1) The whole 50/50 statement was irrelevant because he later claims that this isn't true.
2) Steiner claims that Angle won't attempt to beat him so the 25% & 75% statement is only true for Steiner (he never clarifies whether or not Angle will try to beat Joe).
If this is true, that the difficulty of the match for Joe should be that of a handicap match. For Angle, it would be normally be a triple threat but since he will not try to beat Steiner it will be a handicap for him also, but for Steiner it will be a singles match since Angle is out of the entire thing for him.
For Steiner: Steiner has a 75% chance of winning and Joe a 25% chance
For Joe: Hard to determine because even though he has a 75% chance of losing, we don't know what his chances against Angle are. They are not equal because Steiner refutes this claim, but is Joe stronger than Angle? If so, his chances of winning will decrease because he has going against two men, but it doesn't mean that Angle has Angle a bigger chance of winning? Not if Joe is stronger than him. Angle is also in a handicap match situation.
Scott Steiner also says that Joe has a 33.333...% chance of winning but this is not so. This implies that all men have an equal chance of winning which isn't true. Why does Scott Steiner say that he now has a 66.666...% chance of winning? Nothing has changed. For Scott, it's still a singles match so he would STILL have a 75% chance of winning. The chance of winning only changes for Joe and Angle.
He also subtracts the 25% from the incorrect 33.333...% which makes absolutely no sense. He refers to the 25% as "my 25 percent" of what? Losing? But why would you even add it to Joe's chance of winning? Nothing here makes sense. He's just adding/subtracting things without keeping certain things in mind. He omits the changes.
To answer your question, no. I would not want Scott Steiner has a basic math teacher, let alone a Calculus professor.
