Thread: lets see how smart miscers are
05-15-2018, 06:22 PM
-
#31
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By ChristianMR⏩
This logic indeed would determine anupper boundfor the minimum. The minimum number of races can still be less than 11 though.Das it.
But my actual best guess is 11. Each race of five allows you to drop 2 horses from the running (the final two horses in each race cannot possibly be the fastest 3). You drop 20 horses with the first 10 races. The last race of 5 determines the three winners.
But my actual best guess is 11. Each race of five allows you to drop 2 horses from the running (the final two horses in each race cannot possibly be the fastest 3). You drop 20 horses with the first 10 races. The last race of 5 determines the three winners.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
05-15-2018, 06:22 PM
-
#32
- MajorTendonitis
- Join Date: Jan 2016
- Location: East Kootenays BC
- Age: 65
- Height: 5'8"
- Weight: 241 lbs
- Posts: 42,042
- Subscribers: 8
- Rep Power: 718658
-
-
I’m going with 6 races
Back with my Fam
05-15-2018, 06:22 PM
-
#33
- SuperMariBro
- Banned
-
- SuperMariBro
- Banned
- Join Date: Sep 2015
- Posts: 1,960
- Rep Power: 0
-
-
Originally Posted By scooterbrah⏩
How would you know that??? You have no stopwatchits not that simple. as others have pointed out, what if the 3 fastest ended up in the same Rd 1 heat?
05-15-2018, 06:25 PM
-
#34
- LuNaTiC1988
- Registered User
-
- LuNaTiC1988
- Registered User
- Join Date: Dec 2006
- Age: 39
- Posts: 1,753
- Rep Power: 13909
-
-
Originally Posted By All-Star11⏩
The 3 fastest horses OUT OF 25. That IS top 3 in no particular order. its just a pitayou're not looking for the top 3...
if the fastest was in that heat, then he moves on. doesnt matter if the 2nd or 3rd over all was eliminates in round 1
if the fastest was in that heat, then he moves on. doesnt matter if the 2nd or 3rd over all was eliminates in round 1
Originally Posted By SuperMariBro⏩
You wouldn't.. the point is to find out.. and be right.How would you know that??? You have no stopwatch
05-15-2018, 06:30 PM
-
#35
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By SuperMariBro⏩
It's not about whether you know it or not, it's just a possible scenario. What if the top 3 overall just happened to all be in the first heat? Then the above process would not lead to them being selected as top 3 overall. Namely, the 2nd best overall could not end up in the top 3, as it wouldn't be in the final race.How would you know that??? You have no stopwatch
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
05-15-2018, 06:30 PM
-
#36
- Mortar34
- Unregistered
-
- Mortar34
- Unregistered
- Join Date: Aug 2016
- Location: United States
- Posts: 4,843
- Rep Power: 82485
-
-
Trick question.
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time, it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it wouldn't necessarily be the “fastest.”
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time, it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it wouldn't necessarily be the “fastest.”
"Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid."
"I don't know how I'm going to win, I just know I'm not going to lose."
MFC
05-15-2018, 06:31 PM
-
#37
- metallicide
- Cuttin it up Brah
-
- metallicide
- Cuttin it up Brah
- Join Date: Oct 2007
- Age: 39
- Posts: 8,939
- Rep Power: 40619
-
-
Originally Posted By Mortar34⏩
This, you'd have to have hundreds of races over long periods of time and see whos statistically the fastest.Trick question.
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it certainly wouldn’t be the “fastest.”
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it certainly wouldn’t be the “fastest.”
**Infantry Combat Vet** OEF 08-09
*Cisco Networking Nerd*
**Patriots Crew**
**Tom Brady is a god**
05-15-2018, 06:31 PM
-
#38
- Psychotropic
- Registered User
-
- Psychotropic
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2012
- Location: Australia
- Posts: 4,238
- Rep Power: 9667
-
-
Originally Posted By nothingshocking⏩
you can't eliminate the 3rd horse from the 2nd raceSo, I would have 5 horses run.
I would take the winner, and have him race again with 4 other horses.
I would take the 1st and second and have them race against 3 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
then all 20 horses have raced except the first 4 that lost, so they race again in case they were the 2 and 3...
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
so 9
I would take the winner, and have him race again with 4 other horses.
I would take the 1st and second and have them race against 3 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
then all 20 horses have raced except the first 4 that lost, so they race again in case they were the 2 and 3...
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
I would take the top 3 and race them against 2 other horses.
so 9
and there are 25 horses not 20
05-15-2018, 06:33 PM
-
#39
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
Originally Posted By Mortar34⏩
A valid point, that's why most phrasings of this problem state the horses are actually mechanical objects- think wind up children's toys- that have a set velocity that doesn't change.Trick question.
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time, it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it wouldn't necessarily be the “fastest.”
If you don’t use a stopwatch you aren’t finding the “fastest,” you’re just discovering who won the most races. “Fastest” denotes time. Without time, it’s only a unilateral accomplishment.
If the answer was 6, 11, 12, etc..the stupid beasts could be crawling by the last race and you’d still crown a winner, but it wouldn't necessarily be the “fastest.”
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
05-15-2018, 06:34 PM
-
#40
- nothingshocking
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Location: Uranus, Gambia
- Posts: 36,399
- Subscribers: 5
- Rep Power: 951993
-
-
Originally Posted By Psychotropic⏩
yeah you're rightyou can't eliminate the 3rd horse from the 2nd race
and there are 25 horses not 20
and there are 25 horses not 20
05-15-2018, 06:36 PM
-
#41
- Mortar34
- Unregistered
-
- Mortar34
- Unregistered
- Join Date: Aug 2016
- Location: United States
- Posts: 4,843
- Rep Power: 82485
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Right. You have to eliminate the variables if not using time as the UoM.A valid point, that's why most phrasings of this problem state the horses are actually mechanical objects- think wind up children's toys- that have a set velocity that doesn't change.
"Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid."
"I don't know how I'm going to win, I just know I'm not going to lose."
MFC
05-15-2018, 06:38 PM
-
#42
- YIAMSOMEBODY
- Kobe The GOATBE
-
- YIAMSOMEBODY
- Kobe The GOATBE
- Join Date: Apr 2009
- Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, United States
- Posts: 64,733
- Rep Power: 179850
-
-
If they all run at a speed.of 200mph, why not keep them all????
Profit?
Profit?
"ERMUHGAWD Crew"
"ERMUHGAW LOL...."
"Oh you, ERMUHGAWD!"
05-15-2018, 06:39 PM
-
#43
- metallicide
- Cuttin it up Brah
-
- metallicide
- Cuttin it up Brah
- Join Date: Oct 2007
- Age: 39
- Posts: 8,939
- Rep Power: 40619
-
-
You could just go ahead and eliminate the white horses, clearly the black horses will be faster and more athletic, that narrows it down a bit.
**Infantry Combat Vet** OEF 08-09
*Cisco Networking Nerd*
**Patriots Crew**
**Tom Brady is a god**
05-15-2018, 06:42 PM
-
#44
- BigTimeOperator
- Join Date: Jul 2017
- Posts: 13,373
- Subscribers: 1
- Rep Power: 113717
-
-
I'm guessing you take the top 3 in each race, then eventually race them against each other.
05-15-2018, 06:44 PM
-
#45
05-15-2018, 06:46 PM
-
#46
05-15-2018, 06:54 PM
-
#47
05-15-2018, 06:54 PM
-
#48
- numberguy12
- Registered User
-
- numberguy12
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2017
- Posts: 6,938
- Rep Power: 51915
-
-
The minimum number of races required, X, has to be between 6 and 11.
-5 is not sufficient, because with 5 races we can race every horse exactly once, in the opening 5 heats. At most we are left with 5 winners, with no way to determine which of those 5 winners are the top 3. Thus X > 5.
- 11 racesissufficient, as was reasoned in the post above by ChristianMR. If you can do it in 11 races then 12 as a minimum number of races required wouldn't make sense. Thus X<12
So 6<=X<=11. I won't comment on the solution, because I'm familiar with the problem
-5 is not sufficient, because with 5 races we can race every horse exactly once, in the opening 5 heats. At most we are left with 5 winners, with no way to determine which of those 5 winners are the top 3. Thus X > 5.
- 11 racesissufficient, as was reasoned in the post above by ChristianMR. If you can do it in 11 races then 12 as a minimum number of races required wouldn't make sense. Thus X<12
So 6<=X<=11. I won't comment on the solution, because I'm familiar with the problem
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑
♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮
Nullius in verba
05-15-2018, 07:00 PM
-
#49
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
-
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
- Join Date: Jan 2009
- Posts: 1,039
- Rep Power: 2764
-
-
It's 6, you don't have a stopwatch but you obviously have photo finishes, and we're assuming that there's absolute consistency with the races right?
Race all horses, that's 5 races.
Race all the winners in one final race.
Then compare the distances between the horses on the photos.
Race all horses, that's 5 races.
Race all the winners in one final race.
Then compare the distances between the horses on the photos.
05-15-2018, 07:06 PM
-
#50
- DrunkenMoron
- Don't Rattle My Cage
-
- DrunkenMoron
- Don't Rattle My Cage
- Join Date: Apr 2012
- Posts: 1,834
- Rep Power: 20276
-
-
Originally Posted By Beelze⏩
That theory is incorrect. ( so me thinks )It's 6, you don't have a stopwatch but you obviously have photo finishes, and we're assuming that there's absolute consistency with the races right?
Race all horses, that's 5 races.
Race all the winners in one final race.
Then compare the distances between the horses on the photos.
Race all horses, that's 5 races.
Race all the winners in one final race.
Then compare the distances between the horses on the photos.
What if say the first group of 5 horses had 2 of the fasted horses but you chose to eliminate 4 as '1' horse was the victor.. However the horse that placed second in that group was faster than the 20 remaining horses.. Just cause it lost to one horse in that group doesn't mean he's not second fastest..
Get it ? I think I get it.. made sense to me but coming out I started getting confused. So close to neggin op for making me think.. *******
- Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum -
** Egg Crew **
05-15-2018, 07:19 PM
-
#51
- kingofturtles
- Registered User
-
- kingofturtles
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 8,206
- Rep Power: 56520
-
-
Came in to post 11. Looking for answer op
www.miscers.com
https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=177185321 ~ WoW Classic <MISCERS> guild horde thread GTFIH
320 bench press
1000lbs club at 190ish lbs
Chargers, Angels, Lakers, Canucks.
05-15-2018, 07:20 PM
-
#52
05-15-2018, 07:21 PM
-
#53
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
-
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
- Join Date: Jan 2009
- Posts: 1,039
- Rep Power: 2764
-
-
Originally Posted By DrunkenMoron⏩
That's what the photo finishes are for, you just compare the distances between the horses. As I said for this question to work you require photo finishes and consistency. You check the photo in the 6th race, every horse is going to be then measurable by the distances between them, and you have the other photo finishes from the other races to check those against, it's simple really.That theory doesn't is incorrect.
What if say the first group of 5 horses had 2 of the fasted horses but you chose to eliminate 4 as '1' horse was the victor.. However the horse that placed second in that group was faster than the 20 remaining horses.. Just cause it lost to one horse in that group doesn't mean he's not second fastest..
Get it ? I think I get it.. made sense to me but coming out I started getting confused. So close to neggin op for making me think.. *******
What if say the first group of 5 horses had 2 of the fasted horses but you chose to eliminate 4 as '1' horse was the victor.. However the horse that placed second in that group was faster than the 20 remaining horses.. Just cause it lost to one horse in that group doesn't mean he's not second fastest..
Get it ? I think I get it.. made sense to me but coming out I started getting confused. So close to neggin op for making me think.. *******
05-15-2018, 07:22 PM
-
#54
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
-
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
- Join Date: Sep 2016
- Posts: 9,889
- Rep Power: 146195
-
-
Seven races. Can't be bothered to type the whole thing out but...
You run five horses for five races (5 races)
You take the top five horses and run them for a final race (1 race)
There are still five more horses you need to race... 2nd/3rd place from the "finals" race... and the 2nd/3rd place from whichever heat the overall(absolute) winner won during the first set of five races, and most importantly... the 2nd place winner in whichever heat the 2nd place horse from the "finals" race ran in.
7 races.
EDIT: Lmao @ people talking about photo finishes and all kinds of other gimmicks. It's a logic puzzle... of course you could just use some kind of technology as a work around, but that would defeat the whole point of the thread.
You run five horses for five races (5 races)
You take the top five horses and run them for a final race (1 race)
There are still five more horses you need to race... 2nd/3rd place from the "finals" race... and the 2nd/3rd place from whichever heat the overall(absolute) winner won during the first set of five races, and most importantly... the 2nd place winner in whichever heat the 2nd place horse from the "finals" race ran in.
7 races.
EDIT: Lmao @ people talking about photo finishes and all kinds of other gimmicks. It's a logic puzzle... of course you could just use some kind of technology as a work around, but that would defeat the whole point of the thread.
MISC Blood Drive (MOD REPS): https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=175220881
Start: B-175/S-185/D-185/OHP-95
Current:B-335/S-365/D-365/OHP-215
Goals: B-365/S-405/D-495/OHP-225
05-15-2018, 07:31 PM
-
#55
- ChristianMR
- domo arigato
-
- ChristianMR
- domo arigato
- Join Date: Nov 2015
- Posts: 8,187
- Rep Power: 95385
-
-
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Yep, it was a quick guess. I knew that it could be done in 11, but I wasn't certain whether it can be done in fewer (I assume it probably can, particularly with you chiming in).This logic indeed would determine anupper boundfor the minimum. The minimum number of races can still be less than 11 though.
I'll take it one step further -- still setting the upper bound rather than guaranteeing the minimum.
-Eliminate 10 in the first round of 5 races, each with unique horses. (5 races)
-In the next race, race all of the third place horses from the prior races. It's only possible for one of these horses to be in the top 3 (in the scenario where the top 3 are all in the same heat). Eliminate 4 horses. (1 race).
-In the next race, race all of horses that finished second in the first round of races. Only one of these horses can be in the top 3 (either the top 3 are in the same heat, or 2 of the top 3 are in one heat, and the remaining one from another heat). Eliminate 4 horses. (1 race).
-You've now eliminated 18 horses and have 7 remaining.
-You can definitely finish this in 2 more races (by the eliminate 2 principle), but I think you might be able to finish in one race.
Thus, upper bound is 9, and lower bound is still 6.
Edit: Derp, answered above. Oh well. That was still fun.
Take it easy Christian
05-15-2018, 07:33 PM
-
#56
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
-
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
- Join Date: Jan 2009
- Posts: 1,039
- Rep Power: 2764
-
-
Originally Posted By PeaceWithin⏩
Where in the OP does it say this is specifically an arithmetic puzzle? It says you don't have a stop watch that's all, now you're telling me that if you was in this situation it wouldn't occur to you that there's a different way that doesn't require as much hassle? Then you're fukkin dumb.Seven races. Can't be bothered to type the whole thing out but...
You run five horses for five races (5 races)
You take the top five horses and run them for a final race (1 race)
There are still five more horses you need to race... 2nd/3rd place from the "finals" race... and the 2nd/3rd place from whichever heat the overall(absolute) winner won during the first set of five races, and most importantly... the 2nd place winner in whichever heat the 2nd place horse from the "finals" race ran in.
7 races.
EDIT: Lmao @ people talking about photo finishes and all kinds of other gimmicks. It's a logic puzzle... of course you could just use some kind of technology as a work around, but that would defeat the whole point of the thread.
You run five horses for five races (5 races)
You take the top five horses and run them for a final race (1 race)
There are still five more horses you need to race... 2nd/3rd place from the "finals" race... and the 2nd/3rd place from whichever heat the overall(absolute) winner won during the first set of five races, and most importantly... the 2nd place winner in whichever heat the 2nd place horse from the "finals" race ran in.
7 races.
EDIT: Lmao @ people talking about photo finishes and all kinds of other gimmicks. It's a logic puzzle... of course you could just use some kind of technology as a work around, but that would defeat the whole point of the thread.
05-15-2018, 07:41 PM
-
#57
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
-
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
- Join Date: Sep 2016
- Posts: 9,889
- Rep Power: 146195
-
-
Originally Posted By Beelze⏩
The OP doesn't say it's an arithmetic puzzle, but it gives you the assumption that you will be able to tell who the winner(s) of each heat was. The whole point of saying "no stopwatch" was just so you can't run 5 straight races and then compare times...Where in the OP does it say this is specifically an arithmetic puzzle? It says you don't have a stop watch that's all, now you're telling me that if you was in this situation it wouldn't occur to you that there's a different way that doesn't require as much hassle? Then you're fukkin dumb.
I'm still baffled how comparing photo finishes of different races would help you determine who is (absolutely) the fastest without also having a stopwatch to determine how fast the heat was. Just a finish of a horse at the finish line does nothing...
"As I saidfor this question to work you require photo finishes and consistency. You check the photo in the 6th race, every horse is going to be then measurable by the distances between them, and you have the other photo finishes from the other races to check those against, it's simple really."
So... every race needs to finish in the same amount of time? Seems like you're adding a lot of additional parameters to the OP.
MISC Blood Drive (MOD REPS): https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=175220881
Start: B-175/S-185/D-185/OHP-95
Current:B-335/S-365/D-365/OHP-215
Goals: B-365/S-405/D-495/OHP-225
05-15-2018, 07:45 PM
-
#58
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
-
- Beelze
- The greatest trick.
- Join Date: Jan 2009
- Posts: 1,039
- Rep Power: 2764
-
-
Originally Posted By PeaceWithin⏩
If you take out consistency what are you left with, random outcomes? How would that allow for any solution?The OP doesn't say it's an arithmetic puzzle, but it gives you the assumption that you will be able to tell who the winner(s) of each heat was. The whole point of saying "no stopwatch" was just so you can't run 5 straight races and then compare times...
I'm still baffled how comparing photo finishes of different races would help you determine who is (absolutely) the fastest without also having a stopwatch to determine how fast the heat was. Just a finish of a horse at the finish line does nothing...
"As I saidfor this question to work you require photo finishes and consistency. You check the photo in the 6th race, every horse is going to be then measurable by the distances between them, and you have the other photo finishes from the other races to check those against, it's simple really."
So... every race needs to finish in the same amount of time? Seems like you're adding a lot of additional parameters to the OP.
I'm still baffled how comparing photo finishes of different races would help you determine who is (absolutely) the fastest without also having a stopwatch to determine how fast the heat was. Just a finish of a horse at the finish line does nothing...
"As I saidfor this question to work you require photo finishes and consistency. You check the photo in the 6th race, every horse is going to be then measurable by the distances between them, and you have the other photo finishes from the other races to check those against, it's simple really."
So... every race needs to finish in the same amount of time? Seems like you're adding a lot of additional parameters to the OP.
05-15-2018, 07:53 PM
-
#59
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
-
- PeaceWithin
- Future non-fatty
- Join Date: Sep 2016
- Posts: 9,889
- Rep Power: 146195
-
-
Originally Posted By Beelze⏩
Wut? The whole point of the OP is a puzzle based on ranking winners, excluding losers, and seeing how efficiently you can determine the top three without timing them.If you take out consistency what are you left with, random outcomes? How would that allow for any solution?
I guess I don't understand what you mean by consistency... Like I said earlier, the OP presupposes that you can determine who won each race. Even if you have photo finishes, comparing photo finishes from multiple different races against the semi-final race is an exercise in futility if you don't have a stopwatch to determine how fast each of those different races was...
MISC Blood Drive (MOD REPS): https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=175220881
Start: B-175/S-185/D-185/OHP-95
Current:B-335/S-365/D-365/OHP-215
Goals: B-365/S-405/D-495/OHP-225
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-

- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts