All about flooble | fun stuff | Get a free chatterbox | Free JavaScript | Avatars
 perplexus dot info

For the PerplexusBowl match between the Pascal Probabilities and the Random Results, a bookie was offering the following payoffs:

• PP to win in normal time, 3 to 2
• RR to win in normal time, 2 to 1
• PP to win in overtime, 7 to 1
• RR to win in overtime, 9 to 1

• (The first line means that if you bet \$2 on PP to win in normal time, and it does, you get your money back plus \$3.)

Without knowing anything about football or the involved teams or the actual probabilities, can you show why these payoffs are illogical?

 Submitted by Federico Kereki Rating: 4.0000 (5 votes) Solution: (Hide) If a player bet \$240 on PP to win, \$200 on RR to win, \$75 on PP to win in OT, and \$60 on RR to win in OT (a total of \$575) he would receive \$600 back in any case, for a 4.35% sure profit.

 Subject Author Date Some thoughts Dej Mar 2013-04-11 05:15:04 No Subject Matt Van Winkle 2005-11-28 00:48:36 Another way e.g. 2005-11-27 22:00:56 re(2): better betting spree (with apologies to Vernon) Mindy Rodriguez 2005-11-27 11:30:48 re: better betting spree (with apologies to Vernon) Vernon Lewis 2005-11-27 04:47:29 better betting spree (with apologies to Vernon) Mindy Rodriguez 2005-11-26 21:25:16 No Subject pcbouhid 2005-11-26 12:14:25 betting spree Vernon Lewis 2005-11-26 08:02:57

 Search: Search body:
Forums (2)