# Puzzles and Creativity

It’s a tiny accomplishment, but it is a solution (if not, then show where).

Your proposed solution breaks the clearly stated rules of what is allowed.

Again you you lie. Whatever satisfies that shitty ego. I used to have my inanimates eat through such dividers. You’ve expressed a similar disdain. Anyone capable will see the simplicity and adherence.

Are we even talking about the same puzzle? I was talking about the first one:

“At a work picnic, Todd announces a challenge to his coworkers. Bruce and
Ava are selected to play first. Todd places \$100 on a table and
explains the game. Bruce and Ava will each draw a random card from a
standard 52-card deck. Each will hold that card to his/her forehead for
the other person to see, but neither can see his/her own card. The
players may not communicate in any way. Bruce and Ava will each write
down a guess for the color of his/her own card, i.e. red or black. If
either one of them guesses correctly, they both win \$50. If they are
both incorrect, they lose. He gives Bruce and Ava five minutes to devise
a strategy beforehand by which they can guarantee that they each walk
away with the \$50.”

In this puzzle, they are not allowed to communicate beforehand and during the game. So for me, that means it is impossible to solve. Do you disagree?

No, I’m talking about both parts.

Read the readme.md, at least the first part that describes the solution to the first part of the puzzle.

The approach is to arrange beforehand to guess in a coordinated way so as to cover the space of possibilities. My apologies for not being good enough at explaining it, but the strategy is quite clear. You can then confirm it by working on paper the small matrix of possibilities, which only takes a minute or two. Let me know if you wish me to set that out, I thought it was obvious.

Seems that way. Assume there was a flaw in logic and presentation as would be necessary for participation, wouldn’t what I presented be supported by what is considered a considered acceptable arrived by the explanatory logic given by NSA.

But they’re two different puzzles with two different rules. How can we solve the first one if they are not allowed to communicate during the game and they don’t know about the puzzle before?

Classic dodge. No good.
Sleep time for me. You’re boring.

Fine, im gonna do it but what if i still dont understand it afterwards? am i gonna get the same response?

No, I’ll work the table and show you that it is an exhaustive solution.

He he. Have fun as usual. Only simple men will accept your nonsense. Carry on…

Okay, we’re definately talking about different things here. Because I got stuck at the rules for the first puzzle. It does not compute for me:

If they are not able to communicate beforehand, and during the first game, how can they decide who chooses what?

I’m a simple man. I admit that my explanation is deficient. But the strategy is proven by the program.

1 Like

Quote:

He gives Bruce and Ava five minutes to devise a strategy beforehand

They are not allowed to communicate during the game, from the description of the game:

Bruce and Ava will each draw a random card from a standard 52-card deck. Each will hold that card to his/her forehead for the other person to see, but neither can see his/her own card. The players may not communicate in any way.

That rule only applies for the second game, not the first one. Because it explicitly says

Bruce and Ava complete their game and Todd announces the second level of the game.

So the 5 minutes- rule does not apply to the first game.

And then allows for the viewing of each others card. Don’t play innocent. Both our solutions reach the requested solution. I have appreciated and used both types during issues preceding this. Little disputes like this are heaven.

Regarding the second game, it says:

There is no communication while the game is in progress, but they have five minutes to devise a strategy beforehand

[my emphasis]

But go on to tell us that the calculations are based on what the viewer sees. Stop it blue.

Tbh, I haven’t looked at the second game. I stopped when the first one was not solvable. I get irritated when that happens.

On a side note: You two are funny together, you’re communicating in a quirky way

I’m cool, it’s quite clear.

Is it clear to you now that they can communicate to devise a strategy for five minutes before each game, and then not communicate during the game?