jason palmer mrktgulrucsdedu think previous post somewhat missed point let try benefiting offtherecord exchanges rich consider following game n players one possible winner game played n large mike playing comes game tells secret strategy guaranteed make winner game played mike wins naturally impressed tend think mike really know something others dont suppose players also comes game tells secret winning strategy game played someone wins say fred fred also come game told going win mike previous case im impressed fact fred dont give credence prior claim different case unlikely events engender faith unlikely mike would win made believe unlikely fred would win didnt unlikely event engender faith part think confusion considered event say first case mike tells knows secret strategy two events algebra event mike wins event someone else wins event mike wins unlikely occurs surprised compelled faith second case many people tell secret strategy want say two events event someone tells strategy wins event someone else wins everyone tells strategy first event probability one fact someone wins engenders zero faith part danger arises say algebra includes singleton events player winning distinguishing players say name think want say distinction name simply distinction individuals theoretically irrelevant determination winner game events defined distinguishing features players relevant winning first name starting f made one better player would events corresponding f nonf people winning names irrelevant dont define events ultimately event second scenario fred fred rather someone told winning strategy since thing distinguish among players relevant winning people told winnnig strategy first scenario mike event really mike 1outofn case likelihood someone winning one someone wins engenders faith stock market scenarios likelihood someone succeeding long term may small event someone told could succeed may still unlikely even everyone tells succeed still impressed anyone actually hopefully point jason original message nhipljlbixengrorstedu mailtonhipljlbixengrorsteduon behalf rich neapolitan sent saturday june 25 2005 417 pm faqeecsoregonstateedu subject uai luck skill preparing talk whether people like warren buffet really better investment analysis simply case thousands people analysis probably well poor simply chance possibly different experiment many people toss coin many times experiment probably throw lot heads thinking conceived following paradox suppose stranger named mike showed office told could pick stocks really well advised year made bundle would suspect knew since chance successful chance alone small suppose instead 10000 guys also showed said could pick stocks well case mike still good results would dismiss success probably due luck since 10000 people likely someone well paradox follows faith mike penalized simply people made claims id interested opinions matter rich wed 06 aug 2008 063952 0700 uai luck skill