The Rookie Bet That Didn’t Add Up
At the start of a baseball season, two rookie players make a bet.
They bet $20 on who will have the better batting average by the end of the season.
We’ll call them Bluto and Popeye.
Now it’s the last day of the season.
Neither one is playing, and they’re standing around watching batting practice.
Bluto says, “Hey Popeye, what did you hit before the All-Star break?”
Popeye says, “.250.”
Bluto says, “Ha! I hit .300.”
Then Bluto asks, “What about after the All-Star break?”
Popeye says, “.375.”
Bluto says, “That’s good—but I hit .400. You owe me 20 bucks.”
But just then, the bat boy wanders over and says,
“Don’t pay him. I think you won.”
Now here’s an important fact:
They both had the **same total number of at-bats for the entire season**.
So the puzzler question is:
How could Popeye have the higher overall batting average—even though Bluto had the higher average in both halves of the season?