IziBlog - Creer son blog, photoblog ou meme audioblog - Quand blog et communaute se rencontrent

sir_quirky_k (

sir_quirky_k) wrote,
@ 2008-02-12 13:01:00

Further to the Week
I think the biggest problem is that it's more tempting to quit after two Duels than three when it really should be the reverse. £5k/5% and £25k/25% perhaps? That might at least tempt people on to three Duels.

That said, I think my strategy now would be to turn down the fixed sum but take the proportion of the jackpot. Note also that the size of the jackpot would barely affect my decision-making - as it starts at the final point of inflection on my utility curve - but for the percentage chip. Ten (or indeed fifteen) grand with one more win for either One Rock or thirty grand, and two more for £150k? The former step means rather less than the latter. Ten grand with one more win for either One Rock or sixty grand, and two more for £300k? Completely different proposition.

The Commentariat are likening this to Greed; I think this is perhaps down to a combination of risk-averse contestants, perhaps a slight uncertainty about the true nature of the gamble, probable uncertainty over the prospective opponents and the fact that M.N. No Deel Sod is a couple of hundred miles west-north-west of the Duel Arena, and Nick Hancock is a couple of hundred million miles away in his approach.

(Seriously, I don't think there's ever been a UK game show where contestants have been consistently less risk-averse than Deal or No Deal. The only other possibility is Millionaire, but even then the Duncan Bickleys and Rob Mitchells were very much the exception. How many people stopped on £64,000 even with a 50:50? Too many, that's for sure. If it were not, the new tree would not have gone £50k - £75k - £150k.)

(Post a new comment)

Chip off the old block

daweaver
2008-02-12 07:13 pm UTC (link)

I think the biggest problem is that it's more tempting to quit after two Duels than three when it really should be the reverse. £5k/5% and £25k/25% perhaps? That might at least tempt people on to three Duels.

I think Travis pointed out the necessary revision over at ver Bar: ditching Cash or Chips in favour of a guaranteed fee for winning one, two, three duels. It's the right thing to do.

I think my strategy now would be to turn down the fixed sum but take the proportion of the jackpot.

From this neck of the woods, the first Useful Point greater than £10,000 is the amount to pay off my mortgage, which would come into play at percentages of the jackpot (for sufficiently large jackpots). Offer that and I'd be gone: offer £20,000 cash at the second choice and I'm going for the big one.

The size of the jackpot affects my calculations, as does the confidence in my game so far. And the opposition: in general, old people have a greater general knowledge than young people, and people who play with risks (like the city trader from episode 3) are the perfect opponent to beat.

The Commentariat are likening this to Greed; I think this is perhaps down to a combination of risk-averse contestants, perhaps a slight uncertainty about the true nature of the gamble, probable uncertainty over the prospective opponents and the fact that M.N. No Deel Sod is a couple of hundred miles west-north-west of the Duel Arena, and Nick Hancock is a couple of hundred million miles away in his approach.

The other factor I think we've all ignored (yep, including me) is confidence. With the exception of that city trader, just about every duel so far has gone down to the last few chips. If we get someone who has a great general knowledge and wins their first two duels with six or seven chips in hand, I reckon they'll play on, particularly if offered the smaller amounts. That's not happened so far.

Overall, I think the fallback position is the right one to take.

How many people stopped on £64,000 even with a 50:50? Too many, that's for sure. If it were not, the new tree would not have gone £50k - £75k - £150k.)

Spot on.

(Reply to this)