h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

If C is a robot, who must shoot and do his best to try and kill rather than shooting in the air, according to my scribbled calculations, he is better to aim at A. In this case he will have a 51 in 189 chance of surviving. If he aims at B, he will have only a 50 in 189 chance of surviving.

If C aims in the air until one of the others is killed, then he has a 75 in 189 chance of surviving.

Of course, my scribbled calculations may be wrong.

If C Continues to shoot in the Air - he has no chance at all of surviving as either A or B will get him eventually......

C has to shoot at A, and hope that B either shoots at A too or misses C when he shoots....

I agree with Prof. C. Tonks' thinking but in order for C to ensure his survival he should first surrender and then make sure heats drinks plenty of water and eats lots of healthy food.

Someone agrees with me! *sniff, sniff*

Why do we care about C just because he is the under-dog!
He's a poor shot and obviously the weakest link!
My money's on A.
A should quickly dispatch B, his only real competition, before B can fire. Then run over grab B's gun and do C in mercilessly.

jwf

C's best bet is probably to shoot himself first. That was my first, gut-feeling answer.

Anyway, he ought to check the Wills of the others before taking any risks. Perhaps one or the other has left him a fortune. Or at least enough to pay for shooting lessons.

I suppose this is academic now that the quiz proper is back, but Gnomon was right first time: C should aim to miss, then either B shoots A and C gets first shot at B or B misses, A shoots B and C gets first shot at A. Obviously if C shoots either, then the other gets first shot at him.

To those who reckon C should leg it:
A and B decide C is an unsporting bounder and shoot him before he gets two yards.

Oh piffle! Their respective chances of shooting them are still retained. I fact, they're even less likely to hit him if he's running!

Well, given that A is a crack shot, I'd say C is pretty much stuffed, running or no running.

I agree with Trillian's child. he has little chance of surviving anyways. Besides C is probably too stupid to realize how to save himself.

Since when has the inability to fire a gun been a sign of stupidity?

Surely tha bility to avoid actually ever firing a gun would be a sign of intelligence?

I put this one to my mathematical kids at tea tonight. My 12-year-old said his maths teacher had asked them the same question (with the slight difference that B is a 50-50 shot, rather than 66-33).

"What was the answer?", you all cry!

He couldn't remember. It was last year and you know what happens in the summer holidays. You forget everything. Especially if you're 12.

the fact that he is in a gunfight without knowing how to fire a gun makes him stupid.

That depends what the alternatives were.

Brave sir robin?