Note to recruiters

Note to recruiters: We are quite aware that recruiters, interviewers, VCs and other professionals generally perform a Google Search before they interview someone, take a pitch from someone, et cetera. Please keep in mind that not everything put on the Internet must align directly to one's future career and/or one's future product portfolio. Sometimes, people do put things on the Internet just because. Just because. It may be out of their personal interests, which may have nothing to do with their professional interests. Or it may be for some other reason. Recruiters seem to have this wrong-headed notion that if somebody is not signalling their interests in a certain area online, then that means that they are not interested in that area at all. It is worth pointing out that economics pretty much underlies the areas of marketing, strategy, operations and finance. And this blog is about economics. With metta, let us. by all means, be reflective about this whole business of business. Also, see our post on "The Multi-faceted Identity Problem".

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

MATHEMATICS: Gathering for Gardner - "How to win at Wimbledon" - solution

My email to Peter Winkler.


This is in reference to the "How to Win at Wimbledon" puzzle at :

I have a better solution to your problem. In fact, you can win at Wimbledon with probability 1.

My belief is that the theory advanced by Amit Chakrabarti (who I happen to know actually :) ) is correct. I can see that he is a man after my own heart. The only thing about his theory is that it does not go far enough. The number N that was chosen may not be large enough - assuming that the players can come back for the match if it goes beyond a certain limit, the players may not even be all that tired.

The ideal scores, then, are :

(i) 6-6 (LargeNumberN - LargeNumberNMinus2), 6-6 (LargeNumberN' - LargeNumberN'Minus2), 6-6 (6-0)
(ii) 6-0 , 6-6 (LargeNumberN - LargeNumberNMinus2), 6-6 (6-0)
(iii) 6-6 (LargeNumberN - LargeNumberNMinus2), 6-0, 6-6 (6-0)

Under (ii) and(iii), one needs to choose a sufficiently large N. In particular, one must choose an N that is so large that Roger Federer is at the brink of death. In fact, N is so large and the man is so close to death that if he serves even once more, he will die. Furthermore, it is his turn to serve. That is the situation to find oneself in. 

I believe that I and Amit, *we* are the Ones we have been waiting for. :)
- Anand