<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Understanding the Monty Hall Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/</link>
	<description>Learning shouldn&#039;t hurt. Let&#039;s share the insights that made difficult ideas click.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 05:14:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: smith jr</title>
		<link>http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-273545</link>
		<dc:creator>smith jr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:27:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-273545</guid>
		<description>I think you&#039;re wrong. In the game, whatever your choices are at the start, in the end you will have two doors. You shouldn&#039;t consider the probability of 1/3 from the first stage at all because it doesn&#039;t mean a thing; it doesn&#039;t help; but unfortunately you do compare it to the second stage probability of 1/2, the actual game probability.

By eliminating the rest of the bad doors you are not helped at all, in the end there will always be just 2 doors with equal probabilities. 
It&#039;s like you always start the game with 2 doors: One with the car ( which might be your first choice ) and one with the goat. 
If you&#039;ve picked the car(but don&#039;t know it) and switch, your chance of winning are 50% (because the other door, that remained after elimination can have your car or a goat - you don&#039;t know what is behind your picked door, i.e a goat or the car).
If you stick with your first choice you have the same probability of winning the car -50%.

I think you&#039;re letting yourself be confused by the initial probability of winning equal to 1/3 (in case of 3 doors) that is less than the actual probability (1/2) at which you play the game in the final stage. 

The first stage and the last stage of the game are not interconnected, so in the final stage you&#039;ll not be helped by the decision you made initially. 
You&#039;ll always start from scratch and have to pick between a car and a goat, hidden from you. Revealing the other doors, doesn&#039;t mean that you picked a goat, it doesn&#039;t give you any info about the quality of you pick, it just narrows the the possibilities from many to just 2.
That is what I i understood from reading your article, my opinion is different from yours, i believe am right, but that&#039;s just me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you&#8217;re wrong. In the game, whatever your choices are at the start, in the end you will have two doors. You shouldn&#8217;t consider the probability of 1/3 from the first stage at all because it doesn&#8217;t mean a thing; it doesn&#8217;t help; but unfortunately you do compare it to the second stage probability of 1/2, the actual game probability.</p>
<p>By eliminating the rest of the bad doors you are not helped at all, in the end there will always be just 2 doors with equal probabilities.<br />
It&#8217;s like you always start the game with 2 doors: One with the car ( which might be your first choice ) and one with the goat.<br />
If you&#8217;ve picked the car(but don&#8217;t know it) and switch, your chance of winning are 50% (because the other door, that remained after elimination can have your car or a goat &#8211; you don&#8217;t know what is behind your picked door, i.e a goat or the car).<br />
If you stick with your first choice you have the same probability of winning the car -50%.</p>
<p>I think you&#8217;re letting yourself be confused by the initial probability of winning equal to 1/3 (in case of 3 doors) that is less than the actual probability (1/2) at which you play the game in the final stage. </p>
<p>The first stage and the last stage of the game are not interconnected, so in the final stage you&#8217;ll not be helped by the decision you made initially.<br />
You&#8217;ll always start from scratch and have to pick between a car and a goat, hidden from you. Revealing the other doors, doesn&#8217;t mean that you picked a goat, it doesn&#8217;t give you any info about the quality of you pick, it just narrows the the possibilities from many to just 2.<br />
That is what I i understood from reading your article, my opinion is different from yours, i believe am right, but that&#8217;s just me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zenk</title>
		<link>http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-273314</link>
		<dc:creator>zenk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 20:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-273314</guid>
		<description>position of the door do not matter. 

whichever chosen in the beginning can be assigned as door1 for reference. The remaining doors regardless of position will be considered as per stated in my previous example. 

my main point is that once additional information on the remaining doors are revealed, the effect is propagated to the probability of the first chosen door. So eventually, it always end in a 50/50 chance whether your first door contains the prize. Which in my opinion is a rather true reflection of real life choices. 

Much has argued that remaining doors collectively contain a higher chance, then follow through their calculations while assuming the probability calculated on the first chosen door should remain the same throughout regardless of additional information revealed on the remaining doors, which i find rather weird.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>position of the door do not matter. </p>
<p>whichever chosen in the beginning can be assigned as door1 for reference. The remaining doors regardless of position will be considered as per stated in my previous example. </p>
<p>my main point is that once additional information on the remaining doors are revealed, the effect is propagated to the probability of the first chosen door. So eventually, it always end in a 50/50 chance whether your first door contains the prize. Which in my opinion is a rather true reflection of real life choices. </p>
<p>Much has argued that remaining doors collectively contain a higher chance, then follow through their calculations while assuming the probability calculated on the first chosen door should remain the same throughout regardless of additional information revealed on the remaining doors, which i find rather weird.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alt_227</title>
		<link>http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-272690</link>
		<dc:creator>alt_227</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:45:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://betterexplained.com/articles/understanding-the-monty-hall-problem/#comment-272690</guid>
		<description>only problem with your implementation is that it always picks the leftmost door that isn&#039;t the car so if you always choose the rightmost door and it shows the middle door as a goat then the leftmost door will always be a car</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>only problem with your implementation is that it always picks the leftmost door that isn&#8217;t the car so if you always choose the rightmost door and it shows the middle door as a goat then the leftmost door will always be a car</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
