Suppose the game is such that row player chooses first. In the first game, row player would choose row 2 (not enter) and the payoffs would be 0 and 6. In game 2, he'd choose row 1 (enter) and column player would choose colum 2(dove). The payoffs would be 3,3. This shows that an expanded set of strategic options can be disadvantageous(and a contracted set of options can be advantageous), as has been the case for column player, whose payoff has decreased. The third option is true as well.
PS: If column player played first, they'd end up with 0,6 in both cases.
Locked
