If a raisin and a grape battled to the death, which would win? Suppose you placed a bet on one of the participants.
Why not look at it strategically?
Lets find a Nash equilibrium strategy where given all strategies of each opposing player, you (the gambler) cannot benefit from changing your pick. The contestant you select is a “best response.” The best response should be the fighter with the greatest odds of winning. You should have no motivation to deviate from a Nash equilibrium strategy.
A witty trail of economics will surely reveal the gladiator most likely to win.
Fundamentally a raisin and a grape are the same darn thing. Grapes get an edge because they make really great jelly, juice, and wine. But Buddy Miles did sing lead vocals for the California Raisins, not the California Grapes. Remember, though, Miles and his raisin crew heard everything “through the grapevine.”
Being that raisins once were grapes, they know all the strengths and weaknesses of the grape. Unfortunately they cannot capitalize on this valuable information being so shriveled and puny.
If you look at it objectively the grape has to take the cake: they’re juicy and at the end of the day you just dry them out and you’ve got raisins. Raisins aren’t turning into grapes anytime soon. Grapes win.
This godly nectar will win at a 70% clip. The theorems yielding that number are quite complex I assure you…
Bet on grapes.
Thanks game theory.
Uh oh; I didn’t take into account the conjoined raisin. It goes to show that collecting complete information and analyzing it flawlessly is an uphill battle.
Swift Economics 