Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    Depends if I like the other person or not, so whether I'd mind if they stole and I got nothing.

    If I liked them, I would split.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I realise there are *******s out there who steal. So I would say I'm going to flip a coin, heads or tails, and pick the ball on the left or the right depending on the outcome of the toss. I would then tell my opponent to split (that i'd definitely share if they split afterwards), or face the pains of pure random chance.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redolent)
    If you agree to split it 50/50, and then decide not to do so because you see an opportunity to take their share without repercussions, then you are being selfish.
    No, because convincing the other person that you will split it when they know that you might not is part of the game, and they knew that when they signed up for it.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by manchesterunited15)
    No, because convincing the other person that you will split it when they know that you might not is part of the game, and they knew that when they signed up for it.
    There's really no case to be made for "steal" being a less selfish option than "share". You're not obligated to try and take your opponent's share.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I would split if I believed that the other person was about to split, and steal if I believed that they were about to steal. This way, I get to retain my honour, without risking being 'stolen' from.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Slumpy)
    IF you assume your opponent is rational, it makes no difference, you get nothing. So in that case it comes down to an emotional decision as to whether you would prefer them to get something or nothing, thus no advantage in steal.
    Are you serious? You're basing your opinion on an assumption of what the other person will do, whereas no assumption is needed to see that there is no downside to stealing. Either I get it all or none if I steal, whereas conversely I'm equally likely to get none if I split but if I do happen to win the prize is halved. There is no logical reason to split, unless you actually want the other person to win, which defeats the purpose really. You can always give them money afterwards if you want...

    The proof is in the pudding really, if we played the game right now by your logic you'd split, whereas I'd steal by my logic. I'd walk away the winner.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Are you serious? You're basing your opinion on an assumption of what the other person will do, whereas no assumption is needed to see that there is no downside to stealing. Either I get it all or none if I steal, whereas conversely I'm equally likely to get none if I split but if I do happen to win the prize is halved. There is no logical reason to split, unless you actually want the other person to win, which defeats the purpose really. You can always give them money afterwards if you want...

    The proof is in the pudding really, if we played the game right now by your logic you'd split, whereas I'd steal by my logic. I'd walk away the winner.
    Yes, but if everyone were like you you'd never win anything, whereas if everyone were like us we'd win all the time. It's called being a *******. What would you do against me. I'd say I was going to steal no matter what but split afterwards if you chose split?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Redolent)
    There's really no case to be made for "steal" being a less selfish option than "share". You're not obligated to try and take your opponent's share.
    Of course it's not less selfish to steal. It's also not less selfish to split. Neither option is selfish!!!

    It is a game, and the aim of the game is to WIN MONEY.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blutooth)
    I realise there are good players of the game out there who steal. So I would say I'm going to flip a coin, heads or tails, and pick the ball on the left or the right depending on the outcome of the toss. I would then tell my opponent to split (that i'd definitely share if they split afterwards), or face the pains of pure random chance.
    Corrected.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by manchesterunited15)
    Corrected.
    let's hope you play against some other "good players" then. In fact, everyone should be a "good player".
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blutooth)
    Yes, but if everyone were like you you'd never win anything, whereas if everyone were like us we'd win all the time. It's called being a *******. What would you do against me. I'd say I was going to steal no matter what but split afterwards if you chose split?
    None of this changes the fact that from the individuals perspective there is no benefit whatsoever in splitting. I can't possibly lose any more of the prize by stealing, but I can absolutely half my winnings by splitting. It's really quite simple, surely you can see this?

    Look at it this way, name me the scenario where I lose out by stealing within the rules of this game, where I would otherwise benefited by splitting? There is no such scenario, so it's not a difficult choice at all.

    As for your question, how original of you. Evidently you've either seen the clip of the guy who did exactly that or read one of the multiple posts about it on this thread. I'll tell you what I would have done, I'd have gone ahead and chosen steal. And you know what? I would have won, as the guy split.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    None of this changes the fact that from the individuals perspective there is no benefit whatsoever in splitting. I can't possibly lose any more of the prize by stealing, but I can absolutely half my winnings by splitting. It's really quite simple, surely you can see this?

    How original of you, evidently you've either seen the clip of the guy who did exactly that or read one of the multiple posts about it on this thread. I'll tell you what I would have done, I'd have gone ahead and chosen steal. And you know what? I would have won, as the guy split.
    Yes, but they key difference is I wouldn't have split. I don't mind punishing people who are likely to steal. And so your strategy would not pay off.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blutooth)
    Yes, but they key difference is I wouldn't have split. I don't mind punishing people who are likely to steal.
    So I'm not worse off either way. Congratulations on proving my point.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    So I'm not worse off either way. Congratulations on proving my point.
    You are worse off because I would have genuinely given half afterwards if you split, because I'm that kind of guy.

    Also there is the fact taht people can read body language to a degree, and by stealing you are possibly more likely to induce the other person to steal.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by manchesterunited15)
    Of course it's not less selfish to steal. It's also not less selfish to split. Neither option is selfish!!!

    It is a game, and the aim of the game is to WIN MONEY.
    Your chance of winning money is unaffected by your choice (50/50, ignoring human factors).

    The quantity you win is determined by your willingness to sacrifice your integrity by lying to your opponent about your intentions.

    Just because it's part of a game doesn't mean it isn't a selfish option.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    but the point is, if everyone is a "good player" then no one wins anything. So from that perspective the "good players" are indebted to those who are playing from an ethical perspective. Being a "good player" is just being a *******.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Haha love watching Golden Balls.....I would STEAL even if i trust that the my opponent is gonna Split just to make sure i don't **** up....Then if i win....after the show i'd tell my opponent that i'll share half the money with him/her
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    ^^ thats exactly how i'd play it, but id probably make my intentions known beforehand.

    There should be another move in the game called counter-steal that gets you all the money if your opponent steals but none if they don't.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mockery)
    I'd say that I'm going to split but then steal.


    I'd be lying and no one would guess it, they'd all fall for the trap and I'd get all the money :ahee:
    no no no no no, you need to announce that you're going to STEAL and then steal.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blutooth)
    You are worse off because I would have genuinely given half afterwards if you split, because I'm that kind of guy.

    Also there is the fact taht people can read body language to a degree, and by stealing you are possibly more likely to induce the other person to steal.
    Maybe, maybe not. We wouldn't know until we were actually in that situation. How often do you give large sums of money to random strangers? That's essentially what you're saying here, and frankly I don't believe you.

    Either way, that's not within the rules of the game. That's an outside agreement with no true bearing on the question at hand. The game gives two options, split or steal, and there is no reason to ever pick split. If you can't see that then you're either being argumentative for the sake of it or you lack basic cognitive ability.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.