Thanks for the puzzle (Daimnation linked to you).
Pardon my repeating my post on is blog:
I disagree with the supposedly correct answer for quite different reasons than what were posted. This isn't really a probability issue but more of a shell game/ human nature scam. If you read the scenario right through, you discover that the show host ALWAYS opens one of the doors and gives the contestant the opportunity to switch choices. Therefore the odds were ALWAYS 1:2 NOT 1:3; no way in hell was s.h. going to open the $$$ door (that ruins the game as there are then obviously only boobyprizes left). Forget math, think human nature. The guys that want to run computer programs and sits with 1000 doors have completely overlooked the obvious, there WERE only 2 doors to choose from, the 3rd is a red herring.
Thanks for the puzzle (Daimnation linked to you).
Pardon my repeating my post on is blog:
I disagree with the supposedly correct answer for quite different reasons than what were posted. This isn't really a probability issue but more of a shell game/ human nature scam. If you read the scenario right through, you discover that the show host ALWAYS opens one of the doors and gives the contestant the opportunity to switch choices. Therefore the odds were ALWAYS 1:2 NOT 1:3; no way in hell was s.h. going to open the $$$ door (that ruins the game as there are then obviously only boobyprizes left). Forget math, think human nature. The guys that want to run computer programs and sits with 1000 doors have completely overlooked the obvious, there WERE only 2 doors to choose from, the 3rd is a red herring.
Sorry, my mistake, it was Mick Hartley that linked to your puzzle, not Daimnation