Deal or No Deal [World Famous Game]

[mozak]

Deal or No Deal [World Famous Game]

http://www.99express.com/flash/deal-no-deal.htm

[Lorizael]

They're all morons who pull out too late.

[DRoseDARs]

Premature evacuation?

[Lorizael]

Never works.

[Shi Huangdi]

So what malware do we win if we go to visit your site?

Do you like start out with a case that could have anything from a simple pop-up generating adware, all the way up to a full blown keylogger rootkit?

Ban the bot.

[Kontiki]

Strong contender for stupidest game show ever.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lorizael
They're all morons who pull out too late.

Actually, no.

From what I've read of the game (never seen it) the banker's offer is virtually always less than the mean of the remaining boxes. As long as the box to open is chosen randomly and the player is absolutely risk neutral, it is therefore in the player's interest to play right until the end. If the banker's offer ever exceeds the mean of the remaining prizes then (unless the player is an active risk-seeker) it is in the player's best interest to accept immediately.

Personally, I'm only 26 years old, have no real debts and will probably have a good enough job in the future to satisfy my urge to consume, so my utility curve is fairly straight (I'm almost perfectly risk-neutral). Therefore, I would probably choose to continue right to the end.

[DRoseDARs]

Everytime I see it, I openly wish Howie Mandel would choke on live television...

...as in suffocate.

[Zkribbler]

This show has the two critical factors which make an American game show a success;
(1) Lot of hot babes
(2) A total lack of any talent or knowledge in order to be able to win

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Actually, no.

From what I've read of the game (never seen it) the banker's offer is virtually always less than the mean of the remaining boxes. As long as the box to open is chosen randomly and the player is absolutely risk neutral, it is therefore in the player's interest to play right until the end. If the banker's offer ever exceeds the mean of the remaining prizes then (unless the player is an active risk-seeker) it is in the player's best interest to accept immediately.

Personally, I'm only 26 years old, have no real debts and will probably have a good enough job in the future to satisfy my urge to consume, so my utility curve is fairly straight (I'm almost perfectly risk-neutral). Therefore, I would probably choose to continue right to the end.

Dude, I was just trying to setup a condom joke.

[KrazyHorse]

I never joke about decision theory.

[Lorizael]

That's an interesting theory you present. I know virtually nothing about game or decision theory, though, so I can't offer much. All I know is that I have seen many people on the show take it too far and lose the chance to get the better prizes.

[KrazyHorse]

I think you're reacting emotionally to a situation which requires some analytical thought.

Once you correct the available prizes for taxes (important!) and for their relative utility, you should be able to make decisions based solely on the mean remaining value and the value of the banker's offer.

[Lorizael]

You're wrong. All of my friends know that I have no emotions. I am a heartless monster.

What I have observed, usually, is that the banker's offer will peak at a certain point, and then decline from then on. If the contestant is lucky enough, then the banker's offer can drastically rise very late in the game, but at this point whether or not the contestant gets a lot of money out of this deal is essentially luck of the draw.

Edit: Let me clarify something. You believe me to be reacting emotionally. This is true, but probably not for the reason that you believe. I "know" that I have bad luck, and that if I were to take the risks the contestants take, I would lose.

[Lorizael]

Ha. The show just came on.