"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
message

After you know there is a goat behind door #3 and are
given a chance to guess again, there is a 50% chance the
car is behind door #1 and a 50% chance the car if behind
door #2. Change your choice or not, you have a 50%
chance of being right.

This is not correct. I explained it in a previous post.

You seriously think I didn't read your alleged explanation?
You've been known to be wrong before... ;-)

And so have you.


Because you will have initially selected the wrong door
2/3 of the time (right?) it follows that 2/3 of the time
the good prize will be behind one of the two other doors.
The host will /always/ select a door with a goat,
therefore, you should switch, because there's a 2/3
chance the other door will have the good prize.

That is sheerist ********.

It is, in fact, the correct explanation. It is simple and easily understood
(which is something of an acheivement for me).

You are ignoring the fact that the host KNOWS what is behind each door. His
choice of which door to open is not random.

Everybody has "blind spots". We carry "mental baggage" with us that keeps us
from accepting certain things that are demonstrably true. I've slowly
discarded mine over the years on occasions when I was shown the error of my
thinking.

No one is trying to pull your ******** over your eyes. Think it through
carefully, and pretty soon you'll /understand/.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
You are ignoring the fact that the host KNOWS what is behind each door.
His
choice of which door to open is not random.

Bingo! But still makes the 2/3 claim pure conjecture. Somewhere between 1/2
and 2/3 yes. They ARE known to also use reverse logic sometimes after all!

Trevor.