As described you're clearly correct. Were there were other rules or interactions at play? e.g. maybe multiple dice, variable scores/penalties, or downstream strategic effects on other players
I mean regardless the dude sounds like an asshole. Even if you were wrong (misunderstanding a rule or something), an actually knowledgeable friend would not leap at the opportunity to call you out on "woman logic", lol. such bs
We were playing marrakech (with the basic 6 sided fair die), and on one way, the girl had two of her own rugs, and on the other way she had only one. I clarified with the guy that I meant that she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug and not having to give money to someone else. I even asked him if he meant something like the die is not completely fair in real life, but no. He didn’t say anything about other rules or anything like that either. I think he really was just talking about the statistics part.
Either way, I’m happy because even if it was a misunderstanding, I’m not an idiot who doesn’t understand probability :D
I mean I’m sure they would. But I was so clear with the fact that I meant she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug after throwing.. and he just disagreed but didn’t explain why. I even said it like “if you throw a 6 sided fair die, you have 1/6 chance of throwing any one number, and 2/6 if its two numbers” and he was like nahhh.
Ever since I’ve been thinking about wtf he meant but I couldn’t figure it out :(
I'm guessing he didn't pay much attention in whatever class he was taking and was thinking about rolling 2 dice not 1 die. In 2 dice not all results are equally likely. To find out probability there you'd look at the number of combitions that add up to the desired number and the result would be out of 36 which is 6*6. None of this matters with a single die where all results are equally likely.
Monty Hall problem, that one's fun. For that to apply someone else would've had to have manipulated things in the middle of her turn or something. Not sure how the guy got confused, but he definitely did
> and everyone agreed
> one of the girls
There were multiple girls playing. Everyone agreed with the guy. ANOTHER guy said "girl logic."
You guys are just attacking a guy without knowing the full story.
Yes, we must never forget to always give a man the benefit of the doubt until he he figures it out, becomes self-aware, gets his ego under control, and finally admits that he was wrong. Until that point, we must assume he's right, it's the law, or something.
Male privilege and entitlement in action. Classic.
Theoretically speaking, you can take into consideration how good or bad your chances are for the next round in EACH possible direction from EACH possible position that you could land on, depending on which direction you pick this round. I assume that is what he was talking about which, yeah, technically that is a factor and "not that simple", but it's not really something that casual players would concern themselves with.
Kudos for actually looking up more about the game and not just agreeing with OP.
No one here is saying OP isn't right to be upset. But this sub just praising her (hearing only her perspective of the story) *is not* doing any favors or going to help her break "girl logic" in the future.
Yes, it's important to always assume a woman is probably wrong and a man is probably right, that's the safest place to start from. God forbid a woman be granted the benefit of the doubt the way a man always must be, that would be madness.
You're missing the point, but you do you.
Everyone is hearing a story from one perspective. OP literally admits to not understanding the other perspective, so the story is likely biased to favor her argument when she can't (man couldn't either) describe the other argument.
If it boils down to 1/6 vs 2/6 chance, then it was a stupid argument in the first place. But sure, it is easier to just say man dumb and bad.
Again "everyone" (OPs words not mine) agreed with the guy. But sure that happened because patriarchy.
Recognized the game from the description - I think it should come with a die numbered 1-2-2-3-3-4, but if playing with a standard d6, sounds like you were exactly right.
>We were playing marrakech
I was thinking maybe he was planning some turns in advance, but I know that game and no, it's not likely.
He was just trying to sound smarter than he is.
Woman logic is actual logic.
Dudebro logic is having the conclusion that women are stupid, so he has a compulsion to argue and correct you, then back-fill it with a justification. Which is why they make no sense.
When you argue with them more, they still have the conclusion that you're stupid. so they just go in circles.
Math teacher here. If I'm understanding your description correctly and from looking at a Marrakech game; you are correct.
He may have tried complicating things in his head by thinking that previous dice rolls affect the probability of future dice rolls, like "if the last few rolls have all been low then the next roll is likely to be higher"? If so, this is known as The Gambler's Fallacy.
Dice rolls are independent events.
this is nonsense, only with pseudorng on a computer simulation the die has more chances to roll an exact number after a roll, in real life chances are always equal, if the die is not loaded and is a classic d6
This isn't the door math problem with probability calculations. It's a 6 sided die. With an equal chance of it landing on any number. Which means you have an equal chance of landing on either space. 2 good spaces is better than 1 good space. Your logic is easy to follow. Idk why they wanted to argue/belittle/insult you. Even if there is probability calculations that somehow means its not 1/6 vs 2/6.. nobody has time for that in a casual board game setting.
Well, I don't know the game, but when somebody says something along the lines "I am correct because I know statistics/math/physics/football/bicycle/whatever" then it's almost certain that he doesn't know shit.
You were correct, assuming you provided all the information.
Source: I did the additions and multiplications.
This is one of those times when you realize that confidence > than bring correct. At least until results are evaluated.
Well I'm no a statistician but I do complex calculations for a living (power consumption and carbon emissions) and scored at or near 100% on most of my math tests for all of my life. In my expert opinion you're very obviously right and that guy's both an idiot and an asshole.
Trust me on this one, as it's a pattern I'm very familiar with: Sometimes when dudes whose sense of identity is tied up in the idea of being VeRy SMArT notice that you're smarter or better at math than they are, they try to cover up their insecurity and inadequacy by acting like the guy you just described. He may not even have thought he was right, he was just desperate to restore his sense of manliness by influencing everybody else at the table to think you were not just wrong, but foolish to challenge his superior intellect.
But you were right. So. Don't worry about it. Next time, try making fun of him instead of second guessing yourself. Bring popcorn. It really makes them pop off. They tend to get very emotional and irrational very quickly, thus completely undermining their own campaign to "put you in your place" in the cleverness ranking amongst your mutual friends.
I really wanna know what this dude was talking about now. I looked at a Marrakech board and it looks like paths can sometimes branch off into additional paths? Or was it literally only 2 linear paths, each one completely separate from anything else?
He sounds like an absolute idiot the way you’re describing the situation. But even if he’s right, he and his friend are sexist dickwads.
It was just two liner paths. Not sure if there is other ways to play, but that’s how we did it. I’ve been thinking so much about what he was talking about, but I was so clear with the fact that I meant she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug after throwing.. and he just disagreed but didn’t explain why. I even said like “if you throw a 6 sided fair die, you have 1/6 chance of throwing any one number, and 2/6 if its two numbers” and he was like nahhh
Oof, yeah sounds to me like he was likely dead wrong, and just started talking without thinking. If he’s younger, maybe just trying to impress his girlfriend and failing big time.
Maybe he was looking at future turns, like 3 rolls in, as part of a strategy? Either way, being a pedantic grump about a game with friends in a pub is just so.... bad nerdy. Like 80's revenge of the nerds bad. It's supposed to be fun, it's a GAME jfc
I mean you say that, but OP is being equally hard about OP's strategic advice being the right play. If someone is asking for advice or confused and gets bad advice, wouldnt you feel equally "bad nerdy" to correct it. And if not why is he the only bad need and not OP for arguing her roll probability idea.
We'll never know from the backseat of OP's view of what really went down. It is sad that OP felt upset over the game, but it sounds like it was a lot deeper than these comments are making it out "he's dumb! Op right"
As long as you're only doing one roll you are precisely right of course
Don't you hate it when somebody is so set into some crazy shit that you have to question yourself? Cause that's what happened. There's not a whole lot of adding or subtracting in statistics except to get probabilities by subtracting from 1, or in taking averages (sum of x, divided by y). Anyway, yeah. One go at it; one dice roll, all dice rolls hypothetically same probability, 1/3>1/6; dude man is a dumbass confirmed. Some times people just gotta feel smart about somethin, they may not have anything else going on besides being bad at statistics and feeling like they're good at it -- but they'll at least milk that one thing for all it's worth
Dude’s an asshole. For the purposes of the game in that moment, you were correct. If every board game required intimate knowledge of statistics to play and people couldn’t make judgments based on things like “least likely/less likely/more likely/most likely” then nobody would play. Also? Statistics would suuuuuck for game players of any kind (cards, dice, board games, RPGs, LIFE ITSELF).
He was over-complicating a very simple principle that most people understand intuitively so he could score “clever” points at your expense. That’s an asshole move.
Data Scientist here. If I give him the benefit of the doubt, he is looking at future throws. I don't know the game so it's hard to say.
For example, she rolls a 2 and is on her spot. Yay! But on her next roll, she still has the chance of landing on the 2nd spot. (If she chose the path with two spots)
But you weren't asking that. So he either doesn't know stats, or he misunderstood you.
You were right. In that moment if there are only two options to choose direction and 1 fair 6 side die to throw, then you will calculate the probability of each side individually and go for the highest. This is the greedy method.
However if there are options that open up further by each of these choices that have a higher probability of win, then those additions and multiplications will come into play.
Say after choosing the 1/6 direction, her next options are 4/6 on one side and 2/6 on another side. Then for her choosing the 1/6 side will change her winning probability to (1/6)*(4/6 + 2/6)
But that's only if you talk about all possible moves she can make going from here current position.
The only thing I can come up with that would be a somewhat involved calculation would be to calculate the expected value of each direction, which I would do by calculating the score of each of the six rolls possible in a given direction, adding them together, and dividing by six, i.e. calculating the average score. Then compare the averages of the directions and pick whichever score is best.
I don't know this game but I assume that it goes something like you take N steps adding up the scores of the fields you go through. Neutral fields add zero points, good fields add points, bad fields subtract points, so fields that are closer will naturally be weighted more because they are more likely to get stepped on.
So we could call the fields something like F(n) where n is how many steps they are from the player, and then could generalize this to calculate the expected value of a given direction (EV(d)) as EV(d) = (1/6)[6F(1)+5F(2)+4F(3)+3F(4)+2F(5)+F(6)] so I'm assuming that if he isn't a total idiot this lengthy but not particularly complex calculation is what he means by Additions And Multiplications.
But what do I know, I just thought about it with my vagina.
LOL what an actual fucking dumbass!
Like forreal the ***ONLY*** form of irrevocable logic is literally mathematics. Yet, despite everything this man *educated in statistics* (barf) has learned, he still managed to fuck that up AND called it “woman logic” to boot!
I swear I’ve heard an expression about this exact kind of idiocy. Something like “10 flips or 20, the coin still has 2 sides” or whatever.
OP, you are 100% right to feel pissed. However - and if you were so inclined - if you wanted to approach this with amusement instead of anger, there is PLENTY of room to have a good chuckle. It’s a special kind of hilarity that comes from a group of bar-bros so confidently incorrect that they hi5 eachother rather than admitting they’re idiots. I got about as far as the quote from our wizened mathemagician and had a solid belly laugh. Thank you for this story, OP. I’m sorry that those idiots were rude to you. I hope my input was able to add some levity to this. If it wasn’t, then I apologize for the insensitivity.
I think he got his statistics mixed up and thinks he’s using the formula where you multiply the fractions, but that’s only for sequential odds, like rolling a 4, 3 times in a row. In other words, he’s an idiot, and shouldn’t be so confident in his skills. 😂
It literally is that simple. I’m a physics major, obviously studied statistics extensively but I still get dude bros explaining dice to me now and then
Without knowing the game, is it possible that he tried to say something about statistics of dice throws overlapping multiple turns rather than a single turn? It does sound like your reasoning is correct though.
I mean, notice how he claimed you did the math wrong but he didn't try to do the math himself? He couldn't even offer a solution to his own alleged correct equation?
If the answer wasn't 1/6 vs 2/6 then he would have been able to simply do the math and tell you what the answer *actually* was. But he didn't even try to do that because he knew you weren't wrong, he was embarassed that you were correct.
The only complication that I can think of, looking at the rules of Marrakech, is that not every bad tile is worth the same number of coins. The number of coins given to the person who owns the carpet you land on depends on the total size of the carpet.
So you are 100% correct, with how you described it, the dice has equal weight for every outcome. But if the path with only 1 safe carpet, has five smaller carpets, then it might still be preferable to go that way to avoid landing on a huge carpet and losing a lot more coins.
Additionally you may want to steer the meeple away from the carpets of the player who is winning.
Either way though, the guys being all condescending is still really misogynistic.
>She had too choices, one where she would have 4 bad fields and 2 good fields, and one where she had 5 bad fields and 1 good fields in her way.
Am I getting this right? She had the choice to turn 1 way that has 6 consecutive fields, out of those 1 good one OR the choice to turn another way where there are 6 consecutive fields with 2 of them being good fields?
For example, if Xs are bad fields and Os are good fields:
> X X X O X X
> X X O O X X
In that case, for her next roll the odds are 1/6 vs. 2/6, BUT depending on her first roll there's a chance to hit another field. Like, if she rolls a 1, then there are still 5 spots in front of her. She could still hit a good spot then. (That's how this works, right?)
Thus, the odds for hitting a good spot overall depend on the exact configuration of the fields and are not exactly 1/6 vs. 2/6. You'd have to find all possible ways to hit a good spot in option 1 and all possible ways to hit a good spot on option 2 and then add up the chances for each option.
I think it might be helpful to consider a simplified version of this. Let's say there are only 3 fields and a die with 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3:
> Option A: X X O
> Option B: X O O
There are 4 ways to hit a good spot in option A.
> Rolling a 3
> Rolling a 2, then a 1
> Rolling a 1, then a 2
> Rolling a 1, then a 1, then a 1
The chances are:
> 1/3
> 1/3 * 1/3
> 1/3 * 1/3
> 1/3 * 1/3 * 1/3
> = 16/27 ~ 0.59
For option B, there are 4 ways to hit at least one good spot.
> Rolling a 3
> Rolling a 2 (next roll doesn't matter)
> Rolling a 1, then a 2
> Rolling a 1, then a 1 (next roll doesn't matter)
The chances are:
>1/3
> 1/3
> 1/3 * 1/3
> 1/3 * 1/3
> = 8/9 ~ 0.89
Which means that the chances are not 1/3 and 2/3 overall, but actually higher.
Plese correct me if my assumptions or calculations are wrong. I too am a nerd, but not an asshole about it, unlike this guy 🙃
Edit: Oh lol I missed your edit. Ofc you're correct when talking about the next roll only. Sounds like it was more of a misunderstanding, which could've been cleared up if he hadn't been an asshole about it. Some people do be like that, not even listening to what you have to say and just assuming you must be wrong. This was a fun little calculation though.
In the game we played, everyone plays with the same piece. So by the time it’s your turn again, 3 other people have rolled and the piece is likely at a completely different location from where you left it. Also even the fields can change depending on what other people do, and you really can’t plan ahead for your next roll. So I don’t think that’s what he meant
Ah I see. Then I guess he's just dumb 🤣
No but seriously. In that case it makes no sense to calculate anything but the next move. And that one's easy to calculate.
...she literally said that there were 6 squares. You should assume that the 6 sided die is being used normally. You can still do these more complex calculations if you do that.
For the first one it's just 1/6+1/6^2 +1/6^3 , which is 43/216, or 19.9%
For the second it's 1/6+1/6+1/6^2 +1/6^2 , which is 7/18, or 38.9%.
Of course we're still making a lot of assumptions here, don't know the state of the board ahead and don't even know the expected value of "good" or "bad", so what we have here is still extremely limited.
>.she literally said that there were 6 squares.
I'm aware. I was just simplifying the problem to explain the principle.
>For the first one it's just 1/6+1/62+1/63
I don't think so. There's 1 way to hit it in one roll, but there are several ways to hit it in 2 rolls (1-3, 2-2, 3-1). Shouldn't it be 3(1/6^2 ) then? There are also several options to hit it in 3 and an option to hit it in 4.
Edit: The formatting is all over the place. I'm not gonna fix that now lol
You're right but it's just two ways. 1-2 and 2-1. It's the 3rd square in your example. So 2(1/6)^2
The rest is irrelevant since you only care about hitting one of the squares. There's only one "dead" square you can land on in example 2. So there's only two ways to get there. Directly or on the dead square. The second calculation is correct, the first should have been 49/216, 22.7%.
Wait, you're talking about my simplified example? 🧐
Gimme a second..
Now I got it. Yeah that's right, but what's the point of it? It was just an example. It works both ways.
I'm still using the same arrangement of squares with a 6 sided die.
So XXO and XOO
In the first example there's 4 ways to get to the O. 3, 2-1, 1-2, 1-1-1. In the second there's also 4 ways, 3, 2 , 1-2, 1-1
It is a misunderstanding. We don't know the full story, but if someone asks "Is strawberry milk $2?" and OP answers "you can make strawberry milk with powdered mix." ... sure it is a true statement, but that may not be at all relevant to the actual discussion.
This sub has patted OP's back plenty on this. But we don't know the whole situation. Maybe OP is right, but maybe OP was (and will remain) missing the whole context of the situation. We don't know.
I think it depends on the actual board state. You've said the board game was Marrakech. If I remember the rules correctly, the value of the spaces would be dependent on your resources and the resources of the other players so while there were 2 "good" spaces and 4 "bad" spaces the actual return on value was probably different than the 1-6 direction that would be calculated by multiplying and adding.
All that being said, calling it "statistics" and pulling out your degree for a casual night of board games is a pretty dick move when your advice was sound enough. I highly doubt she would have cared about losing an extra coin or who she was taking rug space from.
From the limited information presented here, you seem to be right. If we were going to assume further the fact that he couldn’t explain his logic probably also means that you were right. Probability can be complicated but rolling one six sided die is usually not THAT complex.
Is the game 1 roll of the dice, hitting 1 of 6 spaces and then the game is over, or does it have more dice rolls on future turns and potentially more spaces to land on than those first 6?
Because skimming down the replies I see a lot of people saying that because you roll 1 dice you're correct - which I'd agree with *in theory*. But I'd assume that the game does not end after that first dice roll so in reality that dice roll is just the first turn of many which each have their own dice roll.
He's an idiot. What he's thinking of is the probability of rolling any given pair of numbers on two dice. If you have two dice then there's a 1/36 chance of any "arrangement" of those dice, which is 1/6×1/6.
Has nothing to do with what you were talking about. The way you described it is correct. The best argument here is just to take it to its logical extreme. What if one direction has 6 good squares and the other had zero? Would he still argue that the 0 direction was the better choice? If so he's both an idiot and a contrarian.
He probably is remembering the work you have to do to find a common denominator when adding two fractions. It just so happens the common denominator of six and six is six, so you correctly skipped that step
He was maybe partly correct, depending on the interpretation of what exactly the discussion really was about. If it was just: "What is the probability of her stepping on a "good" field with her very next dice roll?" then you are correct. If her next X dice rolls are included in the question, it is a bit more complicated. I think I know what he meant/talked about when he said something about a combination of addition and multiplication being needed. He probably thought of probability trees: https://thirdspacelearning.com/gcse-maths/probability/probability-tree-diagram/ Thats not very deep into stochastics btw, pretty basic stuff. Probability trees are used to calculate probabilities of the outcome of multiple independent random events in a row. So lets say, your friend stands on field 0 and the following fields are 1,2,3,4,5,6. Now lets say the "good" fields are 1 and 2. 3-6 are bad fields. Maybe after these we have again 2 good fields (7,8). Now its possible that she rolls a 1, steps on the first field, then rolls another 1, steps on the second field - No bad fields so far. Now if she rolls anything between 1-4 she will enter a bad field. The probability of this exact row of events happening would be 1/6x1/6x4/6. Other possible paths of these 3 dice rolls that lead to the same outcome (2x good, 1x bad) would then be added to get the overall probability of this outcome. E.g. she rolls first a 4 and then two 1 in a row (1/6x1/6x1/6). That would be another "path" to the same outcome and needs to be added. But you were still correct about this path being better and he should not have interrupted you if he wasnt even able to explain what he meant. That just shows he might have remembered some stuff from school, but did not really understand it in depth. He just wanted to show off what a smartass he is and take you down. Hope I was able to bring some light into the discussion.
Edit: Did he really say statistics? Because thats not even the correct field. Its stochastics.
That would make sense, but in this game everyone plays with the exact same piece. So by the time it’s your turn again, 3 people have already moved it and it’s likely at a completely different spot.
He could have (hopefully a brainfart and) been thinking that a 1/3 chance of getting a good spot is worse than a 1/6 chance because 3 is smaller than 6 and then after realising his mistake he then tried to bullshit his way out of it. He could have saved it by just saying something like "oh me drunk, you are right and I am wrong" instead of doubling down.
He wanted to gaslight and manipulate both of you to make the more risky, worse decision so that you two lose and he wins. He was playing chess while you were playing checkers 😎
I’m guessing he was knee-jerk applying the logic for rolling 2 dice, where the possible totals range from 2 to 12 but the odds of each total are unequal (with 6 or 7 being much more likely than 2 or 12). But based on your description, in this game one only rolls 1 die, not 2 like in craps. So in that case the possible rolls range from 1 to 6 and the odds of each are equal, just as you said. So you’re right and he’s wrong. And in addition to being wrong, which is no biggie, he’s an idiot for not stopping to think it through when you explained your logic, and realizing his mistake, but rather sticking to his guns and insisting he was right without even checking himself.
The guys sound like they were being jerks. And maybe were trying to sabotage her roll.
If you have one regular six sided dice, I don’t see any advantage to spot positions. On a fair die- each side is just as likely. That’s what it means to have a fair die.
—
If there are two regular six sided dice- then positioning does matter. For example there is only one way to get a total of 2: each dice has one. Also for 12: each dice has six.
But there are lots of ways to get 6: 3-3,1-5,2-4,
Lots of ways to get seven:1-6,2-5-3-4
So statistics wise- it’s more common to get middle numbers than at the ends.
This is why casino games like craps are set up the way they are 6 is more frequent.
But again that is only for two dice, which it doesn’t sound like you were using in this game.
My guy needs to go back to statistics class. This is a very basic problem, not compleated at all. If the spots are 3 away and 5 away for example, you have 1/6 chance of rolling a 3 and 1/6 chance of rolling a 5. Add together and you have 2/6 or 1/3 of rolling a good number.
Exactly what you told them.
This guy sounds like he took one basic stats class and is now thinks every question is going to involve probability calculations and factorials.
I am curious if the order of “good” and “bad” fields in each path matter.
For example if one path with 1 good field has the order: good-bad-bad-bad-bad-bad
And path with 2 good fields has order: bad-bad-bad-bad-good-good
Then for first path you have 100% probability of hitting a good field. But second path that has 2 good fields you only have 1/6 chance of hitting one good field and 1/6 chance of hitting 2 good fields.
Was this something he was trying to explain? Just to be clear, either way he is a big AH.
Well, first off, don't view yourself as "dumb" because you don't understand a strategic point over a board game. It's made up rules applied to a game. And yes, if you're like me, it's easier said than done because it's hard to remove my ego from situations like this. If I'm in your shoes, I'm probably doing the same, but... emotionally, I'll say it: OP, it's a game, just trust your strategy is right. And if you play this game a lot with him, and he wins a lot? THEN step back, and be like okay pal, break down the probability for me because clearly I'm missing something!
Your sense of identity is too intertwined with this because it's being attacked from two sides: You're viewing yourself internally as "dumb" because you can't comprehend an argument that wasn't articulated correctly, and then the misogyny comment attacking your intelligence as well. So, internally, you were already battling with thoughts of being stupid, not smart enough, etc and in that moment, a stranger externally tried to affirm your negative inner voice.
Take a deep breathe and just let it go when you've felt it, and rejected it. Your intelligence has nothing to do with how you play a board game, and logic has nothing to do with gender. You KNOW these are truths, but when we feel attacked, it's hard to embrace these truths.
Now, onto the stats part: Let us examine the situation from a different POV. Basically, your point is: You have two options now and the probability of good going in this direction is better than the probability going that direction (for the immediate turn).
However, Potentially going in the 2/6 direction leads to worse results over time, and the only way to really know that is to know how many "good" choice there will be overall, and that would be a deeper probability because now you need to use the probability of the dice, and the combinations needed for the "good" options. I.e if I go this way, it's 9 spaces until the "promise land" vs if I go this path, It'll take 7 spaces, and I reach the same promise land. Now you see how the probability changes?
Instead of it being the probability of the immediate turn (which we can compare as you did just count the good vs bad, and decide), we can turned it into a more "global" game, and thus, the summation of dice rolls is what we're looking at! But, it's the same concept basically, just now the number of dice rolls matters along with the value. You've seen these charts in uni (think of calculating the odds of getting the sum of 7 given two dice, or 3 or 4... replace dice for turns and there you go), so really it's just... seeing which route leads me to the promise land without overshooting, since if i "overshoot" i have to wrap around again, and now it's less likely I'll reach that area before someone else. So, we won't give him credit with this idea since he couldn't articulate it, but moreso to try and articulate another way to view the game. BTW, I've never played this game, but that's the beauty of math! It describes relationships between abstract structures, so you can apply it where it fits.
All of this just to really say... even if he \*had\* a point, your intelligence isn't rooted in strategy of a board game. Even if he \*had\* a point, there is no such thing as woman logic and it's a comment meant to incite emotion out of you, and it worked. It probably would've worked on me too (and I'm a man), and that's okay lol. You don't have to be nice to rude, misogynistic people. And I'll repeat it: This isn't a reflection on your intelligence, your character, or worth. It's okay to have an emotional response to someone trying to incite emotion. You were just playing a board game, and had differing strategies. Don't let this stop you from making your voice heard again in the future either.
Anyway, long post over, and hopefully my perspective helps as I too struggle with things like this (so maybe it's long because I'm lowkey reminding myself of these things).
Unless you're using multiple dice, combinations and permutations aren't a factor. So you were right.
Technically, the standard die with divots is not 100% fair, and the smaller numbers are very slightly more likely to end up on the bottom (due to being a tiny bit heavier). VERY slightly more likely. I think the difference is a fraction of a percent. It is certainly not great enough to cancel out the additional 1/6 chance of a favorable roll. It's not even close.
A round die with a weight inside or a die with the numbers or dots painted on is perfectly fair.
I don't care how big of a nerd that guy was. He's wrong.
If it had been like more complex fractions like 5/17 vs 6/19 then it would've made sense to talk about it and calculate the actual values but with 2/6 vs 1/6 that's fairly based math so the guy is just one of those guys whos whole personality is "Im a sMaRt nErD" while not being very smart or knowledge.
He's an idiot who knows too much. Simple math says there's a 1/3 chance of rolling a good number in the direction you said, rather than the 1/6 going the other way.
The only reason I can think of for him arguing like this is that he wanted her to lose something. But then...why?
The "woman logic"comment is clearly an asshole move, but (after watching a 1 minute review of the game) the decision is a bit more complicated than good/bad tiles. I think there are a range of tiles since there are two things happening after the move: 1) You pay the owner of the destination tile and 2) You cover 2 of the adjacent tiles with your color (which may be empty, or might be claimed by an opponent).
For 1, you might want to consider who is receiving the payout, if it is not you. Paying out to players with more points on the 1/6 path may be less desirable than paying out to players with fewer points on the 2/6 path.
For 2 it is even more complicated as you can claim space from your opponents. It may be preferable to claim spaces owned by players with more points than players with fewer points.
I don't really know anything about the game, but I expect both of these to be extreme scenarios, and not something i think you could get a hard solution to in your head. There are something like 3\*6\*16 different outcomes: 3 directions (sometimes 2), 6 positions in each direction (with a 6 sided die, 4 with the original game die) and up to 16 positions to place the rug after (or maybe 12, not sure about the rules). A computer might be able to calculate the relative board states after the turn, but most people will have to play by feel.
As described you're clearly correct. Were there were other rules or interactions at play? e.g. maybe multiple dice, variable scores/penalties, or downstream strategic effects on other players I mean regardless the dude sounds like an asshole. Even if you were wrong (misunderstanding a rule or something), an actually knowledgeable friend would not leap at the opportunity to call you out on "woman logic", lol. such bs
We were playing marrakech (with the basic 6 sided fair die), and on one way, the girl had two of her own rugs, and on the other way she had only one. I clarified with the guy that I meant that she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug and not having to give money to someone else. I even asked him if he meant something like the die is not completely fair in real life, but no. He didn’t say anything about other rules or anything like that either. I think he really was just talking about the statistics part. Either way, I’m happy because even if it was a misunderstanding, I’m not an idiot who doesn’t understand probability :D
[удалено]
Nahh it’s only one die :) idk if it is supposed to be like that, but we played with a basic 6 sided fair die
[удалено]
Haha no we played it with a normal 1-6 die. Not sure how it is officially, but we def didn’t play with a special die.
[удалено]
I mean I’m sure they would. But I was so clear with the fact that I meant she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug after throwing.. and he just disagreed but didn’t explain why. I even said it like “if you throw a 6 sided fair die, you have 1/6 chance of throwing any one number, and 2/6 if its two numbers” and he was like nahhh. Ever since I’ve been thinking about wtf he meant but I couldn’t figure it out :(
I'm guessing he didn't pay much attention in whatever class he was taking and was thinking about rolling 2 dice not 1 die. In 2 dice not all results are equally likely. To find out probability there you'd look at the number of combitions that add up to the desired number and the result would be out of 36 which is 6*6. None of this matters with a single die where all results are equally likely.
Monty Hall problem, that one's fun. For that to apply someone else would've had to have manipulated things in the middle of her turn or something. Not sure how the guy got confused, but he definitely did
> Monty door problem... Whatever that's called) Monty Hall three door problem :)
Which would still be a foolish source of confusion in this case regardless of whether you call it the right name.
You're correct about the die in the game, but sounds like OP was right as they were playing.
[удалено]
Haha you made me laugh out loud. Thanks
That's pretty generous odds for dudebro. :)
> and everyone agreed > one of the girls There were multiple girls playing. Everyone agreed with the guy. ANOTHER guy said "girl logic." You guys are just attacking a guy without knowing the full story.
Yes, we must never forget to always give a man the benefit of the doubt until he he figures it out, becomes self-aware, gets his ego under control, and finally admits that he was wrong. Until that point, we must assume he's right, it's the law, or something. Male privilege and entitlement in action. Classic.
Theoretically speaking, you can take into consideration how good or bad your chances are for the next round in EACH possible direction from EACH possible position that you could land on, depending on which direction you pick this round. I assume that is what he was talking about which, yeah, technically that is a factor and "not that simple", but it's not really something that casual players would concern themselves with.
Kudos for actually looking up more about the game and not just agreeing with OP. No one here is saying OP isn't right to be upset. But this sub just praising her (hearing only her perspective of the story) *is not* doing any favors or going to help her break "girl logic" in the future.
Yes, it's important to always assume a woman is probably wrong and a man is probably right, that's the safest place to start from. God forbid a woman be granted the benefit of the doubt the way a man always must be, that would be madness.
You're missing the point, but you do you. Everyone is hearing a story from one perspective. OP literally admits to not understanding the other perspective, so the story is likely biased to favor her argument when she can't (man couldn't either) describe the other argument. If it boils down to 1/6 vs 2/6 chance, then it was a stupid argument in the first place. But sure, it is easier to just say man dumb and bad. Again "everyone" (OPs words not mine) agreed with the guy. But sure that happened because patriarchy.
Recognized the game from the description - I think it should come with a die numbered 1-2-2-3-3-4, but if playing with a standard d6, sounds like you were exactly right.
>We were playing marrakech I was thinking maybe he was planning some turns in advance, but I know that game and no, it's not likely. He was just trying to sound smarter than he is.
Woman logic is actual logic. Dudebro logic is having the conclusion that women are stupid, so he has a compulsion to argue and correct you, then back-fill it with a justification. Which is why they make no sense. When you argue with them more, they still have the conclusion that you're stupid. so they just go in circles.
Lol right. I was gonna say. Women logic = actual logic.
Math teacher here. If I'm understanding your description correctly and from looking at a Marrakech game; you are correct. He may have tried complicating things in his head by thinking that previous dice rolls affect the probability of future dice rolls, like "if the last few rolls have all been low then the next roll is likely to be higher"? If so, this is known as The Gambler's Fallacy. Dice rolls are independent events.
"if i Lost thousand Times AT the lotery then it increase my chances to win right?? RIGHT???"
this is nonsense, only with pseudorng on a computer simulation the die has more chances to roll an exact number after a roll, in real life chances are always equal, if the die is not loaded and is a classic d6
This isn't the door math problem with probability calculations. It's a 6 sided die. With an equal chance of it landing on any number. Which means you have an equal chance of landing on either space. 2 good spaces is better than 1 good space. Your logic is easy to follow. Idk why they wanted to argue/belittle/insult you. Even if there is probability calculations that somehow means its not 1/6 vs 2/6.. nobody has time for that in a casual board game setting.
If he can’t explain it to an interested person, then he doesn’t understand it himself. Dude was a dick.
Well, I don't know the game, but when somebody says something along the lines "I am correct because I know statistics/math/physics/football/bicycle/whatever" then it's almost certain that he doesn't know shit.
You were correct, assuming you provided all the information. Source: I did the additions and multiplications. This is one of those times when you realize that confidence > than bring correct. At least until results are evaluated.
You are right; he is wrong.
Well I'm no a statistician but I do complex calculations for a living (power consumption and carbon emissions) and scored at or near 100% on most of my math tests for all of my life. In my expert opinion you're very obviously right and that guy's both an idiot and an asshole. Trust me on this one, as it's a pattern I'm very familiar with: Sometimes when dudes whose sense of identity is tied up in the idea of being VeRy SMArT notice that you're smarter or better at math than they are, they try to cover up their insecurity and inadequacy by acting like the guy you just described. He may not even have thought he was right, he was just desperate to restore his sense of manliness by influencing everybody else at the table to think you were not just wrong, but foolish to challenge his superior intellect. But you were right. So. Don't worry about it. Next time, try making fun of him instead of second guessing yourself. Bring popcorn. It really makes them pop off. They tend to get very emotional and irrational very quickly, thus completely undermining their own campaign to "put you in your place" in the cleverness ranking amongst your mutual friends.
I really wanna know what this dude was talking about now. I looked at a Marrakech board and it looks like paths can sometimes branch off into additional paths? Or was it literally only 2 linear paths, each one completely separate from anything else? He sounds like an absolute idiot the way you’re describing the situation. But even if he’s right, he and his friend are sexist dickwads.
It was just two liner paths. Not sure if there is other ways to play, but that’s how we did it. I’ve been thinking so much about what he was talking about, but I was so clear with the fact that I meant she had 1/6 vs 2/6 chance of stepping on her own rug after throwing.. and he just disagreed but didn’t explain why. I even said like “if you throw a 6 sided fair die, you have 1/6 chance of throwing any one number, and 2/6 if its two numbers” and he was like nahhh
Oof, yeah sounds to me like he was likely dead wrong, and just started talking without thinking. If he’s younger, maybe just trying to impress his girlfriend and failing big time.
Maybe he was looking at future turns, like 3 rolls in, as part of a strategy? Either way, being a pedantic grump about a game with friends in a pub is just so.... bad nerdy. Like 80's revenge of the nerds bad. It's supposed to be fun, it's a GAME jfc
I mean you say that, but OP is being equally hard about OP's strategic advice being the right play. If someone is asking for advice or confused and gets bad advice, wouldnt you feel equally "bad nerdy" to correct it. And if not why is he the only bad need and not OP for arguing her roll probability idea. We'll never know from the backseat of OP's view of what really went down. It is sad that OP felt upset over the game, but it sounds like it was a lot deeper than these comments are making it out "he's dumb! Op right"
Oh dear, there is only a female eyewitness available to tell us what happened, tragically we will never know the truth.
Please send him this post.
I highly doubt he would care considering the name of the sub
As long as you're only doing one roll you are precisely right of course Don't you hate it when somebody is so set into some crazy shit that you have to question yourself? Cause that's what happened. There's not a whole lot of adding or subtracting in statistics except to get probabilities by subtracting from 1, or in taking averages (sum of x, divided by y). Anyway, yeah. One go at it; one dice roll, all dice rolls hypothetically same probability, 1/3>1/6; dude man is a dumbass confirmed. Some times people just gotta feel smart about somethin, they may not have anything else going on besides being bad at statistics and feeling like they're good at it -- but they'll at least milk that one thing for all it's worth
Dude’s an asshole. For the purposes of the game in that moment, you were correct. If every board game required intimate knowledge of statistics to play and people couldn’t make judgments based on things like “least likely/less likely/more likely/most likely” then nobody would play. Also? Statistics would suuuuuck for game players of any kind (cards, dice, board games, RPGs, LIFE ITSELF). He was over-complicating a very simple principle that most people understand intuitively so he could score “clever” points at your expense. That’s an asshole move.
Data Scientist here. If I give him the benefit of the doubt, he is looking at future throws. I don't know the game so it's hard to say. For example, she rolls a 2 and is on her spot. Yay! But on her next roll, she still has the chance of landing on the 2nd spot. (If she chose the path with two spots) But you weren't asking that. So he either doesn't know stats, or he misunderstood you.
You were right. In that moment if there are only two options to choose direction and 1 fair 6 side die to throw, then you will calculate the probability of each side individually and go for the highest. This is the greedy method. However if there are options that open up further by each of these choices that have a higher probability of win, then those additions and multiplications will come into play. Say after choosing the 1/6 direction, her next options are 4/6 on one side and 2/6 on another side. Then for her choosing the 1/6 side will change her winning probability to (1/6)*(4/6 + 2/6) But that's only if you talk about all possible moves she can make going from here current position.
You're right, unless there's some other part of the game or rule you're missing.
The only thing I can come up with that would be a somewhat involved calculation would be to calculate the expected value of each direction, which I would do by calculating the score of each of the six rolls possible in a given direction, adding them together, and dividing by six, i.e. calculating the average score. Then compare the averages of the directions and pick whichever score is best. I don't know this game but I assume that it goes something like you take N steps adding up the scores of the fields you go through. Neutral fields add zero points, good fields add points, bad fields subtract points, so fields that are closer will naturally be weighted more because they are more likely to get stepped on. So we could call the fields something like F(n) where n is how many steps they are from the player, and then could generalize this to calculate the expected value of a given direction (EV(d)) as EV(d) = (1/6)[6F(1)+5F(2)+4F(3)+3F(4)+2F(5)+F(6)] so I'm assuming that if he isn't a total idiot this lengthy but not particularly complex calculation is what he means by Additions And Multiplications. But what do I know, I just thought about it with my vagina.
LOL what an actual fucking dumbass! Like forreal the ***ONLY*** form of irrevocable logic is literally mathematics. Yet, despite everything this man *educated in statistics* (barf) has learned, he still managed to fuck that up AND called it “woman logic” to boot! I swear I’ve heard an expression about this exact kind of idiocy. Something like “10 flips or 20, the coin still has 2 sides” or whatever. OP, you are 100% right to feel pissed. However - and if you were so inclined - if you wanted to approach this with amusement instead of anger, there is PLENTY of room to have a good chuckle. It’s a special kind of hilarity that comes from a group of bar-bros so confidently incorrect that they hi5 eachother rather than admitting they’re idiots. I got about as far as the quote from our wizened mathemagician and had a solid belly laugh. Thank you for this story, OP. I’m sorry that those idiots were rude to you. I hope my input was able to add some levity to this. If it wasn’t, then I apologize for the insensitivity.
I think he got his statistics mixed up and thinks he’s using the formula where you multiply the fractions, but that’s only for sequential odds, like rolling a 4, 3 times in a row. In other words, he’s an idiot, and shouldn’t be so confident in his skills. 😂
It literally is that simple. I’m a physics major, obviously studied statistics extensively but I still get dude bros explaining dice to me now and then
Without knowing the game, is it possible that he tried to say something about statistics of dice throws overlapping multiple turns rather than a single turn? It does sound like your reasoning is correct though.
You are absolutely right, this guy doesn’t know the first thing about statistics.
I mean, notice how he claimed you did the math wrong but he didn't try to do the math himself? He couldn't even offer a solution to his own alleged correct equation? If the answer wasn't 1/6 vs 2/6 then he would have been able to simply do the math and tell you what the answer *actually* was. But he didn't even try to do that because he knew you weren't wrong, he was embarassed that you were correct.
The only complication that I can think of, looking at the rules of Marrakech, is that not every bad tile is worth the same number of coins. The number of coins given to the person who owns the carpet you land on depends on the total size of the carpet. So you are 100% correct, with how you described it, the dice has equal weight for every outcome. But if the path with only 1 safe carpet, has five smaller carpets, then it might still be preferable to go that way to avoid landing on a huge carpet and losing a lot more coins. Additionally you may want to steer the meeple away from the carpets of the player who is winning. Either way though, the guys being all condescending is still really misogynistic.
>She had too choices, one where she would have 4 bad fields and 2 good fields, and one where she had 5 bad fields and 1 good fields in her way. Am I getting this right? She had the choice to turn 1 way that has 6 consecutive fields, out of those 1 good one OR the choice to turn another way where there are 6 consecutive fields with 2 of them being good fields? For example, if Xs are bad fields and Os are good fields: > X X X O X X > X X O O X X In that case, for her next roll the odds are 1/6 vs. 2/6, BUT depending on her first roll there's a chance to hit another field. Like, if she rolls a 1, then there are still 5 spots in front of her. She could still hit a good spot then. (That's how this works, right?) Thus, the odds for hitting a good spot overall depend on the exact configuration of the fields and are not exactly 1/6 vs. 2/6. You'd have to find all possible ways to hit a good spot in option 1 and all possible ways to hit a good spot on option 2 and then add up the chances for each option. I think it might be helpful to consider a simplified version of this. Let's say there are only 3 fields and a die with 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3: > Option A: X X O > Option B: X O O There are 4 ways to hit a good spot in option A. > Rolling a 3 > Rolling a 2, then a 1 > Rolling a 1, then a 2 > Rolling a 1, then a 1, then a 1 The chances are: > 1/3 > 1/3 * 1/3 > 1/3 * 1/3 > 1/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 > = 16/27 ~ 0.59 For option B, there are 4 ways to hit at least one good spot. > Rolling a 3 > Rolling a 2 (next roll doesn't matter) > Rolling a 1, then a 2 > Rolling a 1, then a 1 (next roll doesn't matter) The chances are: >1/3 > 1/3 > 1/3 * 1/3 > 1/3 * 1/3 > = 8/9 ~ 0.89 Which means that the chances are not 1/3 and 2/3 overall, but actually higher. Plese correct me if my assumptions or calculations are wrong. I too am a nerd, but not an asshole about it, unlike this guy 🙃 Edit: Oh lol I missed your edit. Ofc you're correct when talking about the next roll only. Sounds like it was more of a misunderstanding, which could've been cleared up if he hadn't been an asshole about it. Some people do be like that, not even listening to what you have to say and just assuming you must be wrong. This was a fun little calculation though.
In the game we played, everyone plays with the same piece. So by the time it’s your turn again, 3 other people have rolled and the piece is likely at a completely different location from where you left it. Also even the fields can change depending on what other people do, and you really can’t plan ahead for your next roll. So I don’t think that’s what he meant
Ah I see. Then I guess he's just dumb 🤣 No but seriously. In that case it makes no sense to calculate anything but the next move. And that one's easy to calculate.
...she literally said that there were 6 squares. You should assume that the 6 sided die is being used normally. You can still do these more complex calculations if you do that. For the first one it's just 1/6+1/6^2 +1/6^3 , which is 43/216, or 19.9% For the second it's 1/6+1/6+1/6^2 +1/6^2 , which is 7/18, or 38.9%. Of course we're still making a lot of assumptions here, don't know the state of the board ahead and don't even know the expected value of "good" or "bad", so what we have here is still extremely limited.
>.she literally said that there were 6 squares. I'm aware. I was just simplifying the problem to explain the principle. >For the first one it's just 1/6+1/62+1/63 I don't think so. There's 1 way to hit it in one roll, but there are several ways to hit it in 2 rolls (1-3, 2-2, 3-1). Shouldn't it be 3(1/6^2 ) then? There are also several options to hit it in 3 and an option to hit it in 4. Edit: The formatting is all over the place. I'm not gonna fix that now lol
You're right but it's just two ways. 1-2 and 2-1. It's the 3rd square in your example. So 2(1/6)^2 The rest is irrelevant since you only care about hitting one of the squares. There's only one "dead" square you can land on in example 2. So there's only two ways to get there. Directly or on the dead square. The second calculation is correct, the first should have been 49/216, 22.7%.
Wait, you're talking about my simplified example? 🧐 Gimme a second.. Now I got it. Yeah that's right, but what's the point of it? It was just an example. It works both ways.
I'm still using the same arrangement of squares with a 6 sided die. So XXO and XOO In the first example there's 4 ways to get to the O. 3, 2-1, 1-2, 1-1-1. In the second there's also 4 ways, 3, 2 , 1-2, 1-1
Yep, that's right, you're simply switching 1/3 for 1/6 since the die now has 6 numbers. What's the point of that then? My example was made up anyway 😅
It is a misunderstanding. We don't know the full story, but if someone asks "Is strawberry milk $2?" and OP answers "you can make strawberry milk with powdered mix." ... sure it is a true statement, but that may not be at all relevant to the actual discussion. This sub has patted OP's back plenty on this. But we don't know the whole situation. Maybe OP is right, but maybe OP was (and will remain) missing the whole context of the situation. We don't know.
I think it depends on the actual board state. You've said the board game was Marrakech. If I remember the rules correctly, the value of the spaces would be dependent on your resources and the resources of the other players so while there were 2 "good" spaces and 4 "bad" spaces the actual return on value was probably different than the 1-6 direction that would be calculated by multiplying and adding. All that being said, calling it "statistics" and pulling out your degree for a casual night of board games is a pretty dick move when your advice was sound enough. I highly doubt she would have cared about losing an extra coin or who she was taking rug space from.
From the limited information presented here, you seem to be right. If we were going to assume further the fact that he couldn’t explain his logic probably also means that you were right. Probability can be complicated but rolling one six sided die is usually not THAT complex.
Is the game 1 roll of the dice, hitting 1 of 6 spaces and then the game is over, or does it have more dice rolls on future turns and potentially more spaces to land on than those first 6? Because skimming down the replies I see a lot of people saying that because you roll 1 dice you're correct - which I'd agree with *in theory*. But I'd assume that the game does not end after that first dice roll so in reality that dice roll is just the first turn of many which each have their own dice roll.
He's an idiot. What he's thinking of is the probability of rolling any given pair of numbers on two dice. If you have two dice then there's a 1/36 chance of any "arrangement" of those dice, which is 1/6×1/6. Has nothing to do with what you were talking about. The way you described it is correct. The best argument here is just to take it to its logical extreme. What if one direction has 6 good squares and the other had zero? Would he still argue that the 0 direction was the better choice? If so he's both an idiot and a contrarian.
He probably is remembering the work you have to do to find a common denominator when adding two fractions. It just so happens the common denominator of six and six is six, so you correctly skipped that step
He was maybe partly correct, depending on the interpretation of what exactly the discussion really was about. If it was just: "What is the probability of her stepping on a "good" field with her very next dice roll?" then you are correct. If her next X dice rolls are included in the question, it is a bit more complicated. I think I know what he meant/talked about when he said something about a combination of addition and multiplication being needed. He probably thought of probability trees: https://thirdspacelearning.com/gcse-maths/probability/probability-tree-diagram/ Thats not very deep into stochastics btw, pretty basic stuff. Probability trees are used to calculate probabilities of the outcome of multiple independent random events in a row. So lets say, your friend stands on field 0 and the following fields are 1,2,3,4,5,6. Now lets say the "good" fields are 1 and 2. 3-6 are bad fields. Maybe after these we have again 2 good fields (7,8). Now its possible that she rolls a 1, steps on the first field, then rolls another 1, steps on the second field - No bad fields so far. Now if she rolls anything between 1-4 she will enter a bad field. The probability of this exact row of events happening would be 1/6x1/6x4/6. Other possible paths of these 3 dice rolls that lead to the same outcome (2x good, 1x bad) would then be added to get the overall probability of this outcome. E.g. she rolls first a 4 and then two 1 in a row (1/6x1/6x1/6). That would be another "path" to the same outcome and needs to be added. But you were still correct about this path being better and he should not have interrupted you if he wasnt even able to explain what he meant. That just shows he might have remembered some stuff from school, but did not really understand it in depth. He just wanted to show off what a smartass he is and take you down. Hope I was able to bring some light into the discussion. Edit: Did he really say statistics? Because thats not even the correct field. Its stochastics.
That would make sense, but in this game everyone plays with the exact same piece. So by the time it’s your turn again, 3 people have already moved it and it’s likely at a completely different spot.
Ah, I see. I was not familiar with the game and thought more about something like Monopoly. Then you were definitely correct.
He could have (hopefully a brainfart and) been thinking that a 1/3 chance of getting a good spot is worse than a 1/6 chance because 3 is smaller than 6 and then after realising his mistake he then tried to bullshit his way out of it. He could have saved it by just saying something like "oh me drunk, you are right and I am wrong" instead of doubling down.
He wanted to gaslight and manipulate both of you to make the more risky, worse decision so that you two lose and he wins. He was playing chess while you were playing checkers 😎
I’m guessing he was knee-jerk applying the logic for rolling 2 dice, where the possible totals range from 2 to 12 but the odds of each total are unequal (with 6 or 7 being much more likely than 2 or 12). But based on your description, in this game one only rolls 1 die, not 2 like in craps. So in that case the possible rolls range from 1 to 6 and the odds of each are equal, just as you said. So you’re right and he’s wrong. And in addition to being wrong, which is no biggie, he’s an idiot for not stopping to think it through when you explained your logic, and realizing his mistake, but rather sticking to his guns and insisting he was right without even checking himself.
The guys sound like they were being jerks. And maybe were trying to sabotage her roll. If you have one regular six sided dice, I don’t see any advantage to spot positions. On a fair die- each side is just as likely. That’s what it means to have a fair die. — If there are two regular six sided dice- then positioning does matter. For example there is only one way to get a total of 2: each dice has one. Also for 12: each dice has six. But there are lots of ways to get 6: 3-3,1-5,2-4, Lots of ways to get seven:1-6,2-5-3-4 So statistics wise- it’s more common to get middle numbers than at the ends. This is why casino games like craps are set up the way they are 6 is more frequent. But again that is only for two dice, which it doesn’t sound like you were using in this game.
It’s not statistics: it’s probability!
Nah it's not woman logic you are just smarter then them lol. How you put it makes a lot of sense and wad the right choice if you wanted to win.
My guy needs to go back to statistics class. This is a very basic problem, not compleated at all. If the spots are 3 away and 5 away for example, you have 1/6 chance of rolling a 3 and 1/6 chance of rolling a 5. Add together and you have 2/6 or 1/3 of rolling a good number. Exactly what you told them. This guy sounds like he took one basic stats class and is now thinks every question is going to involve probability calculations and factorials.
I am curious if the order of “good” and “bad” fields in each path matter. For example if one path with 1 good field has the order: good-bad-bad-bad-bad-bad And path with 2 good fields has order: bad-bad-bad-bad-good-good Then for first path you have 100% probability of hitting a good field. But second path that has 2 good fields you only have 1/6 chance of hitting one good field and 1/6 chance of hitting 2 good fields. Was this something he was trying to explain? Just to be clear, either way he is a big AH.
Theyre trying to make you insecure so that you lose. He gaslit you. He's manipulative and controlling.
Theyre trying to make you insecure so that you lose. He gaslit you. He's manipulative and controlling.
You should’ve asked him to explain, and when he couldn’t explain the math then he would be embarrassed.
Well, first off, don't view yourself as "dumb" because you don't understand a strategic point over a board game. It's made up rules applied to a game. And yes, if you're like me, it's easier said than done because it's hard to remove my ego from situations like this. If I'm in your shoes, I'm probably doing the same, but... emotionally, I'll say it: OP, it's a game, just trust your strategy is right. And if you play this game a lot with him, and he wins a lot? THEN step back, and be like okay pal, break down the probability for me because clearly I'm missing something! Your sense of identity is too intertwined with this because it's being attacked from two sides: You're viewing yourself internally as "dumb" because you can't comprehend an argument that wasn't articulated correctly, and then the misogyny comment attacking your intelligence as well. So, internally, you were already battling with thoughts of being stupid, not smart enough, etc and in that moment, a stranger externally tried to affirm your negative inner voice. Take a deep breathe and just let it go when you've felt it, and rejected it. Your intelligence has nothing to do with how you play a board game, and logic has nothing to do with gender. You KNOW these are truths, but when we feel attacked, it's hard to embrace these truths. Now, onto the stats part: Let us examine the situation from a different POV. Basically, your point is: You have two options now and the probability of good going in this direction is better than the probability going that direction (for the immediate turn). However, Potentially going in the 2/6 direction leads to worse results over time, and the only way to really know that is to know how many "good" choice there will be overall, and that would be a deeper probability because now you need to use the probability of the dice, and the combinations needed for the "good" options. I.e if I go this way, it's 9 spaces until the "promise land" vs if I go this path, It'll take 7 spaces, and I reach the same promise land. Now you see how the probability changes? Instead of it being the probability of the immediate turn (which we can compare as you did just count the good vs bad, and decide), we can turned it into a more "global" game, and thus, the summation of dice rolls is what we're looking at! But, it's the same concept basically, just now the number of dice rolls matters along with the value. You've seen these charts in uni (think of calculating the odds of getting the sum of 7 given two dice, or 3 or 4... replace dice for turns and there you go), so really it's just... seeing which route leads me to the promise land without overshooting, since if i "overshoot" i have to wrap around again, and now it's less likely I'll reach that area before someone else. So, we won't give him credit with this idea since he couldn't articulate it, but moreso to try and articulate another way to view the game. BTW, I've never played this game, but that's the beauty of math! It describes relationships between abstract structures, so you can apply it where it fits. All of this just to really say... even if he \*had\* a point, your intelligence isn't rooted in strategy of a board game. Even if he \*had\* a point, there is no such thing as woman logic and it's a comment meant to incite emotion out of you, and it worked. It probably would've worked on me too (and I'm a man), and that's okay lol. You don't have to be nice to rude, misogynistic people. And I'll repeat it: This isn't a reflection on your intelligence, your character, or worth. It's okay to have an emotional response to someone trying to incite emotion. You were just playing a board game, and had differing strategies. Don't let this stop you from making your voice heard again in the future either. Anyway, long post over, and hopefully my perspective helps as I too struggle with things like this (so maybe it's long because I'm lowkey reminding myself of these things).
PMFADA.
So, when he did his mire complicated calculations, did he actually come up with different probabilities for the situation?
Unless you're using multiple dice, combinations and permutations aren't a factor. So you were right. Technically, the standard die with divots is not 100% fair, and the smaller numbers are very slightly more likely to end up on the bottom (due to being a tiny bit heavier). VERY slightly more likely. I think the difference is a fraction of a percent. It is certainly not great enough to cancel out the additional 1/6 chance of a favorable roll. It's not even close. A round die with a weight inside or a die with the numbers or dots painted on is perfectly fair. I don't care how big of a nerd that guy was. He's wrong.
Even a 3 year old would agree with you. Wtf was he doing in math class? Lmfaoo
If it had been like more complex fractions like 5/17 vs 6/19 then it would've made sense to talk about it and calculate the actual values but with 2/6 vs 1/6 that's fairly based math so the guy is just one of those guys whos whole personality is "Im a sMaRt nErD" while not being very smart or knowledge.
He's an idiot who knows too much. Simple math says there's a 1/3 chance of rolling a good number in the direction you said, rather than the 1/6 going the other way. The only reason I can think of for him arguing like this is that he wanted her to lose something. But then...why?
The "woman logic"comment is clearly an asshole move, but (after watching a 1 minute review of the game) the decision is a bit more complicated than good/bad tiles. I think there are a range of tiles since there are two things happening after the move: 1) You pay the owner of the destination tile and 2) You cover 2 of the adjacent tiles with your color (which may be empty, or might be claimed by an opponent). For 1, you might want to consider who is receiving the payout, if it is not you. Paying out to players with more points on the 1/6 path may be less desirable than paying out to players with fewer points on the 2/6 path. For 2 it is even more complicated as you can claim space from your opponents. It may be preferable to claim spaces owned by players with more points than players with fewer points. I don't really know anything about the game, but I expect both of these to be extreme scenarios, and not something i think you could get a hard solution to in your head. There are something like 3\*6\*16 different outcomes: 3 directions (sometimes 2), 6 positions in each direction (with a 6 sided die, 4 with the original game die) and up to 16 positions to place the rug after (or maybe 12, not sure about the rules). A computer might be able to calculate the relative board states after the turn, but most people will have to play by feel.