If everybody who took the train(especially during peak hours) considered a Nash equilibrium, they would not rush to squeeze into the train doors. The passengers in the train would alight faster, and the passengers going on would in a shorter time.

However, Nash equilibrium is supposed to be innate in most of us. So what is wrong? ah... SMRT keeps putting up posters of courtesy campaigns.. but what real benefit will the consumers get from that?

In order for the theory to work, perhaps there lacks a sub-game Nash equilibrium, which is incapable of manifesting itself from the passengers' initiative. So what is it then?

From my guess, Singaporean passengers are highly competitive by nature. This is due to our insufficient rewards/work stress ratio. *For that matter, if you are a rich man, this does not apply to you as you probably wouldn't be taking the public transport. A highly stressed individual who has non-work commitments will want to rush home as soon as possible to escape the realities of work. He will wake up not too much earlier than is needed to reach work just in time. As a result, if he does not get onto the train which arrives when he reaches the station, he will probably be late for work. This stress will induce him to stand at the middle of the door and secure a place on the train. In addition, due to the slow nature of the train, it would appear that time has ground to a halt within the car. As such, he will find it exasperating to stand up for the entire journey and attempt to snatch a seat, which will be at its highest opportune moment when he boards the train.

The conclusion of the solution to achieving the elusive sub-game Nash equilibrium? Make more regular train runs and increase the speed of travel:SMRT. You might think that this is the optimum speed based on other countries' subway systems. However, you are missing the point that as much as our country is unique and can ill-afford to allow impulsive free speech, our transport system operations must be tailored to the Singapore mindset too.

Take it back to the foundations. We are aspiring to get cars because it is much more convenient and comfortable. The only setback is cost. So why are we not tackling the comfort factor? You might be discouraging chicken consumption and encouraging duck meat(for whatever reasons), but the fact is, you have not eliminated the savoury taste allure of roasted chicken. Look at coke light. Why is it successful? Because it does not try to replace the taste of coke with another flavour. Rather, it superimposes another "healthier" alternative to reproduce a flavour which is almost exactly the same as the original.

Something is not right with the way our transport planners are tackling the problem. They are repressing people's desire to get cars, and not polishing the shine on making public transport irresistable to the Singaporean's taste.