# We Didn't Have A Riddle Thread Before; NOW we do



## The Backward OX (Oct 11, 2012)

Here's a start (French linguists only):

_*Q:* There were two cats, 1 2 3 cat and Un deux trois cat, and they had a swimming race from England to France. Who won?

__*A:* 1 2 3 Cat because Un deux trois quatre cinq 



_Your turn. Don't let the side down.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Oct 11, 2012)

Oh, I was gonna say neither, because cats hate water. They would just scratch the heck out of somebody and go back to grooming themselves. But yours works, too.


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 11, 2012)

*It's A Puzzlement!*

Dear Backward Ox – I have just the thing for you!

_*It’s A Puzzlement!

*_​Three men are visiting a motel and are asking for a shared room. The man behind the desk tells them that for one night this will cost them £30.00. Each man pays £10 and they go to their room. A while later the man behind the desk realises that the room costs only £25, so he gives the bellboy £5.00 and asks him to return it to the men. On the way the bellboy tries to figure out how to split £5 evenly between the three men. He can’t work it out, so he decides to give each man £1 and to keep the remaining £2 as a tip for himself. 

Having got their refund, the three men each paid £9 for their room, making a total of £27. When you add to this the £2 the bellboy kept, the total is £29. Where is the other pound? 

I was asked to send this to five people and the answer would appear on my screen, which was supposed to be crazy. Alas, it never came. ‘Ah well, you win a few and you lose a few,’ I thought. The solution came to me later when I pondered on this puzzle some more.

If you have also found one, please let me know and I will share mine with you. Hopefully, we’ll come to the same conclusion!

Created by Anon​


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 11, 2012)

This is very like the one where the father said to his son, “I have eleven fingers,” and the son said, “Show me.” So the father held up one hand and counted off his fingers: “Ten, nine eight, seven, six…”. Then he held up his other hand and said, “And five makes eleven.”


I’ve heard yours before but without cheating can’t tell you the answer.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Oct 11, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> *A:* 1 2 3 Cat because Un deux trois quatre cinq



Is it wrong to love you for this?
I hope not.

Anyway.

_Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men, couldn't put Humpty together again._
Betcha didn't know it was a riddle.


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 11, 2012)

Staff Deployment said:


> _Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men, couldn't put Humpty together again._
> Betcha didn't know it was a riddle.


Just off the top of my head, wasn't it about the soldiers on one side or the other in the English Civil War trying to get their big cannon back on top of the castle wall in Colchester after it was knocked down by the opposition?


----------



## Staff Deployment (Oct 11, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> Just off the top of my head, wasn't it about the soldiers on one side or the other in the English Civil War trying to get their big cannon back on top of the castle wall in Colchester after it was knocked down by the opposition?



That may or may not be a thing that happened but it certainly isn't the answer to the riddle.


----------



## HKayG (Oct 11, 2012)

What goes around the world but stays in the corner?


----------



## Crash_Tomas (Oct 11, 2012)

Courtjester said:


> Three men are visiting a motel and are asking for a shared room. The man behind the desk tells them that for one night this will cost them £30.00. Each man pays £10 and they go to their room. A while later the man behind the desk realises that the room costs only £25, so he gives the bellboy £5.00 and asks him to return it to the men. On the way the bellboy tries to figure out how to split £5 evenly between the three men. He can’t work it out, so he decides to give each man £1 and to keep the remaining £2 as a tip for himself.
> 
> Having got their refund, the three men each paid £9 for their room, making a total of £27. When you add to this the £2 the bellboy kept, the total is £29. Where is the other pound?



Pretty sure, since 5 divided by 3 is 1.666666 that there will always be something missing. But really there is nothing missing at all. It's just a fault in Math. because the amount does not add up with the rules that one must follow in order to gain back the other pound. I learned this in the dollar form in some class somewhere. the bellboy is an idiot and should have given them all a dollar sixty, or 1.6 and just kept the remaining for himself.


----------



## Jeko (Oct 11, 2012)

Courtjester: I worked that out quite quickly. Pm'd you the answer, so as not to spoil it for others.

No mathematical fault.


----------



## Sam (Oct 11, 2012)

Courtjester said:


> Dear Backward Ox – I have just the thing for you!
> 
> _*It’s A Puzzlement!
> 
> ...



This is one that used to be on the MindTrap games. It's not as much a mathematical anomaly as it is a misdirect. It seems logical when you look at it from the angle you've given. Three men are charged £30 for a room. Later, the owner realises they have been overcharged and gives £5 to the bellhop, who keeps £2 for himself and gives each man £1. That means they have now paid £9 each for the room, or £27 in total which, when added to the bellhop's £2, comes to £29. But while the men _did _spend £27 on the room, only £25 went to the hotel. The bellhop kept £2 for himself, and the men were given back £3. 

25+2+3 = 30.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 11, 2012)

Sam W said:


> This is one that used to be on the MindTrap games. It's not as much a mathematical anomaly as it is a misdirect. It seems logical when you look at it from the angle you've given. Three men are charged £30 for a room. Later, the owner realises they have been overcharged and gives £5 to the bellhop, who keeps £2 for himself and gives each man £1. That means they have now paid £9 each for the room, or £27 in total which, when added to the bellhop's £2, comes to £29. But while the men _did _spend £27 on the room, only £25 went to the hotel. The bellhop kept £2 for himself, and the men were given back £3.
> 
> 25+2+3 = 30.



Yeah "misdirect" is a good description. 

Another way of putting it is, the luckless men paid £27 for a £25 room because the bellhop lied and stole £2.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 11, 2012)

The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.

Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?


----------



## Potty (Oct 11, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.
> 
> Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?



Depends how many chickens I didn't eat.


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 11, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.
> 
> Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?





Potty said:


> Depends how many chickens I didn't eat.





ahem..._I_ do the jokes.


----------



## Potty (Oct 11, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> ahem..._I_ do the jokes.



Guess where this is going.


----------



## Cran (Oct 11, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.
> 
> Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?


It took one hour minus 60 seconds, or 59 minutes.


----------



## Tiamat (Oct 11, 2012)

A woman was camping in the wilderness.  She pitched her tent, and then hiked five miles south, then turned east and hiked five miles in that direction.  Finally, she turned north and hiked a further five miles where she came across a bear ripping apart her tent.  What color was the bear?


----------



## Crash_Tomas (Oct 11, 2012)

Tiamat said:


> A woman was camping in the wilderness.  She pitched her tent, and then hiked five miles south, then turned east and hiked five miles in that direction.  Finally, she turned north and hiked a further five miles where she came across a bear ripping apart her tent.  What color was the bear?



hahaha. Is she even at her tent? it seems she's five miles east of her campsite.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Oct 11, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.
> 
> Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?



59 minutes.
I haven't looked on the second page to see if anyone else answered this.
It took me like 3 seconds, is this a riddle?


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 11, 2012)

Tiamat said:


> A woman was camping in the wilderness. She pitched her tent, and then hiked five miles south, then turned east and hiked five miles in that direction. Finally, she turned north and hiked a further five miles where she came across a bear ripping apart her tent. What color was the bear?


As the only place from which you could travel those same consecutive distances in three directions and finish up back where you started is the North Pole, the bear has to be white. 



Crash_Tomas said:


> hahaha. Is she even at her tent? it seems she's five miles east of her campsite.



Duuuuh.


----------



## Skodt (Oct 11, 2012)

Heres one I remember from the Nick show Are you afraid of the dark: What gets bigger as you take stuff away and smaller when you add things?


----------



## Tiamat (Oct 12, 2012)

Skodt said:


> Heres one I remember from the Nick show Are you afraid of the dark: What gets bigger as you take stuff away and smaller when you add things?


Why, that would have to be a hole.

What can run but cannot walk, has a mouth but cannot talk, has a head but cannot weep, has a bed but cannot sleep?


----------



## Staff Deployment (Oct 12, 2012)

Motor, canyon, dandelion, the ocean

Wait, was it supposed to be just one thing?

What about a mute insomniac with both his eyes missing and that adrenaline thing from that Jason Statham movie?


----------



## Trilby (Oct 12, 2012)

Tiamat said:


> Why, that would have to be a hole.
> 
> What can run but cannot walk, has a mouth but cannot talk, has a head but cannot weep, has a bed but cannot sleep?



A river.


----------



## Potty (Oct 12, 2012)

What can fly but has no wings, has feathers but is not a bird, is shot but never killed?


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 12, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> The number of eggs in a magic basket doubled every 60 seconds and it took exactly 1 hour for the basket to completely fill.
> 
> Question: How long did it take for the basket to become exactly half full?


This is similar to the pond and duckweed, a leaf of duckweed falls off a duck into the pond. each day it doubles in size, if it covers the pond it will suffocate the fish, how much of the pond is covered on the last day the farmer can remove weed and save his fish? Now apply it to global warming and the loss of polar ice.


----------



## Jeko (Oct 12, 2012)

What has four legs and flies?


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 12, 2012)

Don't you mean four wheels?


----------



## Cran (Oct 12, 2012)

Tiamat said:


> A woman was camping in the wilderness.  She pitched her tent, and then hiked five miles south, then turned east and hiked five miles in that direction.  Finally, she turned north and hiked a further five miles where she came across a bear ripping apart her tent.  What color was the bear?



White. She pitched her tent on the North Pole.


----------



## Cran (Oct 12, 2012)

Potty said:


> What can fly but has no wings, has feathers but is not a bird, is shot but never killed?



An arrow.


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 12, 2012)

Cadence said:


> Courtjester: I worked that out quite quickly. Pm'd you the answer, so as not to spoil it for others.
> 
> No mathematical fault.



Thank you for that! You have come to the right conclusion. Not to give things away too early, I shall post the solution in a while. Hope that's ok with everybody else. Cj


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 12, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> I’ve heard yours before but without cheating can’t tell you the answer.



See my note to Cadence. Hope that's all right with you, too. Cj


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 12, 2012)

Sam W said:


> This is one that used to be on the MindTrap games. It's not as much a mathematical anomaly as it is a misdirect. It seems logical when you look at it from the angle you've given. Three men are charged £30 for a room. Later, the owner realises they have been overcharged and gives £5 to the bellhop, who keeps £2 for himself and gives each man £1. That means they have now paid £9 each for the room, or £27 in total which, when added to the bellhop's £2, comes to £29. But while the men _did _spend £27 on the room, only £25 went to the hotel. The bellhop kept £2 for himself, and the men were given back £3.
> 
> 25+2+3 = 30.



Seeing that you have given the solution, here is the one that came to me: the manager takes £30.00 and returns £5.00 of them = he now has £25.00 in his pants' pockets. 

The bellboy takes the fiver to the men, gives each one £1.00 and keeps the remaining £2.00 as a tip. Why shouldn’t he now, poor devil that he is with small earnings?

aving H Having received their refund, the men have each paid £9.00 = in total their expense was £27.00.

The questioner started from the wrong premise by deducting the bellboy’s £2.00 from the original £30.00 Okay, he’s cheated the men out of them, but they’re on holiday and can afford it. The owner has the correct sum of £25.00 and when you add the boy’s £2.00 to it, the total amount that remains *in* the hotel comes to £27.00 – the amount paid by the men.

Cj


----------



## Jeko (Oct 12, 2012)

> Don't you mean four wheels?



Only if you have very perculiar trousers.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 12, 2012)

Cadence said:


> What has four legs and flies?



 A pair of pilots? naaa, strike that.

...or maybe it's one of the four legged chickens KFC is breeding for Potty, heard he loves his drumsticks. lol


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 12, 2012)

Thanks Ox, this is fun ...remembered one from school days, back in the 60s:

Situation: 


You are unable to escape from a room except by opening (yourself) one of only two doors.
On opening one of the doors you would instantly be sucked into a tiny closet and held there without food or water until you died, and on opening the other door you would be free.
Unfortunately, you don't know which door leads to freedom.
Beside each door there is a guard and you know that one of them will always answer with a lie and the other will always answer with the truth.
Unfortunately, you don't know which guard is truthful.
The guards do know which door leads where and (luckily) you are permitted to ask one (only) of them, a single question in order to work out which door leads to freedom.

What's the question?


----------



## Sam (Oct 12, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> Thanks Ox, this is fun ...remembered one from school days, back in the 60s:
> 
> Situation:
> 
> ...



You ask either guard (doesn't matter) this question: "What door would the other guard tell me leads to freedom?" Then pick the opposite one. 

If you ask this question to the guard who always tells the truth, he's going to tell you that the other guard would tell you to pick the door that leads to death. So you pick the other one. 

If you ask it to the guard who tells lies, he cannot tell you anything but a lie. Therefore he's going to say that the other guard will tell you to pick the door that leads to death. Pick the other one.


----------



## Sam (Oct 12, 2012)

This one isn't really a riddle but fun nonetheless. 

You're participating in a game show that gives you a chance to win a car at the end. The catch is that it's hidden behind one of three doors. The other two are empty. You choose door number 1, and the game-show host walks to door number 3 and opens it to reveal nothing. S/he then says to you: "You originally chose door number 1. Do you now want to change to door number 2, or are you going to stick with your first choice and hope you've won a car?" 

Is it in your best interests to take the swap?


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 12, 2012)

Sam W said:


> This one isn't really a riddle but fun nonetheless.
> 
> You're participating in a game show that gives you a chance to win a car at the end. The catch is that it's hidden behind one of three doors. The other two are empty. You choose door number 1, and the game-show host walks to door number 3 and opens it to reveal nothing. S/he then says to you: "You originally chose door number 1. Do you now want to change to door number 2, or are you going to stick with your first choice and hope you've won a car?"
> 
> Is it in your best interests to take the swap?



I'd say no, unless there's a catch. Seems I (now) have a 50/50 chance of winning whichever door I choose.


----------



## Sam (Oct 13, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> I'd say no, unless there's a catch. Seems I (now) have a 50/50 chance of winning whichever door I choose.



Most people would take your stance on it, claiming it to be a 50/50 chance. It's actually not. 

First thing you have to remember is that an equation doesn't lose an entity just because it's done away with. The original equation had three doors. One had a car behind it, the other two were empty. That means on your first pick that you have a 1/3 chance (or 33%) of picking the proper door. You have a 67% chance of picking a door with nothing behind it.

The second thing you have to remember is that the game-show host knows which door the car is behind. So, let me illustrate why swapping when offered will guarantee you a car 67% of the time. We'll say the car is behind door number 2. 

On your first choice, you pick door number 1. The host, knowing the car is behind 2, walks to 3 and opens it to reveal nothing. If you switch now you'll win the car. 

On your first choice, you pick door number 2. The host, knowing the car is behind the same door, walks to door number 1 and opens it. If you stick now you'll win the car. 

On your first choice, you pick door number 3. The host, knowing the car is behind 2, walks to 1 and opens it. If you switch now you'll win the car. 

So, sticking to your original choice gives you a 33% chance of winning the car. Switching doors gives you a 67% chance. I don't know about you, but I'll take 67% over 33% every day of the week.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 13, 2012)

Cadence said:


> What has four legs and flies?


Ox was thinking of a dustcart when he said 'wheels?', this, surely. is a dead horse, but then why peculiar trousers?


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 13, 2012)

Olly Buckle said:


> Ox was thinking of a dustcart when he said 'wheels?'



How _refained and proper_ you British are. Out here, we’d have said “dunny cart” and been done with it.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 13, 2012)

Sam W said:


> Most people would take your stance on it, claiming it to be a 50/50 chance. It's actually not.
> 
> First thing you have to remember is that an equation doesn't lose an entity just because it's done away with. The original equation had three doors. One had a car behind it, the other two were empty. That means on your first pick that you have a 1/3 chance (or 33%) of picking the proper door. You have a 67% chance of picking a door with nothing behind it.
> 
> ...



Hi Sam, 

*Car behind 2 *first choice 1​host opens 3 = switch good​first choice 2​host opens 1 = switch bad​host opens 3 = switch bad​first choice 3​host opens 1 = switch good​
If you include all four possible scenarios (not just a selected three) your formula calculates the odds at 50/50 

 I really enjoy posers like this, thanks Sam.

PS: on the subject of "shortening the odds" I once (back in my bad old days) programmed a Casio pocket computer to time the roulette ball and inner wheel to give me slightly better odds on the outcome. I had to stand right next to the wheel so I would call the core number to my friend who then placed the bet. Despite the croupier giving me permission to use the computer, "nothing can change the odds in your favour" he bragged, despite that permission we hadn't even got past testing (no bets) before security took us down to the "dungeons" where we were (apparently) let off lightly. i.e. nothing broken. lol


----------



## Cran (Oct 13, 2012)

Olly Buckle said:


> Ox was thinking of a dustcart when he said 'wheels?', this, surely. is a dead horse, but then why peculiar trousers?



Indeed, any two pairs of trousers would have four legs and flies.


So, *where, apart from in the dictionary would yesterday follow today*?


----------



## Sam (Oct 13, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> Hi Sam,
> 
> *Car behind 2 *first choice 1​host opens 3 = switch good​first choice 2​host opens 1 = switch bad​host opens 3 = switch bad​first choice 3​host opens 1 = switch good​
> If you include all four possible scenarios (not just a selected three) your formula calculates the odds at 50/50
> ...



The odds aren't 50/50. They can't be. 

When you understand that your first choice involves three doors, and the car can only be behind one of them, it becomes clear. You are 67% likely to have picked a door with nothing behind it, and only 33% likely to have picked a door with the car. Therefore, logic says that 2/3 times you will pick a door with nothing. Thus, when the game show host opens a door with nothing behind it and asks you if you want to switch, you are _still _more likely to have chosen the other door with nothing behind it. Therefore, switching will give you the car 67% of the time. 

By sticking to your original choice, you're wagering that the door you chose to begin with is in fact the door with the car behind it. Unfortunately, there's only a 33% chance of that happening. So, for that reason, probability dictates that it is always in your best interests to take the swap.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 13, 2012)

This is getting a bit serious, for a change of tone;

What is green and hairy and goes up and down?


----------



## Cran (Oct 13, 2012)

Olly Buckle said:


> This is getting a bit serious, for a change of tone;
> 
> What is green and hairy and goes up and down?



A gooseberry on a see-saw, or in an elevator.

Bumping: *where, apart from in the dictionary would yesterday follow today*?


----------



## ppsage (Oct 13, 2012)

Sam W said:


> The odds aren't 50/50. They can't be.
> 
> When you understand that your first choice involves three doors, and the car can only be behind one of them, it becomes clear. You are 67% likely to have picked a door with nothing behind it, and only 33% likely to have picked a door with the car. Therefore, logic says that 2/3 times you will pick a door with nothing. Thus, when the game show host opens a door with nothing behind it and asks you if you want to switch, you are _still _more likely to have chosen the other door with nothing behind it. Therefore, switching will give you the car 67% of the time.
> 
> By sticking to your original choice, you're wagering that the door you chose to begin with is in fact the door with the car behind it. Unfortunately, there's only a 33% chance of that happening. So, for that reason, probability dictates that it is always in your best interests to take the swap.



Although the MC is offering the choice misleadingly, with reference to the original choice, nothing in his offer constrains your choice in the present situation, you are actually free to choose among all options in the new situation and so probabilities for the original situation have no bearing. It's now the same as if there were only two doors to start. In the new situation, your odds have improved, from 33% to 50%.

Edit. In other words, opening a door has redistributed the probabilities from 33% 33% 33% to 50% 50% 0%.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Oct 13, 2012)

Skodt said:


> Heres one I remember from the Nick show Are you afraid of the dark: What gets bigger as you take stuff away and smaller when you add things?



The National Debt...


----------



## Bloggsworth (Oct 13, 2012)

Sam W said:


> This one isn't really a riddle but fun nonetheless.
> 
> You're participating in a game show that gives you a chance to win a car at the end. The catch is that it's hidden behind one of three doors. The other two are empty. You choose door number 1, and the game-show host walks to door number 3 and opens it to reveal nothing. S/he then says to you: "You originally chose door number 1. Do you now want to change to door number 2, or are you going to stick with your first choice and hope you've won a car?"
> 
> Is it in your best interests to take the swap?



Yes.


----------



## Sam (Oct 13, 2012)

For the people who don't believe that it is in the best interests to take the swap, google 'Monty Hall Problem'. There are people with PhDs who have disputed that there is no benefit to be gained. There is. It's simple probability. 

Nobody's getting serious, by the way.


----------



## Bloggsworth (Oct 13, 2012)

ppsage said:


> Although the MC is offering the choice misleadingly, with reference to the original choice, nothing in his offer constrains your choice in the present situation, you are actually free to choose among all options in the new situation and so probabilities for the original situation have no bearing. It's now the same as if there were only two doors to start. In the new situation, your odds have improved, from 33% to 50%.
> 
> Edit. In other words, opening a door has redistributed the probabilities from 33% 33% 33% to 50% 50% 0%.



No it hasn't - Go and read up on Game Theory. The correct explanation has been given.


----------



## ppsage (Oct 13, 2012)

In Sam's calculation, the odds in favor of switching remain at 67%, even if the car was behind door #3.

Edit. I must admit, that the Monty Python articles are very convincing. A bit too algebraic for me to follow the general cases completely or their theoretical objectors.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 13, 2012)

Sam W said:


> For the people who don't believe that it is in the best interests to take the swap, google 'Monty Hall Problem'. There are people with PhDs who have disputed that there is no benefit to be gained. There is. It's simple probability.
> 
> Nobody's getting serious, by the way.



Sam,

Thanks for the link, as far as I can see they found 50 different ways to say the odds favour the many. lol 

For what it's worth, i think the key lies in applying current knowlege when viewing history.

Odds at the start were 1:3 because there were three possible doors but what were the odds (then) between the two doors now remaining in contention? 

Obviously it was 50/50 then, as it is now.

Another way of looking at it is to start with 10 doors. Each time a door is eliminated the odds of player having selected the car get better and odds in favour of the (decreasing) many get less, however odds continue to favour the many unchosen doors until there are only two, player's choice and another, at which point the unchosen are not "many" anymore and it becomes 50/50.   

In probability math they probably never reach exactly 1:1 lol

What a good poser! (smile)

Yours,

Ian


----------



## Sam (Oct 13, 2012)

With the greatest of respect, you're essentially arguing against a proven application. The Monty Hall Problem goes through this in great detail, and it all comes down to one key point: There is a greater likelihood (2/3 as opposed to 1/3) that you will pick an empty door with your first choice. That probability is not suddenly rendered null and void because a door has been removed and it _seems _there is now a 50/50 split. 

It is simple mathematics and probability. You've only got one car. You've three doors. 67% of the time you will pick a door with no car. Subsequently, that means 67% of the time switching will give you the car. Whereas, if you stick with your original choice, there can *only* *ever* be a 33% chance of success. For that reason, switching is *always* to the benefit of the player.

Edit: I realise I've slightly derailed the thread here, so I won't say anything else on this matter.


----------



## Cran (Oct 13, 2012)

And this one was also lost in debates:


HKayG said:


> *What goes around the world but stays in the corner?*


A postage stamp.


So - for the third time: *where, apart from in the dictionary would yesterday follow today*?


----------



## Crash_Tomas (Oct 13, 2012)

The newspaper?


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 13, 2012)

Sam W said:


> With the greatest of respect, you're essentially arguing against a proven application. The Monty Hall Problem goes through this in great detail, and it all comes down to one key point: There is a greater likelihood (2/3 as opposed to 1/3) that you will pick an empty door with your first choice. That probability is not suddenly rendered null and void because a door has been removed and it _seems _there is now a 50/50 split.
> 
> It is simple mathematics and probability. You've only got one car. You've three doors. 67% of the time you will pick a door with no car. Subsequently, that means 67% of the time switching will give you the car. Whereas, if you stick with your original choice, there can *only* *ever* be a 33% chance of success. For that reason, switching is *always* to the benefit of the player.
> 
> Edit: I realise I've slightly derailed the thread here, so I won't say anything else on this matter.



You are right on both counts Sam,

Apologies to Ox for hijacking the topic.

Sam, thanks for being so patient with me, I can see it now after reading a paper at M.I.T. which explained how the original odds were retained.

Makes perfect sense to me now. _Because the host (Monty) may only expose an empty(goat) door, there is never any risk of the "many" group losing its "plumb"(car) whenever it has one.  i.e. even when it seems there are only two doors remaining in the equation, there are actually three with the unchosen one representing the final result of whether or not either of the two unselected doors had the car. -_ amazing, I am still reeling_. LOL_

Thanks again Sam, great poser and you were right.

Best Ian

M.I.T. - https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...STyNBP&sig=AHIEtbQ6PK-QG3QtmT_Nmd4Jz2KHkiucIA

...here's an easy one, draw a single line through all of the walls without crossing any wall more than once and without crossing over your own line. In the example you can see the three walls I missed:

View attachment 3528


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 13, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> Here's a start (French linguists only):
> 
> _*Q:* There were two cats, 1 2 3 cat and Un deux trois cat, and they had a swimming race from England to France. Who won?
> 
> ...



Oh Ox, this is so funny I copied it to Facebook. :grin: ...hope that's ok?


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 13, 2012)

Cran said:


> So - for the third time: *where, apart from in the dictionary would yesterday follow today*?



Oh, my Gawd. In the mind of someone crossing the International Date Line from West to East.


----------



## Cran (Oct 14, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> Oh, my Gawd. In the mind of someone crossing the International Date Line from West to East.


Score one more for the Aussies! 
Crossing the International Dateline from West to East means turning back your watch 
or clock a full 24 hours; or going from today to yesterday.


----------



## Sam (Oct 14, 2012)

What work can one never finish?


----------



## qwertyman (Oct 14, 2012)

Here's one.

Who has written a brilliant 80,000 word novel on the Spanish Civil War and had it rejected by six illiterate bufoons who call themselves agents?





Clue: it's not Hemingway.


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 14, 2012)

Don’t you mean “_who’s the illiterate buffoon who wrote a so-so story that wanders in and out of various times and places, that includes a few random paragraphs on the Spanish Civil War, and rightly had it sent to the bin by discerning agents"?_


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 14, 2012)

Cran said:


> Score one more for the Aussies!
> Crossing the International Dateline from West to East means turning back your watch
> or clock a full 24 hours; or going from today to yesterday.


To be fair, most residents of the Northern Hemisphere have probably never heard of the International Dateline. They probably all believe their days start and end at sunrise and sunset on their national borders, or some such rubbish.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 14, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> To be fair, most residents of the Northern Hemisphere have probably never heard of the International Dateline. They probably all believe their days start and end at sunrise and sunset on their national borders, or some such rubbish.



...we invented it LOL


----------



## Kevin (Oct 14, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> To be fair, most residents of the Northern Hemisphere have probably never heard of the International Dateline. They probably all believe their days start and end at sunrise and sunset on their national borders, or some such rubbish.


 I don't get it. No place else matters, I mean, uh, those people, are they actual people? Well. anyway:
If you're American in the kitchen, what are you in the *bathroom? 

*that's American for 'water-closet' room, toily-toily, or whatever else you call the place where you make no. 1 & 2. No. 1 and no. 2 mean...uh, nevermind.


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 19, 2012)

A man is found dangling from the ceiling. He has hanged himself with a noose. Under him is a large puddle of water, but only his footprints are leading up to the scene, so clearly nobody else was involved. There is nothing nearby like a box, a chair or a stool to enable him to reach the noose. 

Question: How did he hang himself?


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 19, 2012)

I would guess he stood on a block of ice, but then where did the footprints come from? It wouldn't have been melted when he arrived, or were the footprints in the dust?


----------



## Cran (Oct 19, 2012)

Yeah, the footprints end at the puddle, Olly. 



> If you're American in the kitchen, what are you in the *bathroom?


Occupied.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 19, 2012)

Open question of course but I'm guessing Ox will know what this represents:


----------



## Potty (Oct 19, 2012)

Sam W said:


> What work can one never finish?



The work I will probably put off again in the morning.


----------



## Kevin (Oct 20, 2012)

(answer to my p.p.: Eur_a_-pean)   what x 2=24? 12. 12 what? twelve months? 12 months is a year. Is it a date? Hmm, hmmm.

 Why is being in June such a relief, _and_ so full of consternation?


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 20, 2012)

Kevin said:


> (answer to my p.p.: Eur_a_-pean)   what x 2=24? 12. 12 what? twelve months? 12 months is a year. Is it a date? Hmm, hmmm.
> 
> Why is being in June such a relief, _and_ so full of consternation?



...nice try but not a date - clue: "without teeth it would not survive"

I think the people who should know have woken up, yawned, tiptoed across the international date line in their dainty little rugby booties and gone back to sleep. 

Kevin, your "June" riddle has me guessing. Nice to have riddles which are not easily "solved" by google.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 20, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> ...nice try but not a date - clue: "without teeth it would not survive"
> 
> I think the people who should know have woken up, yawned, tiptoed across the international date line in their dainty little rugby booties and gone back to sleep.
> 
> Kevin, your "June" riddle has me guessing. Nice to have riddles which are not easily "solved" by google.



ok, before i get frog marched outta here 




*  is the dental formula of Wombats  -* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wombat

I guess that makes it one all now. Uprights 1, Aussies 1. lol


----------



## Cran (Oct 20, 2012)

I'm still mulling over Sam's riddle.


----------



## Trilby (Oct 20, 2012)

Cran said:


> I'm still mulling over Sam's riddle.



A woman's.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 20, 2012)

Cran said:


> I'm still mulling over Sam's riddle.



...writing a story about yourself?

edit... no can't be because peeps do write and finish their autobiographies.


----------



## Cran (Oct 20, 2012)

I suspect *Trilby*'s answer is the correct one - _a woman's work is never done_ - 
I was just hoping to find another one. 

The only answer I can think of for *Kevin*'s is closer to the PG 13 limit than I'd like.


----------



## Kevin (Oct 20, 2012)

Kevin said:


> (answer to my p.p.: Eur_a_-pean)
> 
> Why is being in June such a relief, _and_ so full of consternation?


 Because you are dis-Mayed and therefore in dismay. (okay, I came up with this on my own...)


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 21, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> ok, before i get frog marched outta here
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm confused. Which one of these is the wombat?


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 21, 2012)

The Backward OX said:


> I'm confused. Which one of these is the wombat?



LOL I do enjoy your humour Sir Ox, unfortunately both creatures in your pic appear upright, like us in the north.

Now, in natural setting (below) it is quite clear that the one which does not look like a Wombat is not a Wombat.

View attachment 3578 ...Uprights 2, Aussies 1


----------



## Kevin (Oct 21, 2012)

"Clock -work"? Because time never stops? (even if the clock does)


----------



## Cran (Oct 21, 2012)

Kevin said:


> Because you are dis-Mayed and therefore in dismay. (okay, I came up with this on my own...)


How does that cover the "relief" part of the riddle? _
Why is being in June such a relief,_


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 25, 2012)

Cran said:


> Yeah, the footprints end at the puddle, Olly.



That's the answer, Olly and Cran.


----------



## Courtjester (Oct 25, 2012)

A truck had broken down. The driver radioed back to base to tell them that he cannot come back and that he needs another truck to rescue him. Base sends out a second truck, but to their amazement when both trucks return together, the first one is towing the second one, in spite of still being faulty.

Question: What was wrong with the first truck?


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 25, 2012)

Courtjester said:


> That's the answer, Olly and Cran.


Somewhere in the dim and distant past I remember a detective story where some one was shot with a cross-bow bolt made of ice was how I got there.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 25, 2012)

Courtjester said:


> A truck had broken down. The driver radioed back to base to tell them that he cannot come back and that he needs another truck to rescue him. Base sends out a second truck, but to their amazement when both trucks return together, the first one is towing the second one, in spite of still being faulty.
> 
> Question: What was wrong with the first truck?



Only thing I can dream up is brakes so 1 tows and 2 brakes for both?


----------



## dolphinlee (Oct 25, 2012)

*There are two vertical posts. They are 750 feet tall.

There is a 1000 foot rope tied between them.  The end of the rope is attached to the top of each post. 

 The rope sags to within 250 ft from the ground.   How far apart are the posts? 
*


----------



## Kevin (Oct 25, 2012)

Cran said:


> How does that cover the "relief" part of the riddle? _
> Why is being in June such a relief,_


 Okay, even I can only just barely see  it now ( I asked myself the same question _after _posting it) but my reasoning was that _if you are in the month of June, you are no longer in the month of May; therefore you are _dis- _May_ed, June not being May, dis' May being such a horrible month...because it's dis' May...dismay being a bad thing, but then if you're not in May, you've been 'un' or 'dis' Mayed, and it is a relief to be taken out of DisMay, June coming after May, so...any clearer yet? Ok, I'll stop...(not such a good riddle)


----------



## Kevin (Oct 25, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> Only thing I can dream up is brakes so 1 tows and 2 brakes for both?


 I was thinking that maybe they took the battery out of the 'rescue' vehicle, and put it in the first, but then it says the first one was still broke so I thought the brakes, too.  If the second in line vehicle has no brakes, it plows into the one in front everytime the first one slows down.


----------



## IanMGSmith (Oct 25, 2012)

Kevin said:


> Okay, even I can only just barely see  it now ( I asked myself the same question _after _posting it) but my reasoning was that _if you are in the month of June, you are no longer in the month of May; therefore you are _dis- _May_ed, June not being May, dis' May being such a horrible month...because it's dis' May...dismay being a bad thing, but then if you're not in May, you've been 'un' or 'dis' Mayed, and it is a relief to be taken out of DisMay, June coming after May, so...any clearer yet? Ok, I'll stop...(not such a good riddle)



...it's a very good riddle Kev. Kinda crosswordy. I'm sure Cran thinks so too or he would not have shown interest. 

Chin up... eaceful:

Ian


----------



## Courtjester (Nov 5, 2012)

IanMGSmith said:


> Only thing I can dream up is brakes so 1 tows and 2 brakes for both?



You are right! The brakes had gone on the first truck, so the second one had to act on its behalf.


----------



## Courtjester (Nov 5, 2012)

A poor greengrocer from a remote village in Scotland has a problem. He uses a pair of old scales to weigh all his vegetables and decides to buy some new weights. As they are very expensive, he wants to buy as few as possible. But he has to be able to weigh vegetables up to 40 pounds and the weights only come in rounded figures. The greengrocer can only measure exact rounded weights and has to weigh them in one go.

For example, if he uses the following 7 weights: 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 15, 20, he can weigh

1lb = the 1lb weight
2lb = the 2lb weight
3lb = the 1lb plus the 2lb
4lb = the 4lb weight
5lb + 1lb = the 6lb weight etc. 

But seven weights are too much. It can be done with less. Can you help the greengrocer and tell him how many and which weights he should buy to enable him to weigh every pound between 1 and 40?


----------

