Talk:Missing dollar riddle

Ladies or Men?

Sometimes the article says ladies and sometimes it says men. That should be fixed. But which one should it be? -Monkey 13!!! 21:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

A rather interesting solution to the problem of choosing ladies or men! It uses 'waiter' and 'bellboy' too, one term should probably be used throughout here as well. Richard001 (talk) 05:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, who cares if it's women or men? I think if they had to choose it would likely be men just because that's how the riddle is usually told.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.129.149.91 (talk) 12:31, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

YOU ARE ALL WRONG!! The solution is this, if someone could kindly fix it: The next day two other people went to the resteraunt and the bill was again 30. Each pays 15. Once again, the waiter brings back 5, but this time keeps 3 for himself and gives 1 back to each of the 2 customers. Hence, each has now paid 14, plus the $3 tip = 14(2)+3 = 31. DUHHHH.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.150.130 (talk) 00:03, 09 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. I don't see the error in the discontinuous solutions.24.112.142.11 (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Excellent article

I came looking for a solution and found a clear and concise answer. Well Done - Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.97.224.6 (talk) 18:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Best explanation on the Internet, well done!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.148.127.192 (talk) 19:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Even simpler solution?

"Three guests check into a hotel room. The clerk says the bill is $30, so each guest pays $10. Later the clerk realizes the bill should only be $25. To rectify this, he gives the bellhop $5 to return to the guests. On the way to the room, the bellhop realizes that he cannot divide the money equally. As the guests didn't know the total of the revised bill, the bellhop decides to just give each guest $1 and keep $2 for himself.

Now that each of the guests has been given $1 back, each has paid $9, and each has an extra, unexpected profit of $1 bringing the total paid to $27 and the total refund to $3. The bellhop has 2 dollars which is subtracted from the total amount paid to the hotel of $27, as this was stolen by the bellhop from the $27 the guests had "paid" to the hotel. If the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?"

By copying the problem word for word, readers can know exactly where the misdirection was made. This also eliminates redundant and confusing phrases like "is accounted for" or "After the refund has been applied".— Preceding unsigned comment added by Disciprine (talk • contribs) 05:37, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

My attempt at explaining it. And a Common misconception, mentioned earlier. Worthy of note?

I for one find this article poorly written. I will try to clean up article with my reasoning if no one gets back to me. Now, when "accounting" for all the money the solution here seems to point the fact that only $27 actually needs to be accounted for. The bellboys $2 needn't be added as its contained within what they have paid. Okay thats cool BUT:

If try to work out what happened to the $30 dollars- IE where it all is; something here has been over looked or poorly phrased. COMPLETE FACTUOUS MATHS. I'll use the assumption $30=all the money (as it is within the boundaries of the riddle)

$30 charged between 3 people, it cost $10 each. Each person has 0, the restraunt gets 30. It actually cost $25, so $3 is returned to them and the bellhorn keeps $2. Each person has $1 (for a total of $3), the hotel has $25, and the belhorn $2. This adds to the total of $30.

They have paid $27 in total (consisting of the bellhorns swabbed $2, and the restruants $25 dollars). Thats $27 paid. The other $3 dolars missing are the refunded dollars, that they have. So sure, the average payment is now $9 each, which gives the $27.The complete suspension of disbelief: Adding $2 for the bellhorn to give $29. Don't know why that happened, that is not needed and fake. There is no missing dollar. That 2 is part of the 27. Mathemeatically, the misdirection is the refund.

Event 1: $30 = $25 for hotel and $2 for bellhorn and $3 extra, to be refunded.

Event 2: The 3 extra is refunded. This brings down the total paid. so -3 from both sides. $27= $25 for hotel and $2 for bellhorn

So the only reason try to add the $2 to 27 is because of clever misdirection. The $3 is out of the equation now, but you would add that to get to the origonal said total.

Now for some FATUOUS MATHS "each customer is given $1 back, each has paid $9". Some people claim thats not true. They claim 30-3=28. They also have seemingly "sound" proof which is as misleading as the riddle, and should be noted. This is what I thought on first glance as many others have also. There is $30 provided by 3 people. $25 of it goes towards the restaurent. Therefore they pay $25/3 each for the restraunt, with $5 spare. So out of they pay 8.33 each, add the $3's given back in total they have handled 9.33 each with $2 left to the bellhorn. 3x 9.33= 28 (because 0.99=1) + the belhorns $2 = $30. The dollars gone no where. The misdirection in this false solution is where $3 is given to 3 people, and average of $1 is given to the average amount paid- where is money given back, not an added expense. THIS IS FALSE! But should be mentioned. because an average of 10 is given, which goes to 9. Not 8.3 (although thats theorectically the hotels take, its irrevant) going to 9.3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deadagain33 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

NOT "impossible to solve". CORRECT: "there is nothing to ‘solve’”

Since the question is based on a false assumption of adding money you have to debt you owe and calling that the total amount of money in the system. Money you owe is only money to you, if you think American. :P The total amount of money in the system is still the same, and it’s simply a misleading non-sequitor. There is nothing to solve since there is no valid question. Duh.
So don’t call it “impossible to solve”, since it makes you look like a fool. PROTIP: Logic
— 188.100.202.245 (talk) 01:32, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree, besides - there is a SOLUTION section — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.31.43 (talk) 07:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Should that be removed, then? I mean, the answer is obvious when you think about it, because the so-called "missing dollar" is actually in the $25 kept by the cashier (25/3=24+1=25+2+3=30). I realize that 25/3 is 8.3(3), but the 24+1 was used to demonstrate the "missing" dollar. $30 - $5 = $25, each receives $1, the bellhop keeps $2, still comes out as $30. Onopearls ^(t/c) 10:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Possible to solve: The missing dollar was with the clerk who sent the bellhop to give the $5 back, if the $3 were given back then the guests totally paid $27 not $30, and the bill is $25 and the bellhop has $2. The $1 which was thought to be missing has always been in bill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:7400:51:6D30:A05E:AB90:C98B:6277 (talk) 06:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Don't let words confuse a simple math problem

This is the type of doublespeak and psychobabble Wall Street uses. It is really a grade school math problem.

3 people rent a motel room. The rate is $25 .

Each owe $8.33 (plus a penny). They instead pay $9.00 a piece. They each overpaid 66 cents. (someone covered the extra 2 cents). 66 cents x 3 (plus the 2 cents) = $2.00 overpaid

where did the extra $2 go? In the clerks pocket — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.125.217 (talk) 04:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Wild Goose Change

This is what you call a wild goose change! Avkrules (talk) 22:32, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Citations - Lack of

There are absolutely no citations in this article. it's generally not very well written either. Flagpolewiki (talk) 08:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing issue

I have tried to find an alternative source for the reference to the "£27" episode of Help but failed. I'm leaving it in there as it's interesting but it would be nice if anyone could find a non-dead citation ;-) For some reason the BBC website seems reluctant to remember this programme which I recall watching myself. TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 11:06, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Just another possible explanatory approach

A lot of people have opinions on how best to explain this riddle and its solution, and in my opinion the main value of the riddle is precisely that — it serves as case study in the psychology of pedagogy, for a discussion of what constitutes a good, clear explanation in a context where what is to be achieved is in part to show why a fallacious explanation is wrong.

In this, I think I have the same view as the person who wrote an earlier section of this talk page: § Clarity in its worst form...?

I would like to add two possible approaches for the community's consideration.

Approach 1: Present the scenario in the form of a table, like this.

Money transference event	Guest 1	Guest 2	Guest 3	Manager	Bellhop
Each guest to manager: $10	-10	-10	-10	30	0
Manager to bellhop: $5	-10	-10	-10	25	5
Bellhop to each guest: $1	-9	-9	-9	25	2

Approach 2: Ask the reader to consider an ammended scenario that is in fact simpler than the scenario given. In this case, suppose the bellhop did not keep the two dollar tip, but gave it back to the manager. Now there are no longer any quantities in the scenario that add up to 29, and as the matter of whether the two dollars ends up in the hands of the bellhop or the manager cannot possibly have any bearing on the amount paid by the guests, it follows that the 29 dollars was never a meaningful quantity to begin with.

203.217.93.152 (talk) 02:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)