Hello! I've never been great with mental arithmetic, and what I was taught in school several years ago, that didn't make sense to me is this: If I have a 10% of soemthing happening, and I try it 20 times. It's still a 10% chance over 20 times correct? Ie. Regardless of the amount of times I try this thing there is always a one in ten chance of succeeding? I'm awfully sorry for such a basic question into such an information rich subreddit, and thank you for your answers in advance.
The Gamblers Fallacy (concept footage) Decided to make concept footage for a short film based upon the psychological concept of “the gamblers fallacy” Made during the UK lockdown 1.0.
What did you think of the Season 15 episode, Gambler's Fallacy? I honestly was surprised with this episode and I felt that Rollins would for sure been gone!
[Q][D] Gamblers Fallacy application in Computers and Games
In light of recent event towards Minecraft speed running I have come to learn about Gamblers fallacy and how it works (Just because something hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it is destined to happen). I was wondering if this played any effect towards games and other computer programs that depend on a RNG to provide randomness. Since computers can only represent a finite amount of values but there is an infinite amount of random values it is so called “destined” for an event to happen. So in the case of the Minecraft speed running scandal could it have so called been “destined to happened” and that the odds provided simply assumed that there are infinite possibilities when calculating probability in dreams odds for success? Also does this mean that other real world statistical terms and analysis fail to be substantial when applying them to Computer games and programs that use RNGs? Some assumptions made by me (correct me if I’m wrong):
There are infinite values in the real world that cannot be confined to a certain range
Events are not destined to happen in real life because of these infinite values but in a finite range can happen anyways
RNG have finite values they can choose from causing “destined” events to happen
Other statistical terms and clauses all rely on the idea that there are infinite values to "dictate "an event meaning that each event has its own theoretical "value" but with computers that is simply not the case.
P.s. I am a junior in high school who just likes computers and doesn't know much about stats👍🏿
It seems we have some people playing foxhole who are very smart at figuring out probability of the next gamble for tech, but completely unaware of the gambler's fallacy. The fallacy is often demonstrated by the coin flipping example. Just because the coin has come up heads 20 times in a row does not mean there is a greater chance that the next flip will be tails. The next flip is still a 50/50 proposition. From wiki - "The probability of getting 20 heads then 1 tail, and the probability of getting 20 heads then another head are both 1 in 2,097,152. When flipping a fair coin 21 times, the outcome is equally likely to be 21 heads as 20 heads and then 1 tail. These two outcomes are equally as likely as any of the other combinations that can be obtained from 21 flips of a coin. All of the 21-flip combinations will have probabilities equal to 0.521, or 1 in 2,097,152. Assuming that a change in the probability will occur as a result of the outcome of prior flips is incorrect because every outcome of a 21-flip sequence is as likely as the other outcomes. In accordance with Bayes' theorem, the likely outcome of each flip is the probability of the fair coin, which is 1/2." To translate into this new tech system, if there is an 80% chance of success, the chance of success does not increase on the next roll because there have been previous failures. In other words "assuming that a change in the probability will occur as a result of the outcome [of the previous attempts to get the Proto] is incorrect because every outcome has the same 80/20 chance. Helias.
Hey, so I have an idea to make the RNG in Pokemon much more bearable. Basically, during the battle you as a trainer have a stat which we can simply call Luck. Luck starts at zero, and can go up or down. Now let's say you use Focus Blast. The game does an RNG roll as usual. If the Focus Blast is successful (70% chance), your Luck value goes down by 30%. If the Focus Blast is unsuccessful, Luck goes up by 70%. Now, on the next turn, let's say you go for another Focus Blast. This time, the Luck value will be applied to the RNG calculation. If your Luck value was -30%, then the chance of you hitting the second one is 70 - ( 30% of 70) = 49%. If your Luck value was +70%, then the chance of you hitting the second one is 70 + ( 70% of 30 ) = 91%. Of course, once the game rolls for this new chance, the result will also affect the Luck value, so if you hit that 91% Focus Blast, your Luck value (which was previously at 70%) goes down by 9%, and ends up at 61%. This process goes on the entire game, and simply makes it so that getting lucky means the chances of being unlucky increase, and viceversa, but without ever really reaching 0% or 100% probability (100% accurate moves are unaffected). The Luck value doesn't really need to be visible to the player, but just knowing that missing that 95% Heat Wave does have a potential upside to it down the line, just seems like it would improve the overall experience. I think the Luck value should only really apply to your own moves, and not whatever your opponent does to you (as they have their own Luck value). Also, of course one needs to decide if damage rolls should be included somehow in the calculations, and also crits. But I mainly just wanted to outline the general idea without going into too much detail. EDIT: so there are two problems with this
If I miss a 95% move I can shoot an Ice Beam on the next turn and have a 95.5% chance of a freeze. The only real solution to this would be to mitigate the overall effect of Luck, by multiplying it by 0.2 or something like that
If I have accumulated a lot of Luck, I can still waste all of it by getting an effect that I didn't really care about, like a stat drop that doesn't matter, or even something that benefits the opponent, like a stat drop on a Defiant/Competitive mon, or something like that.
So maybe this is a basic question. If I said, a coin has been flipped 1 million times and it's heads every time, so tails is "overdue", that would be incorrect logic, and the odds of heads or tails is still 50%, right? But what do people refer to when they say "reversion to the mean"? In the coin example, doesn't that mean the percent of heads will in the long run converge back to 50%? If so, then to go from 100% heads to 50% heads, you would need a disproportionate number of tails in a row. So that means essentially the odds of tails should be more than 50%, which we know is wrong How do you reconcile reversion to the mean with independent probabilities? Am I missing something very basic? Thanks!
The urge to chase after the elusive LD/BT (new shiny toy) is strong due to the hype and players getting Squall's LD and/or BT from the free pulls or tickets. I came across this old JP DFFOO Reddit post authored by u/dcuajunco. This helped me overcome the urge to gamble more tickets and gems than desired, which would result in guilt and despair if I wasn't able to get both the LD and BT. Original JP LD/BT Post I hope this helps anyone else who has a tendency of overcommitting tickets and gems to this banner. The struggle is real and the LD/BT era has just begun! Cheers and Happy Hunting! -Kupo
The Gambler's Fallacy - My Story of Gambling Away Harvard Med School & Promising Start-Up
Hey guys, Longtime lurker here, but created a new account to post regularly. My goal is to keep myself accountable and hopefully encourage others. Early-Life: I grew up in an incredible family. My parents loved us well and provided everything we needed while making us work enough to avoid entitlement. I remember being very happy as a kid. We also had 9 cousins who all lived within 2-3 streets of our house. It was through these cousins that I was first exposed to gambling. Our parents all enjoyed gambling and did so responsibly, so we started playing $1 Texas Hold 'Em games once every few months with all the cousins. It was fun and relatively harmless. We also got a "casino computer game" which was a casino video game using play money. I remember continuing to go "all-in" on the BJ table and "restarting the game" when I busted until I built up an account of $100M+. First Signs of Trouble: I remember counting down the days to my 18th birthday in order to create a PokerStars account. I signed up on my 18th birthday and started playing. I had some small wins, but was playing at very small stakes as I had little money. I accidentally overdrew my account and stopped after I lost that money. College: I attended one of the top ranked US universities to study biology with hopes of going to medical school. I was focused on academics and social life and didn't think of gambling at all, much less actually gamble save the occasional poker night. I experienced tremendous success in all facets of life during college. I was on top of the world and couldn't wait for life to start. To make things better I ended up getting accepted to my dream school, Harvard Med School. "Gambling to win my Harvard Med School Tuition" - I was fortunate enough to have a grandmother who offered to pay for my degree, which would have allowed me to finish debt free. Unfortunately, I watched a movie the summer before school where the protagonist, an MIT student, learns blackjack to win his Harvard Med School tuition. Of course it works because it's a movie, but I think how difficult could blackjack be. I'll learn the ropes and see what I can turn $100 into. Unbelievably, I managed to go on the heater of my life and turn the $100 into 90% of my tuition. I'm on top of the world and regularly making bets larger than my yearly salary. It was insane and I had the cash to cover the other 10%, but my selfish ass wanted to win it all. Naturally, I lost it all. Then it got bad...I was making these unbelievably large wagers with "house money", but I wanted to get it back so I started blowing through my savings. No luck as I'm gambling with pure emotion. I start putting money on credit cards and again start experiencing some success, but want to get everything back that I lost. Proceed to have a terrible experience of the gambler's fallacy (belief that prior hands impact future outcome) and lost 3x my salary in 4 hands. I was dealt 20 each time and the dealer ended up with 21 each time....terrible luck. Coming Clean: I had to tell my parents that I was deep in debt and no longer wanting to attend Harvard. I needed to get myself right, so I moved home and started attending GA. During this time I started working on a start-up and consumed myself with this startup. I ended up experiencing some early success and significant investor interest. I had $1M of investor money committed, but I was going to have to give up 25% of my company. Before doing that I thought I'll give gambling one more chance. It's been several months at this point and I won't be compulsive. My dumbass works up a massive payroll once again, but want to win my entire investment. I end up losing it and everything my business had already generated. Telling My Parents (Again) - Worst day of my life. Absolutely devastating to disappoint them like I did. Undeserving of the love and support that they showed. Cried like a baby the entire time. Committed to changing. Getting a Real Job - Deep in debt (Almost $100k) and having squandered away Harvard Med School and my own business I needed to buckle down, get a real job, and start working out of the debt. I'm living with my parents to save money and pay this off. I've got a decent job and should be able to pay it off in less than 2 years. Recently had a small slip up and was disgusted with myself, so much so that I don't think I'll play it again. I know I can't win my way out, and even if I did it would crush my loved ones that I turned back to gambling. What's Next - Stepping up and working through this. Attending GA, listening to podcasts, reading books, checking this group, posting/commenting often, etc. I cannot afford to continue on. I'm 27 and have sacrificed so much already, but can still turn it around. Don't want to ruin my life. Sorry for the novel.
Im new to the game and still in the early stages of the game. I looked up a guide that suggested taking Gambler's fallacy Amulet. I finished the related quest Artem's Offer and i didnt get the amulet. isnt he supposed to give it to me as a reward?
Let's say you have a fair coin and were somehow able to flip it billions of times and recorded the results. Examining the results, you see that the largest amount of times it lands on heads or tails consecutively is 30 times. Now for example, if you were gambling on the results (heads = lose, tails = win) and you witnessed a streak of 29 heads, why wouldn't you start betting on tails, expecting it to come soon? I mean I know the odds of either heads or tails is 50:50, but wouldn't it be more logical to expect tails after 29 consecutive heads given that all the data suggests a consecutive streak of either heads or tails hasn't ever been longer than 30?
I understand that gambler's fallacy occurs when you mistakenly believe two outcomes are dependent. So what fallacy occurs when you mistakenly believe that two outcomes are independent?
Can someone explain the difference in layman terms such that a non-statistics person can understand easily? Both seems to contradict each other so when does one or the other apply?
I have this thing going on for me where I have a terrible game and insta que thinking the next game can't humanly be possible to be worse than the previous game I just played. This mentality has caused me to lose mmr unnecessarily and the mald overthrows the "take breaks between games." So regarding this what do I do ?
TIL Gambler's fallacy, the erroneous belief that if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past it is less likely to happen in the future. In 1913, in a game of roulette, the ball fell in black 26 times in a row, the probability of the sequence is 1 in 66.6 million.
The gambler’s fallacy can be attributed to the mistaken belief that gambling, or even chance itself, is a fair process that can correct itself in the event of streaks. Coincidences are bound Gambler's fallacy refers to the erroneous thinking that a certain event is more or less likely, given a previous series of events. It is also named Monte Carlo fallacy, after a casino in Las Vegas... What is Gambler’s Fallacy? This curious phenomenon has a very specific definition. In recent years, however, the meaning has been broadened to include other types of behvaior. We will begin by talking about the specific meaning. Gambler’s Fallacy is explained wonderfully in this academic paper from Berkeley University. It is a psychological The Gambler’s Fallacy. On the 18th of August 1913, a phenomenal event happened at the Monte Carlo Casino in Monaco. The action was at the roulette table, where one of the gamblers noticed that the ball had fallen on the black pockets some 8 to 9 times in a row. This got people interested and the “gambler’s fallacy” kicked in. The Gambler’s Fallacy is the mistaken belief that if an event happens more frequently than normal during a given period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or vice versa. Every roll of dice, or flip of a fair coin, or dealing of hole cards in Hold’em, are independent events that follow random process. The gambler's fallacy is mistakenly believing that the answer is "yes." Believers in the fallacy argue correctly that in the long run, the proportion of heads will be \(0.50\). Or, stated more precisely, as the number of flips approaches infinity, the proportion of heads approaches \(0.50\). Gambler's fallacy, also known as the fallacy of maturing chances, or the Monte Carlo fallacy, is a variation of the law of averages, where one makes the false assumption that if a certain event/effect occurs repeatedly, the opposite is bound to occur soon. Home / Uncategorized / Gambler’s Fallacy: A Clear-cut Definition With Lucid Examples. The Gambler's Fallacy refers to the belief that, if a streak of events occurs, then the next event will most likely break that streak. This belief is also known as the Monte Carlo Fallacy or the Roulette Fallacy. Let's take roulette as an example. When “reds” come up in succession, players tend to bet on “black” more. The Gambler's Fallacy is also known as "The Monte Carlo fallacy", named after a spectacular episode at the principality's Le Grande Casino, on the night of August 18, 1913. At the roulette wheel, the colour black came up 29 times in a row - a probability that David Darling has calculated as 1 in 136,823,184 in his 2004 work 'The Universal Book of Mathematics: From Abracadabra to Zeno's Paradoxes'. In an article in the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (1994), Dek Terrell defines the gambler's fallacy as "the belief that the probability of an event is decreased when the event has occurred recently." In practice, the results of a random event (such as the toss of a coin) have no effect on future random events.
Critical Thinking Part 5: The Gambler's Fallacy - YouTube
Short Video Series (SVS-006)What is the Gambler's Fallacy? How is our brain trick us? All answers and details are in the videoImages, animations and videos ... Created by our lab for the New Horizons in Responsible Gambling conference 2016, this video is a demonstration of a classic bias in human decision making. In... This short video provides a background and discussion regarding the Gambler's (or Monte Carlo) Fallacy This video is the first in a six-part series on the Gambler’s Fallacy. In this video I present the reasoning that leads to the Gambler’s Fallacy. This Lecture talks about Gambler Fallacy and Neurofinance A Blackout City Kids original song written for the soundtrack Wrong Turn 5: BloodlinesTwitter @blackoutcitykidFacebook The Blackout City KidsYouTube TbockMusic Detective Amanda Rollins' (Kelli Giddish) addiction drives her to an illegal gambling club, where waitress Clare Wilson (returning guest star Stefanie Scott)... This video is about Probability: Gamblers Fallacy Part 5 of the TechNyou critical thinking resource.The resource covers basic logic and faulty arguments, developing student's critical thinking skills. Suitab...
