As I said, even if you're right, every single person there would've been affected by it then...they are all in the same position of having won a prize in the previous draw. Every single on of them.

Are you trolling? You keep reiterating what everyone is telling you but then going off in the opposite direction to prove something else. Yes, everyone had a 1/35 chance at the big prize. You happy? I've read that about 10 times in this thread and it's like you skip over that part of the post every time or something. The difference is the people are talking about the probability of both events happening.

Anytime there's a math problem in the OP you can bet miscers will argue about it for pages...

lol, brb explaining it to you for the 7th time. Brb, nahIm thinking she never put his name on the glass, she just hid it somewhere on her body. Nobody suspects anything though, nobody is mad. Everyone is like "lol pretty crazy". Everyone on my company is on dat cookiefiend time lol, no wonder why we are having such a bad year

This thread makes my brain hurt

Yeah, everyone had the same chances, nobody is discussing that lol. The chances of the slut's boyfriend getting both tvs in a fair draw is 1/1225, the chances of lucy from accounting winning both tvs is also 1/1225. Not sure why you keep bringing that up.



You are confused because you are only thinking about the chances of winning the big tv. Yeah thats 1/35. But we are discussing the chances of winning BOTH TVs.


See, if you do a coin toss, what are the chances of getting heads? 1/2
If you do two coin tosses, what are the chances of both of them being head? (1/2) * (1/2) = (1/4)

If you do...



you know what fuk it. You are not changing your mind, women like you would rather die than admit they are wrong lol.

damn who would've thought this gmiscer rip off thread could turn 5 stars

I understand what you are saying, but everyone in this situation has already won a prize.

In the first draw 35 prizes were drawn, with each person being knocked out for that round once they got a prize, so that every single person got one.

So for your analogy to be correct you'd have to shoot 35 times the first time, hitting someone every time, the people who've already been shot moving out of the way, until everyone has been shot once.

Then bring them all back in for the second go round, but only shoot one bullet, as they only Drew one name on the second draw. Whichever chiposter you hit is going to be one that you have already shot, because you've shot everyone.

Just the same as whichever name was pulled out of the glass in the second drawer was going to be someone who had already won, because they have all already won.

I will concede it would feel lucky to get both good prizes, but the first prize being a tv doesn't change the odds anymore than if the first prize was a deck of cards, either way they'd all already won a prize draw.

I'm not saying that she definitely didn't cheat btw, just that it's not that impossible to happen.I'm sorry if I'm being frustrating.

I understand that we are talking about the odds of him winning both TV's. But the odds of winning the tv as your first prize and then winning the big TV draw are the same as winning any other prize in the small draw and then winning the big TV draw.

If that's not the case then please explain why because that's what I seem to be getting stuck on.

I could see things being different if there wasn't a guaranteed prize for everyone in the first round, but there was, so everyone then had the same chance of winning for a second time, so there was one guaranteed winner in the second draw, who is definitely also going to be a winner in the first draw.

Anyway, it's too early for this chit lmao.

I don't believe you've ever taken a probability course because your logic is the same logic a lot of new students use when they begin the course. Your overcomplicating a trivial problem and you haven't provided an alternate solution. The other miscer provided a link that shows why the solution is (1/35)^2

Why do companies do raffles so that there is one winner and everyone else is a loser?

Just give everyone a bonus, or spend that money on a company trip.

Lmao this thread delivers

No, not impossible. Just a 1/1225 chance.




Again, you are wrong. It bugs me that you are just not gonna change your mind because fuk it. If you arent willing to admit you are wrong then you wont see the light srs. I could explain it to you to the best my abilities but first i need you to change your mindset. Cant convince you of the sky being blue if you are colorblind nomsayin?

I realize this, but they were talking about two separate things. She was saying the probability of getting the big tv doesn't decrease just because you already won the small tv as these are independent events. In other words, if you ALREADY won the small tv, you don't have a 1/1225 chance of winning the big tv during the second drawing, it's still 1/35. It's 1/1225 chance to win both, however, before any drawings are made, sure.

See edit above. Took me to long to type so a bunch of people has posted by the time it went through lol

Ok. Well I'm not being a jackass about this, so I will break down what you just said. I think we are talking about two different things.

The 1/35 for winning the first TV is the starting chance (before anything is drawn) that someone will win it. The subsequent draws don't really matter for the point of this discussion. Yes, if you drew 20 different crappy prizes, the last 15 people would be excited that their chance at a small TV is improving with each draw. Yes, the chances of someone getting the small TV are improved after each subsequent draw, because there are less names in the hat. Just like their chances of getting shot improve if I had 35 bullets, because there are less people in the circle.None of that matters, because they all had the same starting probability of 1/35

We are not discussing the chances ofeveryone winning a prize(getting shot), and then one person winning the big prize (getting shot again). We are discussing one person winning the small tv, and that same person winning a big tv.


So to stay consistent with my story, I now have 35 bullets loaded for the first round, and 1 bullet for the second round. One of the bullets loaded in the first round has the word "*******" inscribed on it, so it can find the right recipient.

The chance of getting hit by the first "special" bullet (see: small TV) is 1/35. The chance of getting a regular bullet is 34/35
The chance of getting hit by the second bullet (see: big TV) with everyone back in the circle, is 1/35

The chance of getting hit by both the "*******" bullet and also being unfortunate enough to get shot a second time is 1/1225

This is correct but I believed that she argued that winning both before drawings is not (1/1225), which Is wrong because it is 1/1225

Event 1= 1/35
Event 2 = 1/35

1/35= 1/35

Event 1&2 = 1/1225

Yeah, well I misunderstood what she was arguing then.So much for reading comprehension...I failed, and so did you.

You're right I haven't.

But like I said, I think the problem I have in this particular scenario is whoever won the second drawn guaranteed to have won a prize already, just by the nature of the way the draw was run.

That the first prize won by the winner was the tv is no more unlikely then the first prize being won by the winner of the big prize is any of the other 34 prizes.

They all had the same odds to win twice, because it was guaranteed by the nature of the draw that whoever won it would be their second prize.

I think this is where I am getting stuck.

I understand if there were two draws out of 35 people where there was only one winner in each, it would be very lucky for one person to win both, 1/1225, but I'm this case things are a little different.

Yeah, if only I realized you were trying to say the probability of event #2 was 1/35 and not 1/1225

I think we are getting more on the same page now, right when I don't have the time to be making any more long posts on my phone lol. Will reply to this later in the day though. Thanks for taking the time to discuss/try to clear this up even though I'm having trouble wording what I mean :/

Edit: negged right when I admit I'm starting to get somewhere lmao (not by this person just related to this post)

I believe you're talking about conditional probability of independent events. Yes the probability of winning big tv GIVEN he won small t.v is (1/35), but that's because winning small tv is independent of winning big tv. The OP is simply talking about winning both tv BEFORE any draw has been made, which is (1/35)^2

Below is the answer by prodigy and lol at shadow neggs

Yes, whoever won the draw drawwas guaranteedto have won a prize already.

35 people, 35 prizes. 35/35 chance you win something
35 people, 34 chit prizes. 34/35 chance you win a Post-It note pad
35 people, 1 small TV. 1/35 chance you win the small TVAlso correct. The first prize won or the last prize won does not matter, per the math above. The chance of winning the small TV is 1/35, regardless of when it was drawn.

Yes, the chance of getting the TV within the first draw changes depending on when it was drawn, but it doesn't change the overrall chance...

1 tv/35 prizes (first draw)- 2.85% chance you get it, if you are the first name drawn, 97.15% chance you don't

1 tv/20 prizes (fifteenth draw)- 5% chance you get it, if you are the fifteenth name drawn, 95% chance you don't

1 tv/10 prizes (25th draw)- 10% chance you get it, if you are the 25th name drawn, 90% chance you don't

1 tv/5 prizes left (30th draw)- 20% chance you get it, if you are the 30th name drawn, 80% chance you don't

1 tv/2 prizes left (34/35th draw) 50% chance you get the TV, 50% chance you don't (such is life for Timothy)

None of the above affects the chance that winning the small TV is 1/35 for everyone in the roomEach one of them had the same shot at the TV being drawn first, and them winning it. Or the TV being drawn last, and them winning it. Or it being drawn halfway through, and them winning it (1 tv/35 prizes)

Again, to stay consistent with my narrative of eliminating chitposters, it doesn't matter where in the 35 bullets the one "*******" bullet is loaded. Everyone still has the same overall chance of getting hit by it, regardless if it is fired first or last.
Yes, they all had the same odds to win twice.

Everyone had a 35/35 chance to win in the first draw.
34/35 of them would win chit prizes
1/35 would win the small TV

Then the second draw starts.Yes, everyone has already won a prize, but only one person won the TV
34/35 of them won chit prizes, but want a big TV
1/35 of them won a small TV, and wants a big TV

The chance of anyone of the people there getting a big TV is reset to 1/35. No question there.

There is a 34/35 chance that someone who hasn't won a TV already (chit prizers) will win a TV (97.15% chance)
There is a 1/35 chance that someone who already won a TV, will win another TV (2.85% chance)

Now, the odds of someone winning a prize (not the small TV) is 97.15%.

The chance of someone winning a prize (not the small TV)and alsowinning the big TV (2.85% chance) is 34/1225.

Each of the 34 people have a 2.77% chance of winning the big TV.

When you combine all of the 34 people's chances (because none of them won the small TV) it comes to 94.35% of a chit-prizer winning the big TV. (because we are excluding the guy who already won the small TV)

Having already beaten the odds the first time, and winning the small TV (2.85% chance), he would have to follow that upand alsowin the big TV (2.85% chance) This is where the 1/1225 comes from (.08% chance in total of winning both)
See above explanation.



Also, expecting reps on sight from all the mathmaticians ITT. Lol. Lazy and didn't want to provide the proof.

I've done some calculations of my own OP and I have deduced that she indeed rig the contest to allow said ******* to win. I'll explain how.

If there are 35 people in the pot, there is literally zero chance of you not winning. Of that 1% chance, you have to divide the total number of participants, by the number of tickets in the pot, subtracted by the overall circumference of the room, giving you the least possible variation.....350.

Of that 350, we understand that the root number is 16, added to the remaining 75 of (x6 + 5y), giving us 34. When we look at that 34, we must remember that our 1% chance of winning increases dramatically to 62.3%, giving each participant a hefty chance to collect the prize. It is in this, we must be mindful that if our tickets were actually placed in the pot, we do have a chance, but if his name and number had been placed on several other tickets and placed in the pot, his odds increases 10 fold. When the pot was spun, almost 22 knots, or, in Misc terms, hundreds of miles per hour, it is hard to actually see the names on the tickets and verify if your actual ticket was indeed included in the drawing. So, when the pot stops and the hand placed in the bin, it will be easy to watch the ticket drawn for the person you want to win.


Thank you.......

I love you all.

Reading this it seems like we really are on the same page. which means I'm doing an extremely poor job of explaining myself :/
There's probably some bits I'm still not getting, but a lot of what you said there I have no question about and understood in the first place.

But yeah proper reply coming in an hour or two when I have more time for a proper thought through post and to make sure I'm not misreading anything in this post so people can stop going in circles with me...

I swear I'm not trying to go full staberella 200% V2 right now lmao

So 2006 was peak human intelligence. It's all down hill from here.

I am utterly dumbfounded as to how you are not understanding this. The fact that this guy took the time out of his day to write that huge post is also dumbfounding, but good god, please take a math class.

Cookie, for the love of god just spend $900 and take a stats class at your local community college.

or just buy this

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/p/bus...lickid=3x20436

Ok I have time to make a proper post now. Firstly, ho lee fuk, I understand where we are not getting eachother now (and yes you could say it is possibly to do with me being an idiot lmao) but I never would've if it was just people quoting the same equation at me instead of you typing this out (and also your post before this but not going to bother quoting both apart since they say the same thing in a different way). So, thanks, will rep in a minute.

I'll try to explain where I was coming from but it will be in my usual roundabout way so please bear with me lmao.

Firstly, I know that before the draw even starts everyone has a 1/35 chance at the small tv. Mentioning that it could be a higher chance (or 0 for the people already knocked out) was meaning directly before the small tv draw, not from before all of the draws. It was more of a side note, which is why I only mentioned it once (apart from questioning why it was so stupid to say, since I hadn't picked up on the fact they apparently thought I meant before all the draws), and used a 1/35 chance for the rest of the conversation.

The problem we have is that you are saying (and everyone else I guess) that there is a 1/35 chance to win the small tv, and a 34/35 chance to win another prize which is true, but to me it only makes sense to group the other prizes together like that is if the other prizes are all the same thing.

Which I think is where we have come apart. You seem to be assuming that all the other prizes are the same (to use your example, post-it notes, or bullets that are all the same apart from the ******* one lmao), and if you are right in assuming that then I agree that you only have a 1/35 chance of winning the small tv, and a 34/35 chance of winning the post-it notes. Which of course means you only have a small chance of winning both tvs (1/1225) and a much higher chance of winning post-it notes and the big tv, because there are 34 people in the draw to win the tv who have previously won post-it notes and only one who has previously won a tv.

My problem is, I was assuming that all of the other small prizes were different. For example 1. deck of cards, 2. post-it notes 3. a tie and so on. Which hopefully if I am explaining it right, you will see that there is only one person with each prize in the draw for the big tv, making the odds equal to win the small tv/big tv combo as another individual prize/big tv combo. Which brings us back to me saying 1/35 since if everyone has equal chance and there's 35 people then that's just the way it goes. Similarly if there was some things that cropped up twice in the prize draw, for example a deck of cards, yes you would have more chance of winning the deck of cards/big tv combo, than winning a small tv/big tv combo, post-it/big tv combo or anything else, but I was assuming each prize cropped up once and so was individual and equal (with the number of each prize being offered, not value wise, obviously).

So if you assumed rightly that all the other prizes were the same, and I assumed wrongly that every single prize was different, then I 100% agree that I was wrong to say the odds are equal, and it is 100% the case that your odds of winning the small tv/big tv combo were way low.

Not sure if I missed that he said all the other prizes were the same due to it being 6amish when i started posting lol, or if it wasn't mentioned and I assumed something different to everyone else here.

Thank you, and sorry everyone for taking so long to figure it out, but just quoting the same equation at me was not helping because I was assuming that all the prizes were different things