000, and
can't stomach receiving only $500 instead--like perhaps you were
$800 short of the amount to pay for critical bypass surgery--then
the "EV" of trying to double up is indeed +$250. To look at it the
opposite way, refusing the double-up opportunity is tantamount to
THROWING AWAY $250.

If you revised the numbers so that they were 1,000,000 and 2,000,000
dollars, then I doubt that anyone other than a multimillionaire
would take the proposition. If fact, no one except the
multimillionaire SHOULD take it. Conversely, the multimillionaire
DEFINITELY should take the chance.

So what happened to a "bird in the hand"? It depends on whether the
person with the bird needs to kill and eat that bird to keep from
starving to death. Conversely, he could realize that one bird is not
enough to feed himself (or his starving family) and therefore it's
worth the risk to try for the bigger payoff.

This has relevance to VP and gambling in general. Any wager or
series of wagers has to be considered in terms of risk vs. reward. A
positive EV wager should be made ONLY if the risk is tolerable AND
the reward is sufficient to justify that risk.

Consider the case of a very rich man offering you a million dollars
to take a six-chamber pistol, put in one bullet, spin the barrel,
and then point the gun at your head and pull the trigger--once. If
you survive, you get a million dollars. Most people would never take
this proposition, but some would--those who are sufficiently
desperate; those who feel their financial situation makes life not
worth living, etc. This rather extreme example illustrates that
there are thresholds of risk and reward for everyone. As above, a
condemned criminal with a week to go before his scheduled execution
would probably jump at the "game" if the prize was a pardon and
freedom, even if you put FIVE bullets in the gun.

Back to the original question, it's clear that you should take the
double-up proposition, given the parameters of the game you related,
and given that you don't desperately need ALL of the $1000 (i.e.
losing $500 of it would be a catastrophe).

#4

mkl54321 wrote:

Don the Dentist wrote:
My thoughts are you should always try and double. Assuming a fair
game (seems reasonable), half the time you will win $2000 and half
the time you would win $500. This averages out to $1,250...which is
better than the $1000 if you just walk away.
Any flaws in my logic?

Assuming a far game, this is really a 'no brainer'.

Bob Sommer replied:
> What ever happened to "A bird in the hand............." I would
take the $1,000 and run. It reminds me of Let's Make A Deal. You
give back the car for a pick of doors and wind up with a dozen pogo
sticks.

I think you are comparing apples and oranges. In 'Let's Make a Deal', you don't know what's behind the doors, but in _this_ game, you pay $500.00 to pick between two doors -- one has $1,500.00 in it and the other has nothing. I'd bet like that all day long.

No flaws in your logic, Don, but deep flaws in Bob's. Making the
simple assumption that you don't desperately need the $1000, and
can't stomach receiving only $500 instead--like perhaps you were
$800 short of the amount to pay for critical bypass surgery--then
the "EV" of trying to double up is indeed +$250. To look at it the
opposite way, refusing the double-up opportunity is tantamount to
THROWING AWAY $250.

Agreed.

If you revised the numbers so that they were 1,000,000 and 2,000,000
dollars, then I doubt that anyone other than a multimillionaire
would take the proposition. If fact, no one except the
multimillionaire SHOULD take it. Conversely, the multimillionaire
DEFINITELY should take the chance.

snip

I disagree. I'd have a hard time believing that there is anyone on this planet who couldn't get by on the remaining half-mil if they lost the bet, with the possible exception of those very rare instances in which the whole initial win is needed to pay for critical medical treatment, as you suggested; at that point you'd be literally gambling with someone's life, and it's not worth if for those odds.

Bill

#5

Bill Velek wrote:

I think you are comparing apples and oranges. In 'Let's Make a Deal',
you don't know what's behind the doors, but in _this_ game, you pay
$500.00 to pick between two doors -- one has $1,500.00 in it and the
other has nothing. I'd bet like that all day long.

Just like a RNG, all things being fair, for each time you pick an envelope, you have the same 50/50 chance of hitting it or going home with half. Which means you could pick the correct one 100 times in a row or the wrong one the same amount of times. I just believe it would be more prudent to take it $1,000, which is a sure thing. Doubling it not a sure thing. And while I am a gambler, and I play higher denominations than most, I am not so greedy or hooked on betting on everything, that I need the extra chance to double an already sure thing. I would much rather sit down at my next VP machine with an extra $1,000 in my pocket than $500.

It comes down to, you have $1,000, it's yours not the casino's once they have given it to you. It's in your pocket. You are betting $500, or your money, that you can pick the envelope that has the other $1,500 in it. Sure, $2,000 total would be nice, but the $1,000 falling out of the sky is a no brainier for me. Maybe I am just not greedy enough.

Bob

#6

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bob Sommer - Top of the World Coins
<NL7HT@b...> wrote:
I just believe it would

be more prudent to take it $1,000, which is a sure thing. Doubling

it

not a sure thing. And while I am a gambler, and I play higher
denominations than most, I am not so greedy or hooked on betting on
everything, that I need the extra chance to double an already sure
thing. I would much rather sit down at my next VP machine with an

extra

$1,000 in my pocket than $500.

People gamble for all sorts of reasons and I respect whatever choices
one makes for themselves'. It's their money and their risk, but for
the purposes of this discussion it would not make sense for me to be
risk averse making a $500 bet with 50/50 chance of netting $1000 (a
large advantage)and then to lose my risk aversion and put that same
money into a VP machine with, at best, an extremely thin advantage.
that gives me the best advantage.

Chandler

ยทยทยท

From my perspective, If I'm gonna bet, I may as well make the bet

#7

Bob Sommer - Top of the World Coins wrote:

snip stuff about declining a 50/50 draw with a 150% ER.

... I would much rather sit down at my next VP machine with an extra
$1,000 in my pocket than $500.

Sure, Bob. Whatever rings your bell; different strokes for different folks, as they say. You've indicated that you'd rather play that extra $500.00 on a machine with an ER of, at best, slightly over 100%, rather than bet it all at once on a one shot gamble at a game with an ER of 150% -- and which is, incidentally, completely free of the possibility of errors in strategy. This can still be viewed as a legitimate choice based on the personal enjoyment you receive playing VP as opposed to just selecting an envelope, but my point to Don the Dentist was that the 'logical' choice (and by that I simply meant according to the laws of mathematical probabilities, as opposed to personal quirks and preferences) is a no-brainer. Declining the bet is, mathematically speaking, missing out on a golden opportunity, but I did not mean to otherwise suggest that a choice to decline the bet was not intelligent.

It comes down to, you have $1,000, it's yours not the casino's once they
have given it to you. It's in your pocket. You are betting $500, or
your money, that you can pick the envelope that has the other $1,500 in
it. Sure, $2,000 total would be nice, but the $1,000 falling out of the
sky is a no brainier for me. Maybe I am just not greedy enough.

Greed has nothing to do with it. It is simply better odds than you will get at any machine or any table in any casino -- with the sole exception of very special offers similar to the very one we've been discussing.

And I was correct to point out that your analogy to 'Let's Make a Deal' was inaccurate.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#8

Bill Velek wrote:

......my point to Don the Dentist was that the
'logical' choice (and by that I simply meant according to the laws of
mathematical probabilities, as opposed to personal quirks and
preferences) is a no-brainer. Declining the bet is, mathematically
speaking, missing out on a golden opportunity, but I did not mean to
otherwise suggest that a choice to decline the bet was not intelligent.

I did not take it that not taking the be bet was not intelligent but I can see how it might be viewed that way. One last thought that I have been hiding, but did not want to mention because I had hoped that someone else would see it. If you did pick the right envelope, you would get a 1099, and all us gamblers know how much we love those. You probably would for the $1,000 too, as it is a prize over $600. But for the $500 you would not receive one. In reality, this is a good reason to go for it. I realize that ALL winnings are suppose to be reported to the IRS, and we all know how honest all us gamblers are. I am not advocating not reporting it, but it is a thought. Come to think of it, I actually my change my position on this. That would really be a novel idea.

Bob

#9

I was lucky enough to win a $1000 drawing and was given a 1099 for
misc income. I'm not implying that all casinos do this.

#10

staninnv wrote:

I was lucky enough to win a $1000 drawing and was given a 1099 for
misc income. I'm not implying that all casinos do this.

I am not a tax expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I believe that any prize awarded of $600 or more, the casino are obligated to issue you one. I know that here in Alaska, the top prize for Rippies (Pulltabs) is $500 because of this regulation. I also remember in a VP Skip Hughes Group sponsored tournament at the Hard Rock a few years ago, I took 5th place for $550 and did not get one. Fourth place was $700 and they did.

Bob