- This topic has 15 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
On a certain TV game show, the final stage of the competition would see 2 people facing off, with a large sum of money hanging in the balance. The contestants would have to simultaneously choose and reveal whether they wanted to split the money or take all of it for themselves. If both chose to split the money, they would each receive half of it, and if both chose to take it for themselves, neither would receive anything, but if one chose to split and one to take, the taker would receive all of the money and the splitter, nothing.
The contestants were given the opportunity to negotiate first,
which usually took the form of both parties attempting to convince the other that they would choose to split.
(The most common result was actually one choosing to split and one to take, with people who seemed nice enough often being the takers. Researchers said this was because people’s desire not to look foolish by being taken advantage of overrode their desire to be generous.)
One evening, with 13,600 British pounds on the table, a contestant shocked the audience by opening his negotiations
with the other player by declaring that he was going to be
completely honest with him… and that he was going to take.
He told the other player that should he choose split, thus giving
him the money, he would give him half of the money once the show
was over. The host made it clear, however, that Player 1 was not legally bound by this agreement. Player 2 was not happy with this, but 45 minutes of attempting to negotiate with Player 1 were of no use. He stuck to his position and would not hear of doing anything else. Finally, the host told the contestants that they had to make a final decision, and so they did. What do you
think happened? Choose one of the answers below, and we’ll see
how many of you guess correctly. (There will be no prizes.)
A. Both contestants chose Take (leaving them with nothing).
B. Both contestants chose Split (and both received half).
C. Player 1 chose Split and Player 2 chose Take (giving 2 the money).
D. Player 1 chose Take (as he had claimed) and Player 2 chose Split.
Player 1 was as good as his word and gave Player 2 half the money.
E. Player 1 chose Take (as he had claimed) and Player 2 chose Split.
Player 1 did not share the money with Player 2.
Bonus question – How many responses should
I wait for before revealing what happened?
Why would it be a chiddush whatever happened to be the outcome? It could have been any outcome, and whatever it happened to be was random to those particular players.
Comlink-X – lets not discuss the TV.
It’s definitely not A or C.
I would guess either D or B.
Let’s pretend it was a radio show
I don’t chop
Pshhh..Sparkly.. didn’t know you were so shtark!
I agree with Joseph.
It would be much more interesting if it were just a hypothetical story, and the question was “What should Player 2 do?” or something like that.
Right now it’s just a guessing game.
bump
Google it. Is one of the most pooular episodes of the show golden balls. The strategy employed by player one manipulating player 2 to make specific choice which in turn guaranteed player 1 at least a split has been written on by many.
I ended up watching it……wow just plain wow…I dont quite understand whyyy
It’s obviously B. The only reason for someone to be so adamant about what he is going to do is to guarantee himself the money by having both choose Split. Now, I guess that the other guy could have known this and chosen Take, but it’s not worth the risk. So they both took Split and split the money.
Actually, I guess C
Sam2 – I was thinking along those lines too, but it seemed too obvious, and after Happygirlygirl’s comment, I figured the answer must not be something obvious. Also, why would he ask the question if it’s obvious?
But, then again, just because it’s obvious to me, doesn’t mean it is to others, so you could be right.
I was thinking that maybe, like you said, the other guy figured out that the first guy was clearly planning to do split. If guy1 thought that he convinced guy2 to do split, there’s no reason for him to do take and split the money- if he’s going to split the money anyhow and he “knows” that guy2 is doing split, he may as well just do split, and even if he is worried that guy2 will do take after all, there still is no point in his doing take. If they both do take, no one gets the money, so he may as well do split. Therefore, the logical assumption is that guy1 will do split. If guy2 figured that out, he would do take, so he can get everything.
Mainly, I choose C because the answer is supposed to be surprising.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.