Talk:Problem of points

Clear explanation

A clear explanation of the problem is desparately needed: see the external links, which provide it. Geometry guy 21:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics

A relatively recent addition, but in a desperate state. It is pretty hard even to work out what it is about. Has anyone heard of this problem? If so, can you elucidate? Geometry guy 16:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard of it at some time or another. It's a fairly significant historical problem in probability theory. It has something to do with the fair division of a number of stakes in a game of chance given the number of points scored among multiple players (or something along these lines). It is, if I recall correctly, the European origin of Pascal's triangle. Silly rabbit 16:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This appears to be consistent with the contents of the article! Geometry guy 20:32, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is notable and famous, but I have never heard it referred to by that name. Blaise Pascal briefly mentions it, without giving it any name. de Méré's problem seems to be a different problem. –Henning Makholm 20:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(I must admit, however, that Google finds a number of non-Wikipedia uses of the "problem of points" name –Henning Makholm 21:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

If I understand the article and the history correctly, de Méré's problem is unrelated, but Pascal (and Fermat) worked on a different problem, also posted by the Chevalier de Méré, which is a special case of the problem of points. de Méré asked Pascal to consider a game in which the players threw dice, scoring one point for each successful roll, until one player had accumulated six points and so won the game and the pot. Suppose the players must abandon the game when the score is five to four. How should they split the pot? de Méré said they should split it 3-1, but his associate said that they should split it some other way, maybe 5-4, or 2-1, or something. Pascal and Fermat agreed that 3-1 was correct.

In any case, I do believe that the problem is historically significant. -- Dominus 21:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all: any chance someone could transfer these clarifications to the article? It doesn seem to be an important one, and I'm kind of busy right now. Geometry guy 21:50, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(end of copy from WT:WPM)

A more or less complete rewrite seems to be in order. I have started with a clearer statement of the problem at the top. Feel free to join in. –Henning Makholm 01:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I propose moving the entire thing (with appropriate redirects) to Dividing the stakes, which seems to google better. Comments? –Henning Makholm 14:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice (and quick) work! As far as I know "Problem of points" is the standard name for this, although it does sound awkward to English ears. My own cursory googling suggests that Dividing the stakes refers perhaps more to the general concept, and the Problem of points to this particular problem. Anyway, I don't have a strong preference one way or another. As long as a suitable redirect is in place, it doesn't seem to matter. Silly rabbit 15:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. I have redirected Dividing the stakes and Division of the stakes here instead. –Henning Makholm 22:12, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right now the page ends with Pascal and Huygens; however James Bernoulli was also working on it, in winter of 1685-86. Bernoulli’s contribution was to consider the players of unequal skill (that is having probabilities of winning p and 1−p), he calls it “the problem of game of tennis”. His findings were published only after his death, in “Lettre a un amy, sur les parties du jeu de paume” (1713?). // stpasha » 21:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem while Editing

The ratio in the final answer was given opposite, so I tried to rewrite it but something went wrong. Please help. Shouvikgreat (talk) 21:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chevalier of "the Chevalier"?

"While the Chevalier de Méré" or "While Chevalier de Méré"? "Chevalier" is not his name, it's a title (knight: "the knight of Méré"). Just wondering, because I'm not 100% fluent in English. In French, it's always "le Chevalier de Méré" in a sentence, so I wonder wether it should be "the Chevalier" or just "Chevalier" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:8A8D:FE80:D9AB:48C7:AA2F:2777 (talk) 09:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can have

It is very easy to compute the probabilities of winning if the probability p of winning a point is any number, not only one half. I want to know if you are interested in me writing a paragraph for this more general setting. It uses binomial distribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santropedro (talk • contribs) 23:15, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]