bonanova

Better just to throw one across.

With this one you could get lost taking a wrong turn.

Variation of solved puzzle.

Hi danimal, and welcome to Brainden. Not to call you out, but either you didn't read and understand the posts in this thread, or you're looking for an excuse [saying the puzzle is flawed] for not coming up with a solution to a challenging riddle. Here's why I say that ... [1] The problem never states what ratio of black hats to red hats there are or will be. Distribution is not implied, and it's not relevant. [2] Bonanova's solution won't work if ... [there are certain color distributions]. Distribution is not implied, and it's not relevant. You probably didn't understand the riddle. [3] The prisoner at the end and moving up the line will have a look at a larger sample size of the hats and might figure out that black and red hats are not distributed evenly, but as you get to the middle of the line, it becomes a wash and the prisoners don't see enough hats in front of them to make an informed decision. This simply makes no sense in the context of the riddle: Sample size is irrelevant. Distribution is irrelevant. Seeing "enough hats" is irrelevant. [4] The problem also does not state whether each prisoner will be able to hear their fellow prisoner's answer as to red or black or know the outcome of their answer; if they got it right and they get to live or die. Since they are all facing forward, and the King starts at the back of the line, no one is allowed to look back and see what happens. If the prisoners' answers and outcome are unknown to everyone else, it makes the decisions more of just a random guess. Can they hear? - Where does it say they are deaf? Do they know the outcome? - They don't need to. No one is allowed to look back. They don't need to. The decisions become a random guess. - Nope. Nineteen go free, guaranteed. [5] A lot of flaws to the original problem. It's challenging - perhaps both to understand and to solve - but not flawed.

Lizzie, welcome to the Den!

Hi Arkantos, Your answer requires that the likelihood of a two-girl family is the same as the likelihood of a one-boy and one-girl family. Do you really believe those are equally likely events?

... and the Hall Monitor rises again, reluctantly, to the podium: Now children, you know that on the first day of class you were all instructed to read the handout. It was come to my attention that some of you apparently didn't ... So let me read for you a portion of the handout that might be relevant at this point ... Are we all paying attention now? Good! 5. Nit-picking about wording of others' OPs. When solving a riddle, treat the OP as if it has a solution, and then try to find it. The idea is to find a solution that fits the question without violating any of the conditions. If you would have worded it differently, think it's trivial or it just isn't your cup of tea, let it go and try a different riddle. You may now return to class....

Ooops!!! Good catch!

Late to the game .. Can't find #20 due to eyes glazing over ... Good one, Nayana..!

This actually was a riddle, not trivia, for all those who questioned it. It really isn't that simple. Not always. A viable fetus can die prior to birth. That aside, this riddle might be guilty of confusing the order of events with the cause of events. But let's play the game according to sequence: Then wouldn't the real cause of death be [ovum-fertilizing] intercourse? Or perhaps the [prior to intercourse] twinkle in Daddy's eye? http://brainden.com/forum/uploads/emoticons/default_wink.png' alt=';)'>

This is not a solution, just an observation, so I won't "spoil" it. The previous riddle simply asked how it was possible to escape. That answer has already been posted there. Now, since in this riddle the girl has complete freedom on the ice, and since the center is marked by a buoy, the girl is free to walk to the center [the thug won't go onto the ice] and use the already posted strategy to escape. But this riddle asks for more than that - we are asked to find an optimal solution. That's the added challenge that makes this thread worth keeping open.

Your reasoning is clearly correct. So your conclusion would be correct, if only your premise had been correct. Unfortunately, it is not. The *sigh* and the *tear* apply -- there is sadness here -- but not in the way you might be thinking. Consider the plight of the OP -- the one who wrote the riddle. The riddle that so many have simply not taken the time to read. Read the OP once again - this time carefully. You will see that we do not know the gender of the "first" child. Neither are we asked anything about the "second" child. Something so trivial as "what's the likelihood of my second child being a girl?" HARDLY constitutes a riddle, does it?

Identical to this post. With added questions ... keeping it open.

20th prisoner has a black hat. He sees all the other hats. In particular he sees that #19 has a red hat. So he says "Red" - and he's executed. OK he only had a 50-50 chance and he was unlucky. Now #19 knows his hat is Red. Suppose all even #'s are black and all odd #'s are red. How can he use the knowledge that his hat is red to save himself and everyone else? Other recent answers where there's "signaling" read the OP which says There is a solution, but it does not involve length of time, nodding your head, voice pitch or .. "communicating in any way"

The combination of suit and value is sufficient to establish a rank order: equal value "ties" broken by suit preference. Think of two poker hands with no pairs or flush. One hand will be the winning hand based on higher ranking high card.