Monday, January 26, 2009

Dr. Chako Hits A Good Ball (+follow up math question!)

Fresh off my Issaquah home game break evenness, I completely forgot to mention that Dr. Chako and I played racquetball Saturday afternoon. This marks the first non poker-related interaction with a Seattle area poker blogger, and it was good times. Before I get into the racquetball, I'd like to recap the math question from last post...

Dad backed me for the Issaquah home game for $20, and we agreed that he would get 50% of my profit. Schaubs answered $30, but said there was no mention of the buy-in, and Dr. Chako gave a bit more reasoning behind his answer, and hit the nail on the head with an "it depends" answer. I've asked a dozen people over the past 48 hours how much I should owe my dad if we agreed to 50% of my profit, and I have gotten the following answers: $30, $20, $10 and $0.

The follow up question is can you make a logical answer for each of their answers? All of their answers seem justifiable to me, and there are multiple answers I received with completely different logic, but ending up at the same dollar amount.

On to racquetball...

The doc plays in a weekly tournament at his gym and I'm pretty sure he runs all those guys around the court, too, so I don't feel too bad about getting shellacked. Doc won the first three or four games, then I think he picked up on the fact that I wasn't leaving the rectangular cube of death until I got a victory. He had places to be, people to do, so he toned his game down a few notches in our last game and let me squeak out a 16-14 victory.

I picked up a lot of tips from the good doctor, which I will put to good use against Tyler and the r-ball crew in Seattle. Offensive ceiling shots, service aces, back wall caroms--they won't know what hit them!

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

Blogger DrChako said...

Any time you want I rematch, I'm ready. FWIW - I never let anyone win. No excuses - you beat me fair and square.

As for the math question, the correct answer is which ever makes your Dad happy. Otherwise, you may lose your backer.

-DrC

11:23 PM  
Blogger The Wife said...

Lol . . . you're right, he never lets anyone win. What you've probably figured out is that after 3 or 4 games . . . you suddenly got the "25" advantage over "40+"

8:05 AM  
Blogger Astin said...

B=buy-in
C=cost
R=revenue (winnings)
P=profit

C=B*2=$40
R=$40
P=C-R=$40-$40 = $0
0.5P=$0

C=B*2-$20=$20
R=$40
P=$40-$20=$20
0.5P=$10

C=B-$20=$0
R=$40
P=$40-$0
0.5P=$20

C=-$20
R=$40
P=$40--$20=$60
0.5P=$30

It all depends how you define your cost. The revenue is $40 no matter how you cut it.

1.- Cost = $40 because you bought in for $20 twice.

2.- Cost = $20 because the first buy-in was your dad's money, and the second buy-in was yours.

3.- Cost = $0 because your first buy-in was your dad's, and the second buy-in was from your winnings, so cost you no additional money.

4.- Cost = $-20 because you're counting your dad's money as revenue, so you're already ahead of the game. Someone paid you to play. The second buy-in was off the winnings.

In the end, you left with $20 in your pocket, the same amount you walked in with. Since your agreement was for your total profit and NOT the profit + buy-in, you owe him $0. Best case is you owe him $10 if you don't consider the initial $20 as your own money.

Unless you're nice, then $20, but then it's just a loan, not a backing arragement.

1:18 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home