Can you figure it out?

25%

>at least one of the hits is a crit
>assuming a 50% crit chance,
Then what guarantees one of them being a crit?

the past tense

fate

Attached: 1554172867835.jpg (750x911, 86K)

each hit is an individual 50% regardless of intent or desired results
literally just 0.5^x where x is the number of hits. 0.5^2=0.25 or 25%. how can anyone actually not be able to figure this out?

>at least one of the hits is a crit
based retard

Your fortune: ｷﾀ━━━━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━━━━ !!!!

if one of the hits is stated to be a crit, then the chance of both being crits is just the probability of the second hit being a crit. which is 50%

OP is trying to recreate the 3 door goat question and failing.🌈

exactly. this is why people get into big fights over this problem. it depends on how the 2 random hits were "sampled", so both 50% and 25% are reasonable answers to come to.

>one of the hits is stated to be a crit
which one?

The first hit might not crit retard

>at least one of the hits is a crit
thats the retarded part you nigger faggot. why is one guaranteed? its not 50% if one is guaranteed

does it matter?

One guaranteed crit, the only remaining uncertainty is the other hit, meaning its 50%.

If you can't say, then it's not one of them. It's either of them.

it says that at least one of them is a crit. how does not knowing which one change the probability?

based retard

Imagine being such a brainlet that you don't know how conditional probability works

As I said, that means it's either of them. So you have the outcomes of both criting, only the first doing so, or only the second swing. It's 1/3, unless you can pinpoint which, which you can't.

imagine being such a brainlet you think the answer is 50%

Except math is an exact science, so every problem can only have one true right answer. That's my teacher used to say, she couldn't be wrong.

it doesn't. This thread is full of brainlets

What's the probability that a hit is a crit? 50%. Effectively, one of the two is taken out of the equation, because it is a guaranteed to occur. I know these threads are bait, and you guys are very funny for pretending to be retarded.

I am using exact science though. To get 25% or 50% you have to make some extra assumptions about what exactly "at least one hit is a crit" means.

nice 4D bait.

You just gotta think like an angler fish user.

2/2 * 1/2 = 2/4 = 1/2
EZPZ

Event A (First roll for crit ) = 1/2= 0.5
Event B (Second roll for crit) = 1/2= 0.5
P for probability

P(A and B)=P(A)*P(B)
P(A and B)=P(0.5)*P(0.5)
0.5*0.5=0.25
P(A and B)= 0.25=1/4=25% chance

Fucking you are so god damn retarded aaaaaa

Attached: 1544734230861.jpg (539x470, 32K)

2/2 h*ck

Where is the guaranteed crit in your equation faggot?

>At least one of the hits is a crit
The language is vague, but the natural assumption is that one of the hits is guaranteed to crit, effectively removing it from the probability equation

If it's guaranteed, then it's not 50%. The problem contradicts itself.

0%.

Every odd hit is a crit, every even hit is a non crit.

Attached: retard test solved.png (700x1000, 118K)

no it doesn't faggot.

ZERO YOU FUCKlNG RETARDS

Crit question is lame at this point, hardly generates any shitposting or arguing except from extreme retards.
HOWEVER

Attached: PEpTH.jpg (636x424, 38K)

p(b|a)=p(a&b)/p(a)
S={nn,nc,cn,cc}
Event(at least one crit)={nc,cn,cc}
p(at least one crit)=0.75
Event(both crits)={cc}
Event(at least one crit&both crits)={cc}
p(at least one crit&both crits)=0.25
p(both crits|at least one crit)=p(at least one crit&both crits)/p(at least one crit)
=0.25/0.75
=0.333...

50% crit chance doesn't mean every other hit is a crit you statisticslet

>so we know we either got TT, TF, or FT
>FT
Except that's wrong you retard, you already confirmed the first result is a T. I understand that FT is functionally equivalent to TF, but you can't just say TF = FT

Removing a 25% chance doesn't make them all into 33%, retard

based, liked, and redpilled.
Shit bait.

1/1000

50% because parallel universes don't exist and quantum immortality is fake

that's even more obvious, at least fucking up conditional probability is something everyone does at some point or another

25% / (25% + 25% + 25%) = 1/3
faggot
we didn't only look at the first hit though. we looked at both and concluded that "at least one is a crit". if you only look at one hit, then the probability would be 50%. That specific problem of looking at one roll or both rolls is called the boy girl problem, i believe.

Why not though?

The wording on the problem sucks, which is the point. Unless we have the actual system to test, many mathematically sound interpretations are right.

OP here and the answer is 25%. If both hits crit, obviously one of the hits will be a "guaranteed" crit. Have a good day retards.

Attached: 1550192925043.png (500x708, 365K)

god you are retarded. If you have a 50% chance of critting then you have a 25% chance of critting twice in a row and a 25% chance of not even critting once in two hits.

>25%
literal retard answer. at least 50% is somewhat logical.

0% chance of not critting once retard, since one is guaranteed

A hun'ned

It's not a problem. It's indeterminate. You're not privy to which swing crit. You're supposed to solve it without making pulling shit out of your ass, so you have to look at both. It's not a matter of choice, the question has one valid answer. If you assume either crit, you've failed to solve it with the information given. And your answer is wrong, because you made shit up.

only if you're me though

Just do the math
1C = at least 1 crit
2C = both crit

P(2C | 1C) P(1C) = P(1C | 2C) P(2C)

P(1C) = 3/4 (at least 1 crit with 50% chance)
P(1C | 2C) = 1 (duh)
P(2C) = 1/4 (duh)
P(2C | 1C) = 1*(1/4)/(3/4) = 1/3

No arguing your way out of this one.

You are basing your answer as if you were rolling the chance before the crit was confirmed.

The fact that the crit is confirmed can mean that you are now choosing out of the three options that exist for crits

C-noC noC-C and C-C

33%.

OR, you can say crits are deterministic and alternate between crit and non crit, which means since once is a crit, the other can't be.

OR, you can base your crit chance off without awknowledgin the phrase "at least one is a crit", which would give you 25%

OR you could just say fuck it, it says 50% right there, it's 50%.

All options are correct.

The order doesnt matter you imbiciles. Given that, there is only CH or CC.

isn't it about 25%

>Miss first (50%)
>Can't Miss again (0%)
>Critting here is somehow 25% despite being the only option
Retard.

It says "at least 1 of the hits is a crit", NOT "the first hit is a crit"
Otherwise you would be correct.
However as stated it's 1/3

If one hit is guaranteed crit, there are only 2 possible scenarios.

scenario 1
>1st hit 100% crit
>2nd hit 50% crit

scenario 2
>1st hit 50% crit
>2nd hit 100% crit

The answer is only 50%. Go to school kids.

First of all, your nomenclature sucks.
CH? Critical - Hit?
A critical is a hit, this is inofrmation given, meaning that writing HH could mean four different things.

Secondly, it never stays the first hit is a critical, just that at least one of the hits are.

25%

even with 50% both might not hit a crit

>both might not hit a crit
>At least one of the hits is a crit
Dumbass

33%, any other answer is retarded.
There are 4 possible events without a "guaranteed" crit.

Hit 1 crit hit 2 crit
Hit 1 crit hit 2 no crit
Hit 1 no crit hit 2 crit
Hit 1 no crit hit 2 no crit

Having a guaranteed crit means situation #4 is impossible. All 3 remaining situations are equally likely. Only one of them has 2 crits, therefore the chance is 33%.

Okay, imagine this. You're retardedly punching a goblin with both hands at the same time. On one hand you have a ring of guaranteed crit chance on the left, the other has 50 % chance on the right. What is the chance the right hand and left hand crit at the same time?

This thread has happened so many times and people still don't understand that "At least one of the hits is a crit" is vague enough to make both 33% and 50% valid answers.

If you understand it as "one of the hits is a crit no matter the odds" then it's 50%
If you understand it as "after rolling 50% chances one of the hits is a crit" then it's 33%

150%

strawpoll.me/17725561
strawpoll.me/17725561
strawpoll.me/17725561
GO

50% duh, idiot

>guaranteed crit
You have a 50% crit chance. You're contradicting the premise.

The rings only apply to the hand they are on, not your whole body. Try again.

I'm not voting until you put 0% as an option.

It's a valid answer.

That's not how it works at all, retard

Where's 0%?
You have a 50% crit chance, there's no way you're going to get 100% crits.

Explain how 50% = 0%

Every hit has an alternating chance of either crit or non crit.

Crit nonCrit Crit nonCrit Crit nonCrit

This means that the overall chance is 50%.

you're supposed to get 50% crit you can't crit every time that's contremanding the premise

>user doesn't understand probability

So what you're saying is that it matters in this situation which hand you decided to put each ring on this morning? One of them is a crit that is all that matters. The order is arbitrary.

>So what you're saying is that it matters in this situation which hand you decided to put each ring on this morning?
It might. It might not. They're still different hands. You still count them separately.
>One of them is a crit
Which?

Yes, one is your 100% crit hand and the other is not. It doesnt matter which one is which.

Another example, one coin is blue and one coin has a red side and a blue side. What is the chance that both land on the blue side?

The 1/3 solution takes into account the fact that we don't know what swing crits. No outside assumptions are made, and the only material worked with is that which was given. Assuming either hit critting does not falsify the conclusion whatsoever, it is specified in the conditions of the question. It was made up by the question itself.

Your ring example sucks.

From what I'm gathering, you are doing two attacks simultaneously with the left and right arm.

You are equipped with two rings, each on a hand, but which hand for which ring isn't given.
The rings are as follows:
A ring of 100% left hand crit.
A ring of 50% right hand crit.

Then you are asking what is the chance of a dual crit?

It's fucking 50%.

Your question is badly worded and a bad thought exercise.

>one coin is blue
Wrong. You have a 50% crit(or heads) chance. Either of them can explicitly fail. You're just told that at least one(unspecified) did not.

>Why not though?
Because if you flip a coin and it lands heads, that doesn't automatically make the next one tails. It is a 50/50 regardless.
Are you 12?

You have two coins, both with a red side and a blue side.

You flip both.

If both are red, you flip one of them to blue.

What are the chances that both are blue?

These aren't coins, this is an arbitrary system with arbitrary rules.

Nowhere is it said that if a crit happens, the next one cannot be a crit. 50% probability implies just that, 50%.

>assuming the game will not rng your ass to miss both attacks

hit/hit is excluded for obvious reasons
if your answer isn't 1/3, prove that another result should be eliminated

Attached: 1529798415679.jpg (795x594, 43K)

so you won't be walking away with 100%

Nowhere does it said that it doesn't.
If you press a button connected to a display that shows 1 or 0, and after 10 times of pressing the button 5 times 1 is displayed and 5 times 0 is displayed, you can say "there is a 50 percent chance of 1 being displayed", even if my machine was set to display five consecutive 1's and then five consecutive 0's repeatingly.

This is the only correct answer. I wonder why this question brings up so much discussion. Didn’t Yea Forums take high school math?

No. There's one answer, and only one answer.

Attached: 1530344599720.jpg (248x93, 5K)

Because Hit-Hit can't happen
So Hit-Crit is 50%

>all these retards having “serious” discussions about their pet theories
No wonder casinos are still a thing. The answer is 1/3 btw.

Why don’t you apply that then? It’s 1/3.

>Because Hit-Hit can't
didn't
>So Hit-Crit is 50%
A 50% crit chance is a part of the premise. If you contradict the premise you're no longer dealing with the same problem.

100%

Attached: 300px-GameShark_logo[1].png (300x225, 60K)

crit-hit and hit-crit do not count as separate results, because the outcome is the same. There is only 1 hit that is gambled on in any given string, and that 1 hit as a 50-50 chance of critting or not.

Yeah. It is. Not sometimes 1/3 and sometimes 1/2.
>both 33% and 50% valid answers
That's wrong. Dumbass.

He's saying it can either go
Crit - nonCrit
Crit - Crit
or
nonCrit - Hit

He specifically said to not count nonCrit - nonCrit.
There are 3 options, and only 1 is the one we want, therefore 1/3.

you should figure out how to make your life not shit first

>Nowhere does it said that it doesn't.
So you're making up fake parameters to sound smart.

I’m retarded. I thought the post said just 1/3. I’m out.

Attached: 62D3C536-3727-4127-A2BF-29945A4F252E.jpg (495x454, 140K)

You are retarded

>crit-hit and hit-crit do not count as separate results
Yes, they do. There's 1/4 to get crit/crit normally, and 1/4 to get hit/hit. You count crit/hit twice, because it's twice as likely. It's twice as likely, because there's two ways to get there.

>There is only 1 hit that is gambled
You can't exclude the first swing from being a hit, nor can you the second. You can't exclude either possibility. There's still two ways to get there. It's still twice as likely.

If hitting first is 50%, then the next hit must be a crit, this means that the chance of critting is 100% if the first hit did not crit, so Hit-Crit is a 50% chance

Attached: math with v.png (800x600, 42K)

I'm just keeping my options open.

If I could test the system I would, but I can't, so I'd rather have a variety of predictions instead of just one that I stick with.

>If hitting first is 50%, then the next hit
You're told what already happened. Not what's going to. No, what happens in one won't magically change the odds of the other. They are independent events, and you're explicitly told they each have a 50% chance.

>I'm just keeping my options open.
No, you're trying to sound like a smartass

You have to make assumptions either way to get an answer brainlet.

>I'm just keeping my options open.
No, user. Adding information(from your ass) is making it a less general problem. It's the opposite.

You must be replying to the wrong person. I acknoledged that it depends on whether you guarantee a crt or rolled then looked.

No, you can't say that. You can construct a confidence interval, but not an exact probability

Not true, it doesnt use past tense anywhere in the in the problem.

Yes they are because both require making reasonable assumptions about the question

1/3 does not require any information not given in the premise. 1/2 does. 1/2 is wrong.

It says that one of them must crit, not the first or second one.
If one must crit, then hitting twice is impossible, so if the first hits, then by the rules in the OP, the second MUST crit so the first can influence the second, but not the other way around

>All the brainlets ITT who have never taken an entry-level statistics course

Attached: slide_3.jpg (960x720, 74K)

If you take "at least one hit is a crit" to mean that that only one hit was looked at when coming up with that statement, then you can get to 50% without guaranteed crit bullshit. It's called the boy girl problem

Way to out yourself as a brainlet.

>Calls people brainlets
>Doesn't answer the question
Classic

but I did over an hour ago

Well damn user, sorry I didn't know that anonymous post was yours.
Too bad it's fucking wrong though

>he thinks that 1/3 is the end all be all answer
Everyone point and laugh at the brainlet

I think 1/3 is the most probable answer.

What's the past tense of hit? Now, what's the future tense?
>It says that one of them must crit
>must
No. It says that AT LEAST one of them did. Not will, and not must.
>If one must
did
>then hitting twice is impossible
Yes, that is the one thing we are told. That that did not happen. So, that did not happen. It won't suddenly have happened if we look away for a second. It didn't happen.
>so if the first hits
*was a hit
>the second MUST crit
*have been a crit
and yes, if you look at a tree diagram, you'll find that when you exclude hit/hit(since we're told that did not happen), there is no result left where both of them are hits. 1/3rd of the time the first is a crit and the second a hit. 1/3rd of the time the first is a hit and the second a crit. 1/3rd of the time both crit.

It's consistent, you've nothing to worry about. You won't get a hit/hit, and there's no need to cover for it with that bullshit.

At least one of the hits is a crit sentence is messing me up. Does that mean one hit is given a 100% crit chance?

>If you take "at least one hit is a crit" to mean that that only one hit was looked at
That is an additional assumption.
You're given the information that "at least one is a crit" from the premise, and you are assuming which of them that is. It is not a valid solution as it fails to answer the question with the information given.

macmillanhighered.com/launchpad/bps7e/10040484
You can sign up for free trial textbook access with an email account, it gives you a week or two before having to pay. Have a nice read!

Past: hit
Present: hits
Future: will hit

It's also an assumption to take "att least one is a crit" to mean that you looked at both hits

Great.
>You hit an enemy twice.
Can you tell me whether this is future tense or not?

Stop trying. These retards don't realize probability is a measure of confidence based on information and priors, and are probably frequentists.

No retard.
If the first attack wasn't a crit (50%), then we know the second one was a crit, this is a 100% chance under this circumstance. Just because there are 3 outcomes doesn't mean it's 33%, because 50%.
Imagine you're walking down a hallway, and you can choose left or right, you choose left, and the next split has another two options, except one is locked, so you can only go right, that makes the chance you go right equal 100% at that moment, not 50% or 25% or 33%

Attached: math with v 2.png (591x488, 18K)

I'm not that user btw

That's obviously not future tense. It's past or present. The subject being "you" makes it ambiguous because the present of hit for the subject you is still hit

That's why we are discussing assumptions user. It matters how the data was sampled. Does "at least one is a crit" mean only one hit or both hits were looked at?

Can you tell me why it matters?

>guaranteed crits

By the rules of the OP, there must be at least one crit, so if the first doesn't crit, the next must crit.
Explain how I'm wrong.

>It's also an assumption to take "att least one is a crit" to mean that you looked at both hits
No, it's not an assumption to say that we don't have information we don't have.

>mixing up probability with statistics
Lmao retard

3 * .25 != 1...

We are only given information about the minimum number of crits out of both crits with no additional information, so with the information given that is all we can assume. It's not that we're making a positive statement that we "looked at" both crits, but that we only have information in regards to both without any ordering or additional specification. Look up the Monty Hall problem and Bayesian inference to see why your conception of what probability entails is fundamentally flawed. It's all about refining measurements based on given information, which in this case we do not have enough of to refine the probability to what you are assuming.

Because I think you're slightly less likely to argue for a fucking time machine than some magical mystery machine that changes probabilities into certainties as it suits you, but I'm not retarded so how the fuck should I know what you think.

What game guarantees you a crit? What's more likely is that both hits were rolled with a 50% crit chance, and the question is asking, given a pair of hits with a 50% crit chance, what's the probability that both are crits if one was found to be a crit?

You are not told. You are making additional assumptions. You are failing to solve the problem with the information provided.

The 1/3 answer is flawed because 2/3 is equally correct assuming order matters, while 1/2 is always correct.

Exactly. To get 1/3 you need to assume you have information that you don't have

How about the context of the OP you fucking idiot?
It doesn't matter how real the scenario is, you're supposed to answer the question

You have to make assumptions. The answer is to state all possible answers and the assumptions that each requires. There is no one answer that can be expressed as a confidence interval like your retard brain is imagining

I am. Context matters. We are taking about video games

Nigger are you retarded? it's just telling you that one happened to be a crit

You are not refuting my point. What you mention is a question of not having additional information beyond the basic facts given in the question, in which case the probability is one third. The amount of information you have changes the probability, and with the amount of information given the probability is provably, axiomatically 1/3.

But there's not 3 answers with a 0.25 chance. There's only 2, and one with 0.5

You're still wrong. Look at the boy or girl paradox. That is the relevant problem.

Jesus dude did you reply enough times to my one post?

No. You don't have to assume anything. The exclusion of hit/hit follows naturally from there being at least one crit, and there you have it, the answer is 1/3.
>You have to make assumptions
No, you're given all the information needed to solve it. The one and only answer you can get with the information given is 1/3. Ergo, it's the right answer. That's how maths work. You're supposed to find an answer that didn't come out of your ass. That's what's called a solution.
>confidence interval
what in the fuck are you talking about

No it's not you have to make an assumption about what "at least one hit is a crit" means

I should explain further. There are two conditions out of three that are "winning" scenarios. If the order doesnt matter than it is 2/3 if it does than it is 1/3. However knowing one is definitely a crit means essentially 1/2.

No. No matter what it means, hit/hit is out(and 1/3 becomes a valid answer), no assumption made.

Again, see the boy or girl paradox. You actually don't have enough information. The question is ambiguous in a subtle way. You have to make an assumption to get any answer

I love how in vee, you have mathematician wanabees who cant into basic reading comprehension so they brueforce probabilities while ignoring context, we have people who are utter brainlets/baiters and fail at basic mathematics and how we have such long winded explanations when 16 words would be fine

There are clearly two people in this thread who have taken a bare minimum of university level mathematics, and I am one of them. I'm sorry if our posts sound similar because anyone educated in the field of probability and statistics will tell you the exact same thing.

I'm done repeating myself. Read the thread. Look up the boy or girl paradox

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox💢

Attached: 1354886059585.jpg (300x300, 12K)

Typical intro statistics college retards. You can't always just apply the conditional probability formula. Using it requires assumptions and conditions to be filled, and it just so happens that this problem doesn't fulfill those without adding your own assumption

You're the actual dumbass. Look it up.

user, I'm sorry to tell you this, but you're going to have to make your own arguments. Please, explain to me how it is possible to get Hit/Hit with at least one swing being a crit, the only deduction needed to arrive at the answer of 1/3. Where, exactly, do I need to make an assumption, here?

If you have an argument, make it.
>boy/girl
Yeah, I know it. It's the same damn problem. It's also 1/3rd, and also has only one valid(read:possible without pulling shit out of your ass) answer.

pretty sure it's 25%
since the probability outcome can never result in 2 non-crits, you get the following
non-crit (50%) * crit (100%) = 50%
crit (50%) * non-crit (50%) = 25%
crit (50%) * crit (50%) = 25%

I did make my own arguments countless times. If you want to see them read the thread

The amount of information we have changes the probability, with the information given in the problem we don't have to and in fact can't consider how many rolls are "looked at," and "default" to all we are able to conclude based on the fact that there is at least one crit out of two rolls, regardless of how it was "looked at" as you say. What we are able to conclude happens to have the same result as if we knew for sure that we "looked at" both rolls, but it is simply what we are able to conclude with no additional priors or conditionals. Probability is a subjective measure based on information given to us, and in absence of the information you seem to think this problem hinges on, the probability is 1/3.

>1/3rd is the only correct answer to the boy or girl problem
Yeah and all the people who spent all their lives studying and advancing statistics are wrong. It's literal brainlet

Its a word problem, not statistics. If its 50% and the first one is a guaranteed crit therefore it must be none otherwise it would be 100%

Get gassed shitlord.

In the absence of he information and without making any assumptions, you can't get any answer retard. There is no answer. It doesn't exist. The question is ambiguous. All methods are inconclusive

You plugged your ears and repeated yourself without addressing a single thing being said. That is not what an argument is. You're not making one. I've presented proof of how to get an answer of 1/3rd and you haven't had a single objection to it. So, it's over. You're out.

Try to have a bit more tact next time. Being wrong doesn't have to be that demeaning, if you aren't such an argumentative twat, while clueless.

Excluding hit/hit is a deduction, not an assumption.
>well you're assuming we shouldn't add this information out of nowhere
is not one, either.

I have addressed multiple retards such as yourself and at a certain point it grows tiresome and I could care less what you specifically think. I'll always have power over you retards in the real works when you guys are dumb wagies shining my shoes.

In the game "user's Dogma" by 2+2chins software, Sir Nonymous has a 50% crit chance on every attack, but if he fails to crit, he gets so mad that his next attack will always crit.
What are the chances Sir Nonymous hits that smug fucking dragon with two critical hits in a row?

>wagies
My condolences. Get well soon.

That's it what I'm taking about retard. To get 1/3rd you assume both hits were looked at.

0%. He has a 50% crit chance. He can't crit every time. He gasses himself out.

Now that's a different question isn't it since you removed the ambiguity?

assuming a 100% hit chance,
1/4.

Possible Scenarios:

1. Miss Miss
2. Miss Crit
3. Crit Miss
4. Crit Crit

Since there has to be at least one crit, we can eliminate scenario 1, leaving us with:

1. Miss Crit
2. Crit Miss
3. Crit Crit

Putting two crits at 33%

50% and 25% are brainlet takes, don't @ me.

Where? How is that needed to state that we don't get hit/hit(0 crits(PROTIP: 0 is less than 1, dumbfuck))?
Make your argument already. Don't just say you have one and you left it in your car. Ehrm, I mean, your mother's car.

Why can't he crit twice in a row user?
Are you implying if you flip a coin you'll never get two heads in a row?

Nope, Chuck Testa!

Just wait till you get out of your dumb university faggot. You'll go right in the job market and be another wagie nobody and we'll see how special you feel then. Maybe you will have the chance to collect my trash full of used condoms from fucking your dream girl.

Because he's grossly out of shape. I mean for fuck sake man, look at him!

Did you just have a seizure user? You are making no sense. Are you taking you're meds?

Never underestimate retard rage

Is it pseudo random or pure random crit? Is it's pseudo random then I suppose the crit chance would end up being coin flipped the first time and after that it would always end up being crit non crit, crit, non crit, thus making it a 0% chance. If it's pure random then the chance would be ... about 25%? And go down more and more the more crit you manage to role, not impossible, I've seen people hit a 5% chance with how many crits they got in a row at one point, if I recall right.

Attached: Cat (228).jpg (640x889, 31K)

depends on the mechanics of
>at least one of the hits is a crit
If the guaranteed crit is predetermined, before any of the two hits, then it's 50%.
If the crit is given to the second hit, upon the first not critting, it's 33%.

No, I "am" not meds.
Make your argument already. You said I made an assumption. Where? How is it possible to get hit/hit, AND still getting at least one crit? If it's not, then we can exclude hit/hit without making assuming anything not in the premise. And, get an answer of 1/3.

The outcome of FT is impossible is first hit is T retard.

>assuming a 50% crit chance
ok, that's simple eno-
>but what if we have a 100% crit chance sometimes
>what if it's 0%
>what if it's flopping between the two
what in the fuck are you doing

Again that's not where I take issue with your logic. Until you stop ignoring me we will make no progress

It's simple Bayesian inference user.

are you ok?

>RNG

Attached: sean bean toilet.jpg (623x539, 45K)

I'm not ignoring you, I've asked you to elaborate for what, 4 posts now?
>Again that's not where I take issue with your logic
Nigger, that was the entire way from the premise to the answer. If you don't take issue with it, you're saying it's right.

if you eliminate H/H, we only have C/H, H/C, and C/C -> the answer is 1/3.
if at least one is a crit, H/H is not an option

that's the full solution. Again, where is the additional assumption, here? You're saying there is one, it's gotta be somewhere.

50%

The scenario itself guarantees it.
That's why the answer is 50% and not lower, because you're only being asked the chance of the other hit.

50%, they're either both crits or they're not idiot

50% faggots

One of the hits is already confirmed a crit, so you can forget about it

The question can be boiled down to "What is the chance the second hit will be a crit?" and the answer is 50%

Ok retard way to ignore my point again. I already told you where the issue is multiple times. Just die already.

Why the hell would the assured hit have any affect on the other hit?

> the other hit
As opposed to, which hit, precisely?

What if it misses first?

And that's why the answer is 1/3rd

>I already told you
That's not an answer, and no you said:
> that's not where I take issue with your logic
So, where?

As opposed to the guaranteed hit presented in the scenario, ESL-kun.

Which is? Which hit would that be, exactly?

1 of the hits has 100% crit. The other has 50%. So its 50%.

0.25

Is this actually a bait thread?

>1 of the hits has 100% crit
Which?

I think you don't understand. What he's questioning is the nature of the guaranteed critical hit.

Whether the first hit always yields a critical hit (i.e. it's 100% and not dependant on any factors) or if it's a failsafe that is granted if the first hit fails to produce a critical hit.
A) scenario has 50% because, since the first hit alwaya has a set outcome, the second hit has the full raw 50% chance.
The B) scenario on the other hand is only 100% guaranteed if the first hit doesn't crit. This means that the first hit always has the raw 50% chance and in order for both hits to be crits both hits have to successfully proc the 50% chance. 0.5 * 0.5 is 0.25, a 25% chance of both hits critting.

"At least one of the hits is a crit," ESL-kun.

One hit always crits. There's only one hit left, it can't miss. 50% crit chance, 50% is the answer by the way the question is phrased. Now if it were phrased different I could see 25% but it's not.

Yes, and which hit would that be? You're saying one of them is guaranteed to be a crit. Is that the first hit, or the second? It's not a very complicated question I'm posing here, it shouldn't be giving you this much trouble. Have you asked your mother to read it to you? You never know, it might help.

0 = impossible
1= certain
0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25
25% chance
please explain to me why my thinking is incorrect rather than just calling me wrong, otherwise I'll have to assume you're pretending to be stupid

Attached: Y10_Probability_Trees_05.gif (195x219, 2K)

It says at least one of the hits is a crit.
If the question is whats the chance of both being crits without any guarenteed crit, then its 25%.

>extra assumptions
It only means either the first hit is a crit or the second one is, autismo.
CRIT+NONCRIT
CRIT+CRIT
NONCRIT+CRIT
CRIT+CRIT

Yes it is an answer because I've answered you before but you proved yourself to lack the mental capacity to handle the truth about your "solution" just like the snowflake university student that you are. God I'm glad that retards like you aren't in power here to offer your "solutions" like open borders and gun bans but instead you faggots slave away for the actually intelligent people while under the impression that you are smart because the Jew university system told you you could be for just 4 years of your life and a few hundred thousands of dollars of debt that you will pay off for the next twenty years. Get fucked dumb snowflake and future wagie Jew slave.

retard

Yes. And you said one of them has 100% crit. I asked you which. You didn't answer. Which?

>all these anons arguing 33%, speculating that the guaranteed crit runs on an "if, then" condition
>the question merely states that the crit is simply there
This isn't a math question, it's a reading comprehension test.

50%.
One hit has a 100% of being a crit.
The other has a 50% chance
1*0.5 =0.5

how true is this image?

Attached: trifecta.png (1630x1546, 1.63M)

It doesnt matter. Either the first or second. You calculate probabilty by multiplying and multiplication is commutative.

The only diagram in this thread worth anything

Attached: timeline.png (929x444, 14K)

>can follow a formula but can't suss out the assumptions
Let me guess, engineering student?

>Either the first or second
>It doesnt matter.
No, you said one of them is guaranteed. 100% crit.
If it's not the former, and it's not the latter, then where's your guaranteed crit? So, which?

Is the first hit always a crit? Is the second?

No retard.
If the first crit failed, the second will succeed, making Fail-Succeed a 50% chance of occurring overall, since if the first 50% fails, there is only one option past that

>you're saying one of them is guaranteed to be a crit
Because that's the scenario we are given, ESL. At least one is a crit.

I thought it would be funnier to watch you have a breakdown. Do get help, if you haven't already.

Attached: 1545286009546.jpg (1006x932, 263K)

>If the first crit failed, the second will succeed

One of the hits is a crit by the grace of God.
Why would it have any effect on the other hit's crit chance?
It literally is just asking "crit chance is 50%. what's the crit chance?"

Attached: baer.jpg (285x261, 49K)

Well, it's not since a trifecta implies three DLCs

Your fortune: Bad Luck

The first hit has a 50% chance of critting
If it crits the second hit has a 50% of critting.
If it does not crit the second hit has a 100% chance of critting.
HOWEVER. The third outcome guarantees at most 1 crit. So the probability of both criting is still 0.25.
With the chance of the first hit critting and the second not at 0.25. And the first hit not criting and the second one critting at 0.5
tldr
1 crits but not 2 =25% chane
1 crits and two crits =25% chance
1 does not crit but two does =50% chance
neither crits = 0% chance.

4 possibilities
Crit Crit
Fail Crit
Crit Fail
Fail Fail

Each has equal chance chance.
Fail Fail isn't allowed so it's between the other 3.
33.333...% chance

see
The only way either hit has a 100% chance of critting, is if the first one does not crit.

>one of them is guaranteed to be a crit
>that's the scenario we are given
Alright, which?
>At least one is a crit
Now, that's different. That's not specific. Doesn't say that either is guaranteed to be one.

Yes.
One of the two hits is a a crit, we know that from the OP

There's two possibilities, because the first hit was already a crit:

Crit fail
Crit Crit

50% chance for Crit Crit

>Each has equal chance chance.
This is where you messed up. They are not independent events.

This.

Let's say the first hit does not crit (50% chance), then you're second hit single a guaranteed crit but that won't make you have 2 crits. So we determined that at least 50% of the time you will crit only once.

Now let's consider for when the first hit does crit (50% chance). Then the second hit is not guaranteed to crit, so you have to again. That means that half of the 50% of the time the first hit cross, the second hit will crit too, giving you two crits, while the other half of that 50% you will only crit once

So adding the two previous paragraphs together. 75% of the time you will only crit once and only 25% of the time will both hits be crits

>lefty tranny telling others to get help
Ironic

" Crit chance is 50%, the FIRST crit is guaranteed. What is the chance of critting twice"

The answer WOULD be 50%, and that's where most people stop thinking. But the question is

" Crit chance is 50%, any of two hits is a guaranteed cri. What is the chance of critting twice"

The fact that the one crit can be any of the 2 changes the scenario and thus the probability, which in the latter case can be computed to be 1/3. Disregarding the 25% brainlets, that's literally all the thread is about.

50/50
they either crit or they don't

>time breaks math
Ok, retard.

yikes, check out this brainlet.

Are you trying to make a philosophical point? If the first one doesnt crit there is a 0% chance of both being crits. The answer is either 0 or 50%. Maybe you wanna average the two and say its 25%. I dont care about this philosophical math shit.

You guys are adding an algorithm to the mechanics of the guaranteed crit. The question only states the there is a crit out of the two hits. There are 4 outcomes if you don't inject logical conditions to the mechanics of the guaranteed crit.

>guaranteed crit is the 1st hit, 2nd hit doesn't crit
>guaranteed crit is the 1st hit, 2nd hit crits
>guaranteed crit is the 2nd hit, 1st hit doesn't crit
>guaranteed crit is the 2nd hit, 1st hit crits

Where does it say anything about the first hit?

>the FIRST crit is guaranteed
Brainlet
No, the first crit is not guaranteed. The second one is IF you did not crit on the first swing.

>Are you trying to make a philosophical point?
no.
> If the first one doesnt crit there is a 0% chance of both being crits.
Correct. Which means there is a 0.75 chance only one crits.
One is garunteed to crit, but this only comes into play if the first is a miss. The first has a 0.50 chance of hitting, and so does the second one if it hits. The only 100% hit comes into play if the first hit is a miss.

No, I'm trying to lead a horse to water.

To start, you have the possibilities:
Crit / Crit - 25%
Crit / Hit - 25% ------
Hit / Crit - 25% ------or bunch them together as C&H and it's still fucking 50% no one gives a shit it doesn't matter
Hit / Hit - 25%

Now, which of these can you exclude?

but the 25% probabilities are no longer valid because they are conditional on the extra information provided, so they need to be recalculated

>You guys are adding an algorithm to the mechanics of the guaranteed crit.
No, you are adding the condition that the "garunteed crit" is a given, rather than an unkown. If that was the case Op would have specified "thie first hit is a crit, or the second hit is a crit." But as it stands it is a basic RPG element, where the odds are a true 50% each hit, until he needs to crit every hit to meet the quota.

Take an intro statistics course brainlet.

That's what he did. That's why they're 1/3 now, and not 1/4.

i literally have a masters degree in stats

200%

Attached: 1543622669122.png (557x605, 178K)

Nice reading comprehension.
>No, the first crit is not guaranteed.
I didn't claim that, I gave a scenario in which the post in was referring to would be true to underline the difference to the actual scenario.

>the odds are a true 50% each hit, until
No. You have a 50% crit chance. It's in the premise. It's not complicated. You don't magically change the odds. You're just told that a hit/hit did not happen.

>Now, which of these can you exclude?
This is wrong, because the fourth outcome is not happening, but just being discounted. It is actively being avoided. Which is why
hit/crit Happens with 50% likelyhood, and the other two outcomes at 25%.
Again, it is not an independent event.
The first hit as a 50% chance of hitting
If it does the second hit has a 50% of hitting.
If it does not, the second hit has a 100% of hitting.

Uhhhhhhhhhhh "at least one" is meaningless, I'm going to discard that cuz I feel like answering "if there's a 50% chance of a hit crit-ing, what's the chance of two hits crit-ing consecutively?" instead

Its 1/3 retards

If one of the hits is guaranteed a crit, you can immediately remove it from the calculation. It's already happened. Therefore it's a 50/50 that both are crit. There's no point trying to logic your way in to a 25% scenario, as the one given in the OP guarantees you one crit in this situation.

Your entire argument is based off the assumption that one critting means the guarenteed crit got "used up". What if the first one crit but that was the 50% chance one and then the second is the guarenteed one.

>1/3
Looks like someone can't into probabilities.

>No. You have a 50% crit chance. It's in the premise
OP clearly stated the aditional condition that one hit HAS to be a crit. That means if the first is a miss, the second is GARUNTEED to be a hit.
> You're just told that a hit/hit did not happen
Which means the outcomes are skewed to miss hit.

jfmueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/crow/prob teasers.pdf
it's 50%

this is just one of those probability riddles you do in stats that tricks retards into feeling good about themselves because they know some secret trick to get 1/3, which is the non-intuitive answer, but it turns out it's bullshit anyway since if you actually run through the numbers properly you will always get to 50%

>What if the first one crit but that was the 50% chance one and then the second is the guarenteed one.
That is not a thing, if the first one hits with the 50% the second one still has a 50% chance. The garunteed crit only comes into play if the first is a miss. I feel like we are going in circles here.

Only one out of 3 possible scenarios has a double crit.

>hit, crit
>crit, hit
>crit, crit

Come back when you've done some basic maths in high school

>the fourth outcome is not happening
Yes, we can exclude Hit / Hit. Good job.

Now, can you exclude Crit / Crit?
Can you exclude Hit / Crit? (guarantee that the first swing is a crit)
Can you exclude Crit / Hit? (guarantee that the second swing is a crit)

>Again, it is not an independent event.
Yes, they are. You're told that from the start. They're both 50%, a cointoss. You're just told hit/hit did not happen, and so now we've excluded that possibility.

No you don't or you'd immediately recognized that math like it was second nature. All three outcomes still have equal probabilities

This is based on an independent event. The OP is not.

> You're just told hit/hit did not happen
Read the OP again, it is not past tense.

>there are 3 possibilities, so they must be equiprobable!
Come back when you've graduated high school

Irrelevant. Whether or not hit/hit did not happen or hit/hit is not happening doesn't make a difference

the trick is supposed to be 0.5 or 0.25. You are just flatout braindead.

>one hit HAS to be a crit
No, he said at least one was.
>Which means the outcomes are skewed to miss hit.
Yes, the outcomes. Not the odds of them. All we need to guarantee "at least one is a crit" is remove hit/hit. We're left with the other 3, at equal odds(now 1/3 instead of 1/4).

They are equiprobable retard. Do the math yourself if you're so smart

Can you guarantee which hit is the crit? No? Then stay in school underage fag

>Irrelevant. Whether or not hit/hit did not happen or hit/hit is not happening doesn't make a difference
It makes a huge difference. Because if it is a future event. My model is inevitable. The only way it could change, and in turn make them 50/50, would be if the actually probability of one of the hits critting was 100% which we would need an observation to make.

it isn't even stated either way. the only way to get an answer is to assume they're independent. if you don't do that then you need some additional figure which gives the probability of consecutive hits which isn't given, so it's unsolvable

Please make a point or answer the questions. Don't meaninglessly deflect.

Now, can you exclude Crit / Crit?
Can you exclude Hit / Crit? (guarantee that the first swing is a crit)
Can you exclude Crit / Hit? (guarantee that the second swing is a crit)

To quote your source

>Answer i) is wrong about what p(B1) represents. The probability of one child being
male does not equal the probability of at least one child being male. Answer i)
misinterprets the question to be "probability of other child being male given at least
one is a male" when the question asks "given one child is male."

>The probability of one child being
male does not equal the probability of at least one child being male.

But that is what the OP asked for. Answer i) is, btw, 1/3

>NO U!
Pathetic. The question doesn't imply any complex mechanics. It only says that there is a crit out of the two hits. Learn english if you don't know what that means. It's basically stating there is a guaranteed crit. Making crits proc conditionally is adding mechanics that weren't stated in the question.

Past present or future doesn't change probability you tard

25%🐸

It's actually:
>hit, crit
>hit, hit
>crit, hit
>crit, crit
But ok, I'm the one who can't into maths.

No, you can't set up a proper simulation with it also making assumptions about the problem again. If you take "at least one" to mean that both rolls were peeked at instead of only the first one, you'd get 1/3rd by running the numbers

...

>That is not a thing
This is literally just your opinion. I really doubt something like this is 1/3.
Hit hit
Hit miss
miss Hit
hit Hit
2/4

Of course not. What is your point. I agree those are the three possible outcomes.
>it isn't even stated either way.
Yes, The OP states you are guaranteed at least one in two hits to crit. The child problem asks "assuming one child is a boy" It is also not unsolvable see

Order of the events is irrelevant, you're not calculating odds on what the probability of hitting 2 crits in a row are, 0/1 and 1/0 are the same result, the only result you care about is if it is either 1/1 or 1/0, percentage of crit is 50% so the chance is 50%.

Anything else you do to the equation isn't specified by the problem and doesn't matter.

Maybe learn to read before you learn to count

Yikes fucked that up.
>it isn't even stated either way.
Yes, The OP states you are guaranteed at least one in two hits to crit. The child problem asks "assuming one child is a boy" It is also not unsolvable see
(You)
Was meant for

Its 1/3, scorelets. Get dunked and stop being retarded

Three things could happen:
hit-crit
crit-hit
and crit-crit
>implying ~67%

It's not 50% because the two events are correlated. You don't have the same crit chance on swing two after a hit as you do after a crit.

>0/1=1/0
No it fucking doesn't you grade school reject.

There is nothing stating about guaranteed crit, only that at least one of the hits is a crit. If you don't crit on your first hit then and only then does the following result have to change to avoid violating the rule "at least one hit is a crit". Otherwise, you simply roll your 50/50 as usual. So in this case, essentially all that has happened is hit hit turns into hit crit, which still doesn't give you both hits critting.

Think of it this way. If you don't crit your first attack, regardless of whether or not the second hit is a crit, they can't both be crits because you already rolled the first one. So 50% of results you don't get two crits. In the case your first hit crits, then at least one of the hits is a crit already and so the following results won't change at all. It's a simple 50/50 for the second hit to see if that also crits, which brings us to 25%.

This problem assumes we know that one of two is definitely male, so what's the gender of the other one.

It's like saying "the first hit was a crit, what's the likelihood of both being crits".

This is differnet to the problem posed in the OP, so this paper's answers don't apply.

>hit crit
>crit hit
>crit crit
1/3, there only is one order it can happen in, the other are outcomes. Double hit can't happen if you know how to read.

I guarantee you none of these faggots paid attention in math class. If they did, they'd know to disregard the trick information. For example, "A baker leaves to make a delivery that is 35 miles away from his shop. He travels at 65 miles an hour down the highway to get to his destination, and left on a full tank of gas. Assuming that gas is $2.45/gal in his area and he gets 22 highway miles per gallon of gas, how much would it have cost the baker in gas to make the trip to and from his destination?"

The person's profession, how much gas was in the tank, and the speed at which he travels is irrelevant. He traveled 70 miles and gets 22 miles per gallon of gas used. That means he'd use roughly 3.18 gallons of gas to complete his journey. If gas is $2.45/gal, he'd spent $7.79 in gas to do the round trip regardless of if he fueled up before or after he made it. He still spent that much in gas, which is the point.

So OP's question is basically just a less complicated word problem that literally boils down to, "You have a 50/50 chance to make a critical hit. What are your chances of making a critical hit?" The answer is literally 50/50. You disregard the other critical hit, because in the scenario, it was established that the hit was already made and was critical, it no longer has any bearing on the situation, which is "If I make a hit with a 50/50 chance of it being a crit, what are the odds it crits?"

Now if the situation had stated, "You have a 50% chance to make a critical hit and hit twice, what are the chances both hits are critical?" then it would be a completely different story.

>Past present or future doesn't change probability you tard
It inevitably does for dependent events you fucking spastic. if the odds of wining a random drawing are 1/10. And I did not win last time. What are my chances of having won last time.
If If my chance of winning are 1/10, and I did not win last time, what are my chances of winning this time? Again the outcome of previous events is only irrelevant if they are independent.

anyone who doesn't understand why it's 1/3 is a fucking retard

>nothing stated about guaranteed crit
>one of the hits is a crit
You fucking spastic

is anything truly independent?

>hit crit
>crit hit
These are the same result. Which one comes first is irrelevant. You're adding information that isn't specified by the problem.

You clearly misunderstand the problem in a fundamental level if you think time has anything to do with it.

Yes, good. Then you should be able to see the point of my "philosophical point", as you put it. Now we've finally gotten to the point it's relevant.
Again.
>you are guaranteed at least one in two hits to crit
Yes. Now, could you please point to an outcome we have not eliminated yet, that does not fulfill that condition?

Attached: 1526465713902.png (139x190, 2K)

>This is literally just your opinion. I really doubt something like this is 1/3.
It is not, that is objectively wrong, even if they were independent.
I am saying it is
crit crit (0.5)(0.5) =0.25
crit hit (0.5)(0.5)=0.25
hit crit (0.5)(1) =0.5
I am saying they are not independent events. The probability of the second hit critting, is dependent on if the first hit crits.

>literally each outcome is the opposite of the previous
>the same

Attached: 1536427850231.jpg (762x574, 30K)

so we know that at least one hit is critical. Assuming the likelihood of a critical hit is independent to other hits...

there is a 50% chance that the critical hit being referred to is the first one. in this case the probabilities are
CH - 50%
CC - 50%

there is a 50% chance that the critical hit being referred to is the second one. in this case the probabilities are
HC - 50%
CC - 50%

in which case you get (50%*50%) + (50%*50%) = 50%

even if you decide to lump them together, they're still twice as likely as crit/crit

>These are the same result. Which one comes first is irrelevant.
No, they aren't. I don't know how to put it any clearer, but you must be actually retarded.😃

but going by that logic there are two versions of crit-crit, depending on which one the definite critical hit is, thus doubling that outcomes odds

>there is a 50% chance that it is referring to the first hit being a guaranteed crit
This is the most retarded logic I've seen in this thread. You literally pulled numbers out of your ass

Give me a little slack, I just woke up. What I meant to type was
>crit, hit
>crit, crit
>hit, crit
>crit, crit

.♥️

There is a 50% chance of critical hit, so that means only half of the hits will be critical. HC and CH are the only two possibilities, the probability for two critical hits is 0%.

maybe go back to bed spastic

okay, well it could literally be any figure anyway
let's say there is an 80% chance that the critical hit being referred to is the first one. in this case the probabilities are
CH - 50%
CC - 50%

then there is a 20% chance that the critical hit being referred to is the second one. in this case the probabilities are
HC - 50%
CC - 50%

in which case you get (80%*50%) + (20%*50%) = 50%

.❌

In this scenario, it doesn't matter the order in which the crit was made. You are guaranteed ONE critical hit. You need to push that entire crit aside now since it's guaranteed, and take a look at the chances of a hit being a crit, which is stated as being 50/50. If you are GUARANTEED ONE CRIT, the odds of the other being a crit are 50/50.

I cant do this anymore.

HIT hit
hit HIT
miss HIT
HIT miss
2/4 = 50%

If you cant understand that I wish you godspeed and good luck cuz you need it.

hhjj♨️

i absolutely you and your retard math.

Probability of X knowing that Y happened is :
P(X and Y) / P(Y).

our X is (Both are crits). our Y is (at least one of them is a crit)

So we get P(Both are crits and one of them is a crit) / (at least one of them is a crit)
Both are crits and one of them is a crit = .25
one of them is a crit = .75

.25/.75 = 1/3.

ez.

this is correct. people just heard some dumb riddle in stats class when they were like 12 and never bothered to think about enough to question it and realise it was wrong

Why bother when my dazed self is still far more logical than most of you idiots?

But which one is a guaranteed crit? Oh we dont know so theres 3 outcomes

listen to this man, it's embarrassing how few have seen through it so far👌

Your logic is still incredibly wrong. You can just say no matter what hit was looked at when making the statement "at least one is a critical" that the probability is 50%

Also How about it could be referring to the fact that either guy is a crit, not just the first or second? I.e both hits are being looked at. Then it's 1/3rd.

See? There's no correct answer. All require assumptions to be made.

Nigger you couldn't even understand the initial problem
You dont understand shit

Irrelevant to the question.

of course it's relevant you retard. god just check the wikipedia page for conditional probabilities you're embarassing yourself.

While you're right I'm not reading your post for using whatever thise units mean.

yes agreed, i'm just going by the assumption that the probabilities of each hit being critical are independent from each other, since that's the only way to make it solvable. if they are not then the whole exercise is pointless

REE I DONT LIKE IT SO IT DOESNT COUNT
I accept your angry defeat

They're called word problems and were literally meant to gauge the student's ability to filter out irrelevant information. See It doesn't fucking matter what one is the crit. It's a fucking crit. You are guaranteed one critical hit. You are done with that. It's irrelevant and over with. The scenario does not allow you to change the fact that one of two hits was critical. The question is literally asking you, "If I have a 50/50 chance for my hit to be a crit, what are the chances my hit is a crit?"

you are the most wrong dumbass, because not all 3 outcomes are equally as likely. Fucking christ.
Even if we had just true 0.5 chance and all four on the table
hit hit =/0.25
hit crit = 0.25
crit hit = 0.25
hit hit =0.25
Summized
0 crits =0.25
1 crit = 0.5
2 crits =0.25
So it was 3 outcomes, of which they were not equal in probability. One got removed.

The fact that it's pointless is the point retard. It's a bait thread

>All require assumptions to be made
1/3 doesn't
"at least one is a crit" is all you need
it's non-specific, and the non-specific answer's 1/3

It is physically impossible to be 1/3. If the second hit is dependant on the first it is 0.25. If they are independent it is 0.5. The 0.25% of a miss/miss can only be adsorbed by the possibility of 1 crit, or 2 crits, not split amongst them. see the child problem the user linked. I think the question is ambigous, but there is no interpretation of which you are correct.

There is no assumption to be made. You are guaranteed a single critical hit in the scenario. You can now disregard that and look at the one remaining hit. It's a 50/50 chance, as stated in the scenario, that it will crit. Since the question is asking, "If I have a 50% chance to crit, what are the odds that I crit?" and the answer is stated to be 50% in the question itself, there's nothing else to do. It is 50%, and no matter how you do your mental gymnastics, that fact does not change. You are literally given your answer of 50% in the question itself.

at that point i just don't want to explain to retards anymore, here is the solution
math.stackexchange.com/questions/991060/flip-two-coins-if-at-least-one-is-heads-what-is-the-probability-of-both-being
thought Yea Forums had the smart kind of autist retards, looks like not.

> If the second hit is dependant on the first
It's not. They're independent events. 50%, remember?
>The 0.25%
>0.25%
what
>a miss/miss can only be adsorbed by the possibility of 1 crit, or 2 crits, not split amongst them
>absorbed
what
>see the child problem the user linked
Yeah, it's the same problem. Same answer.
>the question is ambigous
Alright, there's no way you're being serious.

>you have a 50% crit chance
>hurr you're going to get 75% crits

No, it asking the probability both hits are a crit. Read the fucking problem.

50% is like flip a coin.

You are guaranteed one critical hit, thus eliminating the need to do the calculation for one of the two hits. You simply have to do the calculation for one hit, which is literally stated as being a 50/50 chance. Anyone who thinks the answer is 25% or 33% is fucking retarded and fails at basic reading comprehension.

>You are guaranteed one critical hit
And which hit would that be?

you don't know wich one is a crit you fucking retard. your view of the problem is :
you do a hit, you check if it's a crit or not, and then you find the probability for the second one being a crit. Thats not how it works.
you do both hits, and then you know that at least one of them is a crit, and you want to know the probility for of them being a crit, wich means that you either have 1-crit 2-hit, 1-hit 2-crit or 1-crit 2-crit, wich is 33%.

check for actual scientifical answer

YOU AREN'T GUARENTEED ONE CRIT AND THEN YOU ROLL FOR THE OTHER.

YOU ARE GUARENTEED ONE CRIT OUT OF A POOL OF FOUR POSSIBILITIES, ONE OF WHICH IS NOW IMPOSSIBLE DUE TO THE CONFIRMED CRIT.

ONE OUT OF THREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEe

Attached: file.png (900x900, 729K)

>It's not. They're independent events. 50%, remember?
Then how can one possible disregard the possibility of miss miss? the answer is because the game bases the probability of the second one on the probability of the first one. if the first one misses (which it does 50% of the time) the second one has a 100% of hitting. Otherwise you would inevitably run into miss/miss situations.
>what
Meant 25%.
>what
If you ran this problem monte carlo, without the constraint, you would have a 25% of the outcomes being miss/miss. If you remove that outcome, the question becomes, what becomes of those outcomes.
>Yeah, it's the same problem. Same answer.
Its not though.
>Alright, there's no way you're being serious.
It is, it does not tell us how we arrived at one garunteed crit. Is it because the game is programmed in such a way that if you miss the first you have to hit the second. Or is it because we already swung once and crit. Or because we swung twice, with a blindfold on and are trying to work backwards? the constraint is not properly given.

If there's a guaranteed crit, not only is h/h gone but also either c/h or h/c as a scenario, because that's not what the q is asking for.

If the q stated "what are the chances of any crits" it would be 75%

tards won't understand the diference, stop trying

no, if the q stated "what are the chances of any crits" knowing that one of them is a crit (wich is the fucking question) the answer would be 100%.

So there are 4 possible outcomes at the start, each with 25% probability:

Hit-Hit
Crit-Hit
Hit-Crit
Crit-Crit

2/4 (50%) of the Crits occur in the Crit-Crit outcome, so if you know at least one is a crit, then it has a 50% chance of coming from the Crit-Crit outcome

except that it's stated in the question that hit-hit is not a possibility.

Ofcourse it wouldn't state what are chances if there's a guaranteed crit

>If you remove that outcome, the question becomes, what becomes of those outcomes.
They go away. Post-facto. You're left with the remaining 75%. You divide the remaining outcomes' probabilities by 0.75 to make all the valid outcomes sum to 1. The probability tree is left as is, we went to prune an outcome, not fuck up the probabilities of each step.
>Its not though.
Yes.
>it does not tell us how we arrived at one garunteed crit
There is none. You're guaranteed a sum of crits, not either swing.
>Is it because the game is programmed in such a way that if you miss the first you have to hit the second. Or is it because we already swung once and crit. Or because we swung twice, with a blindfold on and are trying to work backwards? the constraint is not properly given.
Yeah, you're not meant to make any additional assumptions. It's solvable without them. It's 1/3, and it's the only real answer.

answer is 50%

Your fortune: You will meet a dark handsome stranger

i know you fucktard, that's why i wrote the second sentence

answer is 33.3_%

Your fortune: Good Luck

on the other hand, if you have the four possible outcomes, and one of the three that has at least one critical hit is selected at random, then you'll get 1/3

25%, EZ, faggot

well that's the op question. you're basically ignoring the statement "at least one of them is a crit" wich is incredibely important. for pure logic, just because it voids the hit-hit possibility, and mathematically is just translate to conditional probabilities "chances of X to happen knowing that Y happened", wich is really simple to calculate, and is 1/3 in this question

Explain the problem so I can laugh at you afterwards.

then why did you say 50% you fucktard.

...

>If there's a guaranteed crit
There isn't. You are guaranteed AT LEAST one crit. Which you are, the moment you exclude H/H. You don't have any more information. You can't exclude anything else. You're left with the 3 other options, all equally likely.
>but also either c/h or h/c as a scenario
Which is why there is no "guaranteed crit". The first swing isn't guaranteed. The OP says "at least one", and it might not be the first one. The second isn't guaranteed either, since it doesn't specify either way. Neither C/H or H/C can be excluded. So there is no guaranteed crit. It's nonsense. You've 3 options, and one of them is the double crit he asked for.

But it does matter which one is the crit faggot.

I roll two six sided dice. What are the odds that I roll a two? What are the odds that I roll a three?

1/6, retard

You were not guaranteed a two or a three on either die, therefore that question isn't the same as the one being asked. What you meant to ask was, "You roll two six sided die. You are guaranteed to roll a two on at least one die. What are the chances that the second die will roll a 2 or a 3?"

Okay let me rephrase. What are the odds that I roll snake eyes? What are the odds that the two dice sum to three?

Attached: 1429595619809[2].png (600x456, 82K)

You're reading the question wrong. It says 2 hits which means you need to apply 50/50 twice. 50/50 for the first then 50/50 for the second with the caveat that if the first is not a crit, the second is guaranteed. Put that into math terms and it's not 50%, it's 33%.

ARE YOU SERIOUSLY THAT RETARDED ?

>"You make 69 hits. 68 of them were crits. If you have a 50% chance to make a crit, what are the chances all 69 hits are crits?"

translates in this problem to. "you make a hit, it's a crit, what the probability of both being crits" WICH IS NOT THE FUCKING QUESTION.

BOTH HITS ARE DONE, SOME EXTERIOR DUDE WHO KNOWS THE ANSWER TELLS YOU "one of them is a crit" THEN THE PROBABILITY FOR BOTH BEING CRITS IS 1//3 STOP BEING SO FUCKING BAD AT BOTH ENGLISH AND MATHS

read the fucking logic, it's correct, just like it just depends on the interpretation. if OP is talking about a specific pair of hits, where at least one of them is critical then it's 50%. if he is saying that he has selected a random pair of hits where at least one is critical, then it's 1/3

No, you are. You make two hits, yes. One is guaranteed to be a crit. You can now disregard half of the question and are left with the remainder. If you have a 50/50 chance to make a crit, what are the chances of making a crit?

Irrelevant. You were not guaranteed a specific roll in that situation, therefore the maths are completely different.

50%

Attached: 105T.gif (256x192, 32K)

>"You have a 50% chance for your hit to be a crit. You make two hits. What are the chances that both are crits?" then yes, the answer is 1/3 because in this scenario, you are not guaranteed a crit.
25%

>This is basic reading comprehension.
hahahahhahahahaha.

>You are told that one hit out of 2 was already critical
>If you have a 50/50 chance to make a crit, what are the chances you make a crit?" It is 50%.
It's not saying you have one hit confirmed, roll for next hit, it's saying out of all possiblities, the possiblities that have at least one crit are the ones that could've happened.

>"You make 69 hits. 68 of them were crits. If you have a 50% chance to make a crit, what are the chances all 69 hits are crits?"
0.00000000000000000016940659% or something stupid like that
Now if you said:
"You make 69 hits. THE FIRST 68 of them were crits. If you have a 50% chance to make a crit, what are the chances all 69 hits are crits?"
I'd say 50%.

1/6

25% is the correct answer.

...

Correction,
>"You make 69 hits. 68 of them were crits. If you have a 50% chance to make a crit, what are the chances all 69 hits are crits?"
would be 1.428571428%

It is a poorly worded problem. Both 25% and 50% interpretations are possible, although the 50% one seems more "likely" to me as second language English speaker.

>IT'S GUARANTEED
Which hit is?

Answer the question faggot. When you figure out why rolling ONE and TWO is twice as likely as rolling ONE and ONE, you'll understand why the double crit is 33%.

Wrong. Its 1/3. It's actually quite simple if you're not retarded.

It doesn't matter. If the first hit is a crit, then the 2nd hit has a 50% chance to crit, it either does or doesn't.
If the 1st hit isn't a crit then the 2nd hit is 100% a crit.

No it's not. "At least one of the hits is a crit", there is no possible way you could interpret that as meaning "The first hit is a crit".
Those are two completely different sentences conveying different information.

it very much matters
if the first hit is "guaranteed", you exclude H/C, if the second, you exclude C/H

0.5*0.5
75% one crit
25% zero crits
25% two crits

What if the first crit and the second is guarenteed to crit?

It's 50%. Since the first hit was already a crit it doesn't enter into the equation. The problem is essentially asking "what is the chance you'll get a single crit with a 50% crit rate".

The first crit is your guaranteed crit.

Prove it

If it is assumed that this information was obtained by looking at both hits to see if there is at least one critical, then three of the four equally probable events for a two-hit sequence are possible, and thus the answer is 1/3

If, however, the information was obtained by randomly observing one of the two hits to be a critical, then the probability of two criticals is now equivalent to the probability of the other hit to be a critical, i.e. 50%

Then you rolled your 50% on the first hit.
You either crit or you don't, it's really that simple

If we knew which one crits it would be 1/2
Given we don't which one crits we are left with 3 equiprobable outcomes, so it's 1/3

Where does it say that fag

...

It doesn't HAVE TO, we just know it did
Are you dumb niggers so uneducated you lack even the most basic reading comprehension?
Learn to fucking read

>Yeah, you're not meant to make any additional assumptions.
You are, guaranteeing 1 hit is not remotely possible with with a 50% chance of a hit. Its not fucking rocket science.

Possible outcomes:
Crit -> Hit
Hit -> Crit
Crit -> Crit

The probability being: In one of three cases as covered by the prompt, you proc a crit both times.

>guaranteeing 1 crit
Is already done in the premise. "You get at least one crit". It's solved before you get it.