And Behind Door No. 1, a Fatal Flaw

[Tom Storer]

  JSngry said:

Well, if she played the same strategy every time, yeah, she'd break 2/3-1/3. but if she just did her thing and went with her hunches in spite of the "smart choice" strategy, I bet she'd win more than 2/3-1/3, which again, is a matter of successfully knowing/feeling/guessing when to stay and when to switch, which has nothing to do with the always equal odds for each choice on every game.

In a case like this Monty Hall game, what, besides the odds, could give you an advantage in choosing when to stay and when to switch? There isn't a way to successfully know, feel or guess when to stay and when to switch, unless you find further information such as a goat fart. If your mother-in-law is perceptive enough to pick up on clues, such as goat farts, Monty's eye movements, tire tracks in the dust leading to a particular door, etc., then yes, she can have better odds. Otherwise, you're talking about the supernatural, in which case why care about the odds at all?

[JSngry]

I don't believe in the supernatural. Simple as that.

I do, however, allow for the possibility that there are levels of "natural" that we have yet to discover. History/evolution would support this, no?

Or do you think that we've discovered/uncovered all there is to know?

Now as far as my mother-in-law goes, I believe that she is perceptive enough to pick up on those "other clues", but quite possibly/most likely subconsciously. That's why she's hard to beat at damn near any game involving anything even remotely involving "bluffing" or "calling dares". That's in no way supernatural, but it is a quality I've noticed that some people possess in greater quantity that others.

Now, my question from the beginning has been - is there a way to better develop those "gifts" of perception?

[Tom Storer]

  JSngry said:

I do, however, allow for the possibility that there are levels of "natural" that we have yet to discover. History/evolution would support this, no?

Or do you think that we've discovered/uncovered all there is to know?

Not at all, but I don't think that the fact that some people's hunches seem to come off more than some other people's hunches is a reason to think that existing logical explanations don't cover it.

  Quote

Now, my question from the beginning has been - is there a way to better develop those "gifts" of perception?

So that's what your question has been from the beginning.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I had a friend, now regrettably deceased, who on the Monty Hall show would have asked to switch to the door Monty opened. Would this have been allowed? Did it ever happen?

He kept goats. Sold the meat in the office. Delicious and useful when entertaining our Kenyan friends.

MG

[Tom Storer]

Now there's a contestant who should stay, not switch.

[JSngry]

  Tom Storer said:

  Quote

Now, my question from the beginning has been - is there a way to better develop those "gifts" of perception?

So that's what your question has been from the beginning.

Poorly presented as it has been (not the least reason of which being the constant diversion of already feeble mental resources to the swatting of the gnats who insisted that I don't grasp basic math...), that has been the gist of it, yes.

There've been some corollaries from that as well, but since it's taken this long just to get this far...