"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Using BF in my class

Two threads in one day from me! A new record. Some of you may remember that a while back distinguished forum member Waterrockets won a pretty big race. He posted a thread about what to do with the winnings. Though we all know Waterrockets to be a standup guy, his thread inspired a question that I am using in my game theory class (I teach at a university).

The full question (with backstory and payoff table) is attached if anyone is interested. Here is the question portion (without the backstory):

The game proceeds as follows. First, nature decides whether Waterrockets’ teammates are nice (probability = n) or not nice (probability = 1-n). Then Waterrockets must decide whether or not to share his winnings. Then his teammates must decide whether or not to work for Waterrockets in the next race. Nice teammates will work for Waterrockets in the next race whether he shares or not (they value being part of a winning team and assume they would not get any good stuff without WR, so might as well win with him!); not nice teammates will not work for him if he doesn’t share (they only race hard for a reward!). In the game theory lexicon we will use, sharing his winnings is cooperating (C), not sharing is defecting (D). Teammates working for him are cooperating (C), those not working for him are defecting (D).

My students thank you, Mr. Rockets.

I always hated game theory, even though John Harsanyi was an acquaintance of mine.

I love hating game theory.

That's pretty funny. Do students ever ask WTF is a waterrockets?

I never had any gaming courses in my computer science program, so I don't hate it :)

I teach it & I hate it! Ok, not really. Doing game theory is sort of like doing intervals for me. Excruciating and enjoyable all at the same time.

And WR -- the students are too busy trying to find the equilibrium(s) to worry about what a waterrocket is. They are annoyed by the bike examples, but not nearly as annoyed as they are at the tennis examples used in their textbook.

(Ah, subgame perfect equilibrium and 2 Nash equilibrium if I recall correctly.)

Good character-naming strategy! I tend to use family members, friends or current-event characters; now, wow, a whole forum of names as fodder for problem sets and exams. :thumb:

"Scuze me sir, what is 'water-rocket'?"

Next up: the Byzantine Generals problem modeled by guys in the break.

^^ Above my paygrade and outside the realm of most of what I do. Thank goodness. Just read a quick paper applying the BGP to information technology systems. Fascinating stuff.

Next up: applying the variable of Waterrockets NOT having any teammates in the race due to promoter driven rule changes. If WR cannot race with his strongest teammates, will WR's ability to race with a broken collarbone in the 3's produce sufficient incentive for his teammates to downgrade in Category, provided he shares his prime winnings, noting that the team is split 60/40 on their like/dislike of raspberry Gu....

Ahhh. Ya lost me.

I'm racing with rage in 2009. It'll be fun.

Copperas is on my birthday in January :thumb:

Waterrockets payoffs are defined as W (winnings) + R* (rage) - B (broken bones).

*R and C (crushed souls) are interchangeable terms.

& there are 2 possible Perfect Bayesian Equilibriums in the game, depending on the value of n.

Math makes me horny.

Waterrockets payoffs are defined as W (winnings) + R* (rage) - B (broken bones).

*R and C (crushed souls) are interchangeable terms.

& there are 2 possible Perfect Bayesian Equilibriums in the game, depending on the value of n.

Any terms for the Axis of Evil (RX, EDR, WR) rotating attacks all day long?

Math makes me horny.

Wife not home or something?

Next semester I am teaching a seminar which will include social media/web 2.0...Eric, thanks to you, I now think I have a good example/illustration website in mind...:)

Wife not home or something?

I take it you're not married....:innocent:

i take it you're not married....:innocent:

ftw

Any terms for the Axis of Evil (RX, EDR, WR) rotating attacks all day long?

Now that adds complexity to the game. And my brain hurts. Yesterday was the superbowl for political scientists.

But, here, we would have to treat EDR & RX as "the teammates." We could throw in two new types of probability calculations: 1) WR probability of winning without his teammates (as it approaches 1, you are less likely to share, as it approaches zero, you would be less likely); & 2) probability your teammates could win without you. As it approaches 1, you are also more likely to share as you would need to buyoff your teammates; at 0, you are less likely to share.

Conclusion? With an RX in the midst, you better damn well share if you ever want your day in the sun. Or, if it is like AT&T last year, your day in the rain.;)

Conclusion? With an RX in the midst, you better damn well share if you ever want your day in the sun. Or, if it is like AT&T last year, your day in the rain.;)

Ex follows Marxist theories when it comes to bike racing. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. It pleases Ex when wins are distributed among his teammates. Ex is nothing more than another worker.

I think that's another class though.

Ex follows Marxist theories when it comes to bike racing. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. It pleases Ex when wins are distributed among his teammates. Ex is nothing more than another worker.

I think that's another class though.

Game theory doesn't handle altruism well.

Math makes me horny.

"Me love you long time."

http://www.webstockpro.com/Comp/Blend/bld055528.jpg