When I say DO NOT take this class I genuinely mean it. The professor is genuinely a nice guy and clearly has a lot of passion for game theory. So did I until I took this class. The things we do in class and the examples he gives are so surface level, and in complete contrast, his final was literally unsolvable. Even the TA took it before to make an answer key and called it difficult. He expects PhD level thinking from undergraduate students which is nice that he pushes us, but it's not a valid expectation to hold from us. If I could go back in time and change things I would (interstellar moment). The homework assignments are doable, but the TAs hard carry on all the tough questions. The midterm was very similar to the homework problems, but that final.... literally a monster. I sat there for 3 hours and left feeling absolutely dejected. Not to mention he barely curves so even if you think you didn't do too well and hope that you can rely on a curve,,, you can't. Another thing he does is that he doesn't post the past final papers until the NIGHT BEFORE the exam, and even then he uploads it with no answer key and doesn't want to solve it out. Trust me when I say there are other 106 classes that are more worth your time and energy, literally any of them besides this one.

I think that taking this class is the biggest mistake I made in my college career. I know I am being dramatic, but as a student that wants to go to grad school and usually puts 100% into every class, this class felt to me like one that I just could not do well in, regardless of how well I may feel I understood the material going into the tests. And for context, I got an A+ in 106D literally the quarter right before I took this class, and the content in both classes is VERY similar.
Something to note about this class that I didn't realize going in was that there is a lot of positive selection, meaning that the type of people who would choose to take this class in the first place are among the most mathematically inclined in the econ major. If you aren't good at math, don't take this class! You will be competing with peers that are and will probably feel stupid everyday in class. I don't think the professor realizes this, because the curve in this class is really harsh. At the end of the course, it was revealed that only slightly above 20% of students received some sort of an A. This means that you can literally score in the upper quartile and still not even receive an A-. And I have heard that in the past quarters, the professor has curved the class down before. If everyone is working hard and doing well in your (very difficult) class, I don't know why a professor would want to punish students by deflating their grades.
I also wanted to talk about the professor. While he is very enthusiastic, social, and friendly to the students, he also will not make it easy for you to succeed. What do I mean by this? He habitually posts problem sets days after he says he will in the syllabus and still expects you to turn it in on the original due date (which could end up being less than two days after it is posted). Sometimes, he will teach a concept to you using very simple examples and then expect you to make leaps of knowledge in the homework or on the test. This was especially true on the final, which was not only inhumanely long but had questions on it that hardly related to what was being taught in class at all. I genuinely believe that if it weren't for my TA, I would have gotten a 50% on all the homeworks alone. Furthermore, the professor will post "practice" problems for you on the tests the day before the tests and also not give you an answer key. What is the point of posting practice problems if you can't even check your work?
Finally, I wanted to talk about the lab component to this class, which was supposedly graded "on completion" and that everyone would do well in. There was absolutely no standard for how your grade in that class will be determined, and there was very little clarity as to what sort of presentation they wanted us to make.
This review may come off as overly bitter, and honestly it is. I know that the 106 series is supposed to be harder than the rest of the econ electives, but you can still do yourself a favor and try to take easier ones. I heard pricing and strategy is pretty fun. You may think that you are good at game theory (like I did before I took this class) but unless you are okay with the possibility of actually putting a lot of effort into a class and still struggling to get a B, I would not recommend taking this class.

Tomasz is probably the best econ professor I've ever had. All the other reviews about him being funny, energetic, and engaging are all very true. But the other reviews also make it sound like everyone in the class got an A...for reference, the average final exam score for spring 2022 was a 73.

Tbh would probably still take this class again. Tomasz is worth it

His lecture is engaging and funny, with lots of real world examples.

He posts lecture notes, so use them to study if you don't go to lecture. Notes are detailed, but I still recommend to go to lecture. (Some examples can not be understood unless you see him explain to you in person)

Midterm is straightforward (easier than homework). Final is significantly harder that asks you to think back and forth.

Curve is generous enough. In general, 80%+ is A.

Econ 106GL is graded differently from Econ 106G. For lab discussions, attendance is required, and you also need to do a group project (Econ in Action). The project applies Game Theory to real world examples. It is fun.

Sadzik is a great Professor and guy. He genuinely cares about his students and provides you with a lot of resources to be successful. Would have preferred there to be more structure in the form of practice problems given over the course of the class as opposed to just right before exams. Class relied too heavily on his lectures/lecture notes that are nothing more than dense game theory. More practice problems would have made the material easier to digest. Also, this class ended up being reverse curved which was disappointing for the GPA :(

The midterm and final are manageable as long as you're comfortable with all the questions from the study guide. But beware: even though he gives out ~40% A's, don't expect any curves for this class!! The average on the midterm was a 90%, and you have basically no chance to recover if you did poorly on the midterm. To put things into perspective, I did better in Econometrics and Ravetch than in this class.

Spring 2020 (COVID-19)
I personally really liked Sadzik. He was a complete nerd and admitted. He is really passionate with what he lectures and is always willing to help. He has a bit of an accent but it does not detract from the learning experience. I would highly recommend this class because there were many real world applications and was a great introduction to Game Theory.
There were a lot of grading errors on the Midterm and Final but it was not necessarily Sadzik's fault, but rather the fault of the TAs. However, Sadzik is not the best at communicating (sometimes he is amazing, other times not so much) so take action and fight for the grade you believe you deserve.
Lectures are pretty standard, he does a lot of practice problems and explains the games. LEARN THE GAMES. If you know the games, you essentially get an A in the class.
Discussion Section consisted of playing games, exam prep and going over 106GL projects (Read 106GL Review). I personally did not like my TA but it won't make or break the experience.
The exams were doable. I would say that the midterm was easier than the homework but the final was harder. However, the exams are difficulty solely because the wording of each problem is very confusing. You have to read it in his voice and then you could get it.
Homeworks were fair and aren't graded 100% for accuracy (half accuracy half completion). They are pretty difficult in my opinion and was definitely harder than the lecture material.
He gives out practice midterm and final question. STUDY THEM. They are almost the midterm and/or final but slightly modified. I do wish he gave a bit more practice problems because I feel like I just memorized the answer key for some of the problems instead of fully understanding it.
He was very willing to help in Office Hours and I would highly recommend them.

He had two grade schemes because of the BLM
20% HW
30% Midterm
50% Final (Original Scheme)

20% HW
50% Midterm
30% Final (Adjusted Scheme)

However, he does issue a curve against the class and it results in slight upcurving. His curve is top 20% get A+ or A, 10% A-, 10% B+, 20% B, and rest lower.

Overall, I would take this course again in a heart beat. Thanks Sadzik!

There are two parts of this lab. Lab lecture and the group project. The lab lecture is Sadzik talking about applications to what you learned in class. I enjoyed this part because it supplemented what we were learning very well.
The main part of the lab is a group project called "Econ in Action" which is essentially creating a game using your knowledge in game theory and explaining the theory and your findings behind the game, which is 100% of your grade.
It was an easy A to say the least and as long as you're proactive with you project, it isn't much work at all. The TAs are there to help guide you to make sure that your reasoning is not flawed either. Your grade is ultimately determined by the Alumni that you are presenting to but they are super kind and grade easily.

Professor Sadzik was obviously very passionate about the subject he teaches, and it shows through in his instruction. He provides detailed lecture notes and uses slides in lectures, but I would still personally recommend taking notes by hand to better understand the content. He covers some more complicated topics in his class, and the problem sets he gives out are pretty hard as well, but they are graded for completion for the most part. His tests are easier than both the prep questions and the homework though. Overall I will say I enjoyed his class, although sometimes he can struggle a little to explain the harder concepts, he is very willing to repeat and elaborate on those topics. My TA has also been extremely helpful, so shout out to Juan!

I like this professor! I took him online, and he really tried to include us in his presentations (he basically offered marginal grade bumps at the end of the quarter if he recognized your name). His lectures were interesting, funny, and presented well, and game theory is originally a fun topic, so I had a good time in his lectures.

He is a little disorganized, though. We were supposed to have four homework grades, and we ended up with two. He still posted the other two for exam prep, so that was nice! Also, nobody has received grades at the time of writing, so there's that.

Homework and exams (a midterm and final) were fair, I think. He lets you work in groups for homework! He also gives you practice questions ahead of time. His lab lectures were fun, not-on-test concepts that supplanted regular lectures. Labs are group projects with a separate grade from the main class, but the grading is super generous. (the professor was like, 'something must have gone very wrong for you to get an a-.)

In general a fun and fair class with a great professor! I would take again.