**From New Scientist #2321, 15th December 2001** [link]

The darts players at George’s local have devised a seeding system for themselves. Each has determined the number of darts he needs to throw, on average, in order to hit the Bull once. This is his *rating* — the lower the better. Thanks to remarkable foresight in their parents’ choices of names, the seedings proceeded alphabetically from Alan at No. 1 to Zak at No. 26, with no duplication of initial.

Fred and George met in the pub recently and decided to throw alternately, one dart at a time, until one hit the Bull. The other would then pay for the drinks. Although Fred is the more accurate darts player, they calculated from the ratings that if George threw first they would each have an even chance of winning the sudden-death game.

Duly refreshed, they then calculated from the ratings that this would be an even-money game for *any* pair of players who are adjacent in the seedings, provided the lower seed throws first. But if Zak played the game against Alan and threw first, his chance of winning would be exactly 10 per cent.

What is George’s rating?

[enigma1165]

### Like this:

Like Loading...

I solved this one analytically:

If

fandgare the probabilities of hitting the bull for playersFandG.Fis the stronger player, sof>g.Writing

P(F, G, F)for “the probability thatFgets a bull first, playing againstG,Fto throw”but this last value is 1/2, so:

So, starting with

a, (a>b>c> … >z):also:

Solving the 2 equations in

aandzgives:and:

So:

A has a 1 in 3 chance of hitting the bull, so a rating of 3;

B has a 1 in 4 chance of hitting the bull, so a rating of 4;

C has a 1 in 5 chance of hitting the bull, so a rating of 5;

…

Y has a 1 in 27 chance of hitting the bull, so a rating of 27;

Z has a 1 in 28 chance of hitting the bull, so a rating of 28.

So:

Solution:George’s rating is 9.