Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Puzzle time - penalty kicks

Puzzle time - penalty kicks

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
19 Posts 4 Posters 131 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • taiwan_girlT Offline
    taiwan_girlT Offline
    taiwan_girl
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    I think yes, but haven’t really thought about the math.

    Just ran some numbers in my head.

    1 Reply Last reply
    • AxtremusA Offline
      AxtremusA Offline
      Axtremus
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      @jon-nyc said in Puzzle time - penalty kicks:

      penalty kick percentage

      How is "penalty kick percentage" defined?
      The # of penalty kicks that result in a goal divided by # of penalty kicks attempted, is that right?

      jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
      • AxtremusA Axtremus

        @jon-nyc said in Puzzle time - penalty kicks:

        penalty kick percentage

        How is "penalty kick percentage" defined?
        The # of penalty kicks that result in a goal divided by # of penalty kicks attempted, is that right?

        jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nycJ Online
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        @axtremus Yep

        "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
        -Cormac McCarthy

        1 Reply Last reply
        • AxtremusA Offline
          AxtremusA Offline
          Axtremus
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          :::

          Proof by counter example:

          Start of year the footballer’s penalty kick percentage was 79/99*100%, so just a bit under 80%.

          In that year, the footballer attempted only one penalty kick and that penalty kick scored a goal, so at the end of the year his pernalty kick percentage became 80/99*100%, a bit over 80%.

          The footballer went from just a bit below 80% to just about over 80% without ever dwelling at exactly 80%. So there need not be a time when it was at exactly 80%.

          :::

          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
          • AxtremusA Axtremus

            :::

            Proof by counter example:

            Start of year the footballer’s penalty kick percentage was 79/99*100%, so just a bit under 80%.

            In that year, the footballer attempted only one penalty kick and that penalty kick scored a goal, so at the end of the year his pernalty kick percentage became 80/99*100%, a bit over 80%.

            The footballer went from just a bit below 80% to just about over 80% without ever dwelling at exactly 80%. So there need not be a time when it was at exactly 80%.

            :::

            jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nycJ Online
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            @axtremus You forgot to increment the denominator. Your example ends at 80%, not above.

            "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
            -Cormac McCarthy

            1 Reply Last reply
            • KlausK Offline
              KlausK Offline
              Klaus
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              Hm, this is trickier than it looks.

              On first sight, it seems to be obvious that the percentage is a discontinuous function and can hence jump over .8.

              But now I think it may actually be impossible. Let me think a little whether and why that's actually tre.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • KlausK Offline
                KlausK Offline
                Klaus
                wrote on last edited by Klaus
                #8

                :::

                Among the pairs of numbers between 0 and 5000, there is no pair (x,y) such
                that x/y < 0.8 and (x+1)/(y+1) > 0.8.
                03cf8106-20cf-4afc-bcf6-984f5c3fa077-image.png

                An engineer would stop here and consider the case closed. No soccer player ever scored more than 5000 penalty kicks. QED 🙂
                :::

                1 Reply Last reply
                • AxtremusA Offline
                  AxtremusA Offline
                  Axtremus
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  :::

                  There is something special about 90%, 80% and 50% ... if the quotient is 79% or 81%, or 49% or 51%, or 60% or 70% or 40%, etc., there are many pairs of integers that satisfy (x/y) < quotient and (x+1)/(y+2) > quotient. :man-shrugging:

                  :::

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nycJ Online
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                    #10

                    Lets do some arithmetic. We're looking for an 'a' and 'b' such that:

                    a/b<4/5
                    (a+1)/(b+1)>4/5

                    The first equation simplifies to:
                    5a<4b

                    The second simplifies to:
                    5a+1>4b.

                    So 5a+1 > 4b > 5a.

                    But that can't be true for positive integers a and b. So the answer is you can't skip 80%.

                    Ax notices some other numbers you can't skip. He noticed that 90%, 50% have the same property.

                    Can you generalize the property?

                    "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                    -Cormac McCarthy

                    taiwan_girlT 1 Reply Last reply
                    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                      Lets do some arithmetic. We're looking for an 'a' and 'b' such that:

                      a/b<4/5
                      (a+1)/(b+1)>4/5

                      The first equation simplifies to:
                      5a<4b

                      The second simplifies to:
                      5a+1>4b.

                      So 5a+1 > 4b > 5a.

                      But that can't be true for positive integers a and b. So the answer is you can't skip 80%.

                      Ax notices some other numbers you can't skip. He noticed that 90%, 50% have the same property.

                      Can you generalize the property?

                      taiwan_girlT Offline
                      taiwan_girlT Offline
                      taiwan_girl
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      @jon-nyc said in Puzzle time - penalty kicks:

                      Can you generalize the property?

                      Yes, if you divide two integers (with the numerator smaller than the denominator) and you continually increase both by 1, you will eventually have the answer equal 0.5, 0.8, and 0.9!!

                      5555

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nycJ Online
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #12

                        Yes you will, but what other percentages are unavoidable if you start below them and end above them?

                        "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                        -Cormac McCarthy

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • AxtremusA Offline
                          AxtremusA Offline
                          Axtremus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #13

                          :::

                          Let's see ...

                          From:
                          a/b < A/B AND (a+1)/(b+1) > A/B

                          We get to Ba + (B-A) > Ab > B*a

                          If we are talking only natural numbers, the condition boils down to (B-A) = 1.

                          So fractions like 1/2 (50%), 2/3 (66.666...%), 3/4 (75%), 4/5 (80%), ... 9/10 (90%) ... all fractions that can be written as X/(X+1) are "special" that way.

                          :::

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • jon-nycJ Online
                            jon-nycJ Online
                            jon-nyc
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #14

                            Ax got it!

                            "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                            -Cormac McCarthy

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • jon-nycJ Online
                              jon-nycJ Online
                              jon-nyc
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #15

                              When I first saw this problem last week I thought it was stupid and the answer was obviously “of course you can skip 80”. I didn’t even sit down to play with it for a few days.

                              "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                              -Cormac McCarthy

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • AxtremusA Offline
                                AxtremusA Offline
                                Axtremus
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #16

                                FWWI, @Klaus might be happy to know that this puzzle got me to install Haskell. 😄

                                KlausK 1 Reply Last reply
                                • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                  FWWI, @Klaus might be happy to know that this puzzle got me to install Haskell. 😄

                                  KlausK Offline
                                  KlausK Offline
                                  Klaus
                                  wrote on last edited by Klaus
                                  #17

                                  @axtremus said in Puzzle time - penalty kicks:

                                  FWWI, @Klaus might be happy to know that this puzzle got me to install Haskell. 😄

                                  There are infinitely many good reasons to install Haskell, but if all you want is list comprehensions, then you can do the same thing in many other languages, such as Python.

                                  b01503f1-6c8e-42c7-8f8e-347b6f929f17-image.png

                                  In Haskell you can of course write the program in a cooler and more general way using monads.

                                  import Control.Monad
                                  [1..500] >>= \x -> [1..500] >>= \y -> guard (x/y < 0.8 && (x+1)/(y+1) > 0.8) >> return (x,y)
                                  
                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ Online
                                    jon-nycJ Online
                                    jon-nyc
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #18

                                    I’m a little sad nobody commented on “Diego Primadona”.

                                    "You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
                                    -Cormac McCarthy

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • AxtremusA Offline
                                      AxtremusA Offline
                                      Axtremus
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #19

                                      I have read @Klaus mentioning Haskell a few times in the past, and has been meaning to check it out. This puzzle is just the thing that finally got me to do. These days my primary computer programming language seems to be “go” (or “golang”), mostly because I found it quite convenient for dealing with web APIs.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      Reply
                                      • Reply as topic
                                      Log in to reply
                                      • Oldest to Newest
                                      • Newest to Oldest
                                      • Most Votes


                                      • Login

                                      • Don't have an account? Register

                                      • Login or register to search.
                                      • First post
                                        Last post
                                      0
                                      • Categories
                                      • Recent
                                      • Tags
                                      • Popular
                                      • Users
                                      • Groups