by sabastious 363 Replies latest jw friends
So I have thrown out the other streak-breaking possibilities since it did happen each time. Your belief that it's Millions-to-1 is based on planning to get this result from the beginning. That's how Vegas makes so much money.
That must be why I am always at the casino playing slots....
/sarcasm
-Sab
I'm pretty sure the chances of flipping a coin twice and hitting tales twice in a row is 1/2 multiplied by 1/2, correct?
-Sab
Yes, there are these possibilities for two flips of a coin:
Heads/Heads
Heads/Tails
Tails/Heads
Tails/Tails
But after the first flip is tails, all that is left is:
Tails/Tails
Tails/Heads
So as you go on, you keep coming back to 50%.
If you don't like my rounding up slightly, then even 1-in-50 or 1-in-100 is way closer to the truth than 1-in-A Million.
We possibly might be at an impasse. You insist on ignoring the Exponentiation apsect of the equation and I am not sure why. Because I didn't set it up? That doesn't affect the math.
-Sab
So as you go on, you keep coming back to 50%.
And if I flipped that coin a trillion times I would have some times where I flipped the same side a crazy amount of times in a row I understand that. What is your point?
-Sab
Still using my rough math, if you had a 5-sided die and rolled a "1" on the first try, you go back to 1-in-5 for the next roll being a "1."
I just extended your possibility of a successful "King-Small" hand out to the next hand, already marking the previous hands a success.
Still using my rough math, if you had a 5-sided die and rolled a "1" on the first try, you go back to 1-in-5 for the next roll being a "1."
It will always be 1-5 no matter how many times I roll it I understand that more than you know actually. I prey on people who don't understand that at the poker table. It's how you win money in that game.
The reason why this is so crazy to me personally is because first, I have never seen such a sequence in my poker career, second the true odds of it happening are in the millions and third I "coincidently" was talking to my garage a half an hour prior about some sort of sign.
You are so right to be skeptical. I would never tell you to believe my story, but I also respectfully ask you not to discount it. I thank you for helping me with the math because I need it, but just give me data not results.
-Sab
I got out of this conversation early and let you enjoy your miracle, but when you stated how vague the miracle really was, a King and a Two-through-Eight, I felt it necessary to say how unremarkable that really was.
I stated this at page 13:
Not Understanding Probability Theory
If a coin toss results in heads nine times in a row, what are the odds that it will be heads on the tenth toss?
50/50.
Many people would argue that the chance of this happening is less than one in a thousand. However, that answer is wrong. The probability that the tenth coin toss is going to come up as heads is still 0.5, because each toss is statistically independent from those that preceded it. Tossing nine heads in a row is very unlikely, however once it has happened, it doesn’t influence the outcome of the tenth toss in any way.
People who fall for this fallacy, do so because of a fundamental misunderstanding of how probability works. They combine the probability of past events (irrelevant for independent trials), with that of future events. Some people would erroneously conclude that “tails is long due to come up” and as such would think that it’s more likely to occur.
It’s not a difficult theory to understand, when we just talk coin tosses. Every instance of an event relies on the same probability regardless of it being a coin toss, or you’re rolling dice or playing hands of cards. The next hand is independent of the previous hands when calculating odds.
The odds change when it's not a coin. But close to 1-in-5 each time remains constant. If the coin was Tails for 10,000 times in a row, no matter how unlikely that is, the odds for 10,001 is still 50/50. Each time you got a "King-Small" hand at nearly 1-in-5 odds, the odds for the next hand went back to 1-in-5.
Oh sure, if you started from scratch intending to actually get this specific result, the odds would be much greater.
That's essentially what I am stating possibly happened and this is why I calculated the odds into the millions.
-Sab
The odds change when it's not a coin. But close to 1-in-5 each time remains constant. If the coin was Tails for 10,000 times in a row, no matter how unlikely that is, the odds for 10,001 is still 50/50. Each time you got a "King-Small" hand at nearly 1-in-5 odds, the odds for the next hand went back to 1-in-5.
This is the third time you have coached me on this law of probability in like 20 minutes... My experience exclusively deals with the 10,000 coin flips as a single phenomenon... does that make sense? I'm fully aware of and not falling prey to "Not Understanding Probability Theory"
-Sab
i really wish i had a clue what this conversation is about :-). is the game you are given cards, two at a time, and two specific cards correspond to a king-small?
