The "Million Dollar Article" by Jerry Forsyth

[Sloppy Pockets]

LOL

gamblers fallacy....i cant tell if you are trolling or seriously trying to argue stats here. play russian roulette 100 times and if you are successful 99 times its still 1 in 6 on try #100. they are independent trials, past performance does not influence future results. but i will digress now, i can be more productive moving pebbles from one spot to another so ill go do that for a while....

First thing, I ain't no troll and never have been.

Secondly, give me a break and read what I actually wrote, and don't put words into my mouth that I never said. What I said was that if you played the game a dozen times you will probably not be long for this world. I never once said that on the 12th attempt your odds would be any worse than on the first attempt or any other attempt, that's just you assuming I'm some loser gambler.

The fact is, if you keep playing RR, eventually you will pull the trigger on a live chamber. The more times you play, the worse your odds of surviving all of them. If you play 1 game, the chances of winning are roughly 83%. Play it 12 times in a row, the chance of still standing at the end are only about 11%.

Only takes one loss to end your career. If you seriously believe that you can play an untold number of games of RR and have the same chance of surviving them all, I recommend that you turn all your guns over to a responsible party for safe keeping.

For the record, the chances of surviving 99 games of Russian roulette like you mentioned, with one round in a six-round chamber are about... well, you're the mathematician, you figure it out. Let's just say ain't nobody gonna book that bet. :smile:

Now, please, go back to moving your pebbles. You may actually know something about that.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Just remember one thing, there is always someone better

What? Slot machines were guaranteed to pay out after 100 pulls, I thought???

I was told long ago "never play anything or anyone that stands with it's back against the wall challenging anyone that wants to play"

And this one is for my biggest fan, SJD:

When I was leaving home to go on the road to live out my adventures, facing many dangers, trials and tribulations, my mother advised me with a voice of concern "Just remember one thing, there is always, CJ, someone better".

I replied, dead serious...... "yes, and there's always a chance I'm that someone!"

'The Road was the Teacher'

 

[CSykes24]

you guys are no good at the maths.

the odds were based on someone doing it within the 12 tourneys they were going to have that season...

i believe that many of you think that actuaries are people they find off the street who can pick football games well....lol

i commend CJ for not getting frustrated.

as an example....how many kickoffs have there been in any football game in history at any level?
how many were returned for 100+ yards at any level?
how many have been returned for 100+ yards in the NFL?
how many have been returned for 100+ yards in the nfl for the first 12 weeks of the 1996 season?

all are very different answers

I think people have trouble comprehending that B&R% does not equal the probability percentage of it happening. That's where the fork in the road lies.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

I think people have trouble comprehending that B&R% does not equal the probability percentage of it happening. That's where the fork in the road lies.

And I may be one of those people.

I'm no mathematician, even though I did take a couple mandatory statistic courses in college. Like I said above, I just plugged those B&R percentages into a probability calculator and let it do the work.

I think the problem with this forum is that whenever someone is in error in their thinking, the knee jerk response seems to be to make some sort of derisive statement instead of attempting to educate them. I'm an "expert" in plenty of things, some of them pretty hard for many people to comprehend without elaborating on them. I am always patient and do my best to explain.

So, do me the favor and point out where the error in my thinking is. Momma let me wear my big boy pants today, so I think I can handle it.

 

[CJ Wiley]

What's the odds of a miracle?

I think people have trouble comprehending that B&R% does not equal the probability percentage of it happening. That's where the fork in the road lies.

That is correct, the Professor that works for the insurance company is a Professor of Statistics at SMU University and considered an expert.

Unless someone is a better expert then it's logical that he probably knows more about this field than a "normal person" that isn't hired and paid to do these types of calculations.

What's the odds of a miracle?

Probably 7.8 million to 1 would be my guess, because, from my vantage point what Earl did was a miracle.....so many things had to align for him to do this and the other critical parts of the story to take place.....it was far more than just the "pool playing" part that makes this story interesting, it has several unusual factors in the equation.

It actually appears that on one hand it was "meant to be," and on the other hand the "world" desperately wanted it not to happen......I have no idea why.

 

[BigDeal52]

I looked up probability mathmatics on wikipedia. Since I am by no means a mathmatician I am not really sure if the calculation is true but it is interesting. If we use the earlier fellows number of 11% chance to make a break and run, according to what I read the probability of making 10 in a row would be 1/(0.11 ^ 10) which equals 3,855,432,894 to 1 odds of making 10 break and runs in a row. I can see why the insurance company took that bet. However, what they did not figure on was waving that carrot in front of one of the greatest players that ever lived. Whatever your feeling are about Earl their is no argument about what an exciting player he has been and still is. Amazing is a poor description of what he accomplished.

 

[jcrack_corn]

The fact is, if you keep playing RR, eventually you will pull the trigger on a live chamber. The more times you play, the worse your odds of surviving all of them. If you play 1 game, the chances of winning are roughly 83%. Play it 12 times in a row, the chance of still standing at the end are only about 11%.

incorrect

for independent trials, the only thing that matters is the 1/6 each time you pull the trigger. calculating probabilities of groupings is a thought exercise...it doesnt matter.

given 1 million trigger pulls there is nearly a 100 percent chance of a run of 12 empty chambers. the trick is to start in that run

 

[CJ Wiley]

Someone said that the we "got over" on the insurance company

I looked up probability mathmatics on wikipedia. Since I am by no means a mathmatician I am not really sure if the calculation is true but it is interesting. If we use the earlier fellows number of 11% chance to make a break and run, according to what I read the probability of making 10 in a row would be 1/(0.11 ^ 10) which equals 3,855,432,894 to 1 odds of making 10 break and runs in a row. I can see why the insurance company took that bet. However, what they did not figure on was waving that carrot in front of one of the greatest players that ever lived. Whatever your feeling are about Earl their is no argument about what an exciting player he has been and still is. Amazing is a poor description of what he accomplished.

That's a good point, and another thing that's funny is this:

Someone said that the we "got over" on the insurance company when the fact is they only gave us approximately 500 to 1 on the money.

I'm pretty sure everyone agrees the the odds were more than 500 to 1 that 10 racks were run in the tournament......even with Earl Strickland in it.

How good do they match up? We simply "outran the nutz" when you think about it.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Someone said that the we "got over" on the insurance company when the fact is they only gave us approximately 500 to 1 on the money.

That was me, and I really meant it sorta tongue-in-cheek. I genuinely wanted to know what possible existing stats were available that allowed such an enormous number to be derived. With so many documented 8-packs out there, why are the chances astronomically higher just to run two more? It didn't make sense to me, it still doesn't, and apparently it doesn't to many other people. Extremely unlikely? Yes. But 7.8 million to 1? It just begs the question, "How so?"

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

I looked up probability mathmatics on wikipedia. Since I am by no means a mathmatician I am not really sure if the calculation is true but it is interesting. If we use the earlier fellows number of 11% chance to make a break and run, according to what I read the probability of making 10 in a row would be 1/(0.11 ^ 10) which equals 3,855,432,894 to 1 odds of making 10 break and runs in a row. I can see why the insurance company took that bet. However, what they did not figure on was waving that carrot in front of one of the greatest players that ever lived. Whatever your feeling are about Earl their is no argument about what an exciting player he has been and still is. Amazing is a poor description of what he accomplished.

Well, that's what I did, only backwards. When I went snooping around for B&R stats, I noticed that they hovered around 20% or so. I plugged a few probabilities into a stat calculator and discovered that 1/(.205^ 10) was real close to 7.8 million to 1, so I deduced that that must have been what they were looking at. One guy, one chance, 11 racks, two ways of grouping them into 10-packs (the first 10 or the last 10). Turns out Earl ran all 11.

Now I'm told that you can't use the B&R% as a probability factor, so I'm back to square one again as far as understanding it. Bottom line, I don't really care that much, I was just speculating while waiting for the film to come out.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

given 1 million trigger pulls there is nearly a 100 percent chance of a run of 12 empty chambers. the trick is to start in that run

Well, when you figure out that trick let me know. You play, I'll bet on you. :wink:

 

[markgw]

Oh, I didn't know it was for an entire 12-tourney season. That makes the odds of someone making 10 B&Rs in a row 12 times more likely than if it was during only one event like I assumed. It's like Russian roulette. Play the game once and the odds are 6 to 1 in your favor. Play it a dozen times... better have ordered your casket ahead of time.

Anyway, what's fun to me is seeing how much energy you put into refuting statements that are actually in support of your case. The odds I quoted are only for the likelihood of random outcomes occurring. They were just some numbers ("guessed" at from looking at typical tournament stats that are readlily available these days) plugged into an online probability calculator.

Pool playing, however, is hardly random. Only the table rolls are random, the players themselves and their results vary widely, from day to day, based on their current performance level. You are right, trying to determine the odds that the greatest 9-ball player of all time will or won't run a 10-pack at any given time is futile. When a player like Earl in his prime hits his highest gear, who know's? He may never stop running them. It's no longer a probability issue, it becomes a will and heart issue. Last I knew, these two qualities cannot be assigned a specific number, leading to a major bean counter fail. Which, in a backhand way, is what I've been alluding to all along.

Good luck finishing the film. Count me as a future customer for it.

If I was CJ I would just surrender and say I think it was even money that Earl would run 11 racks for a million dollars, but someone made him a dog...

 

[terryhanna]

Hey CJ whats up i was lucky to have ben there and seen this great event and my memory might be a little hazy but i remember the whole room got real calm when everybody realized Earl had a five pack going and i may be wrong but i thought Earl ran six racks before he was told to let the camera start filming because the last five racks had to be on tape for the million thats how it was 11 but i might be wrong its a little fuzzy but i clearly remember when Earl made the combo to win the million he jumped about ten feet in the air and the crowd went crazy and it took a good 30 to 45 minutes to stop and everybody there was lucky to see EARLS ‎MIRACLE MILLION

 

[CSykes24]

I think people have trouble comprehending that B&R% does not equal the probability percentage of it happening. That's where the fork in the road lies.

And I may be one of those people.

I'm no mathematician, even though I did take a couple mandatory statistic courses in college. Like I said above, I just plugged those B&R percentages into a probability calculator and let it do the work.

I think the problem with this forum is that whenever someone is in error in their thinking, the knee jerk response seems to be to make some sort of derisive statement instead of attempting to educate them. I'm an "expert" in plenty of things, some of them pretty hard for many people to comprehend without elaborating on them. I am always patient and do my best to explain.

So, do me the favor and point out where the error in my thinking is. Momma let me wear my big boy pants today, so I think I can handle it.

You're focusing on small data sets, where as a full probability must involve a very, very large population of data. The logic is just wrong, though I can understand why people would think that this is a plausible way of going about it.

The jist of what I'm saying is...

% happened != % happening.

And no, I don't want to get into a discussion of how to find the actual probability of it happening. I'm not a statistician, nor do I claim to be. I'm a pricing analyst, though, so I do know a decent amount. I just know it'd be difficult to measure it, because we don't have enough data on it. Especially with the many, many variations of tables out there that are played on with different pockets, shelf sizes, pocket widths, cloth, size, balls, etc etc.

You get the idea.

That is correct, the Professor that works for the insurance company is a Professor of Statistics at SMU University and considered an expert.

Unless someone is a better expert then it's logical that he probably knows more about this field than a "normal person" that isn't hired and paid to do these types of calculations.

What's the odds of a miracle?

Probably 7.8 million to 1 would be my guess, because, from my vantage point what Earl did was a miracle.....so many things had to align for him to do this and the other critical parts of the story to take place.....it was far more than just the "pool playing" part that makes this story interesting, it has several unusual factors in the equation.

It actually appears that on one hand it was "meant to be," and on the other hand the "world" desperately wanted it not to happen......I have no idea why.

I'm honestly super intrigued to see how this professor from SMU came about developing a probability of this. Do you have any way of finding the statistical analysis of it?

 

[wahcheck]

seems like...

Hey CJ whats up i was lucky to have ben there and seen this great event and my memory might be a little hazy but i remember the whole room got real calm when everybody realized Earl had a five pack going and i may be wrong but i thought Earl ran six racks before he was told to let the camera start filming because the last five racks had to be on tape for the million thats how it was 11 but i might be wrong its a little fuzzy but i clearly remember when Earl made the combo to win the million he jumped about ten feet in the air and the crowd went crazy and it took a good 30 to 45 minutes to stop and everybody there was lucky to see EARLS ‎MIRACLE MILLION

I think that's what I read somewhere too......if that's true, he didn't really win the million on the combination shot, because it was only the 4th rack run that was taped, and he had to run the 11th rack for the money?.......C.J. Is that right?
If that's true, it makes the feat even more phenomenal....IMHO

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

You're focusing on small data sets, where as a full probability must involve a very, very large population of data. The logic is just wrong, though I can understand why people would think that this is a plausible way of going about it.

The jist of what I'm saying is...

% happened != % happening.

And no, I don't want to get into a discussion of how to find the actual probability of it happening. I'm not a statistician, nor do I claim to be. I'm a pricing analyst, though, so I do know a decent amount. I just know it'd be difficult to measure it, because we don't have enough data on it. Especially with the many, many variations of tables out there that are played on with different pockets, shelf sizes, pocket widths, cloth, size, balls, etc etc.

You get the idea.



I'm honestly super intrigued to see how this professor from SMU came about developing a probability of this. Do you have any way of finding the statistical analysis of it?

Yes, I do get what you are saying. However, the hypothetical I originally presented was only meant to show how someone might be led to believe that this could be analyzed as such. I truly don't believe there is any way that these odds could have been calculated to such a precise number for the very reasons you mention, and I have made some posts deconstructing my original premise.

At any rate, I have nothing more to say on the matter of the calculations. I have neither the data, the software, nor the requisite know-how at my disposal. I just don't see how they could have come up with the necessary data, and I am as curious as you are to find out what they used to come up with their figure.


What I can say about the whole fiasco is that it was a bad idea to start with. To dangle such a whoppingly large carrot in front of their noses, one that dwarfed the actual tournament total purse, created an environment for a type of play that carried little resemblance to the way a typical tourney should go.

Based on the early buzz CJ's trying to create for the movie, Earl was interviewed about how he trained specifically for this purpose - to run ten racks before anybody else did and take home the million. Does anyone really believe he went to the pool room and practiced his safety play all day long? Why would he ever push out or play safe when it would automatically end his bid for the bucks?

In the real world, players don't take high-risk shots in the hopes that they will drop in. This whole thing reminds me of attempting high runs in straight pool challenges. They are somewhat meaningless in how they relate to the actual game of 14.1. The guy sprays the rack with a set-up break shot and tries to make every ball he can because there in no opponent to run out the rest of the set when he misses. Appleton's 200 and out this summer means a heck of a lot more to me than if he broke Mosconi's 526. It was real straight pool in a tournament setting. The "Million Dollar Challenge" was not real 9-ball, it was a race to get to 10 consecutive racks first. That fact in and of itself brought the odds against it happening way down, and surely offset the "tournament pressure" by large factor.

And don't ask me by how much, I haven't a clue.:wink:

 

[CSykes24]

Yes, I do get what you are saying. However, the hypothetical I originally presented was only meant to show how someone might be led to believe that this could be analyzed as such. I truly don't believe there is any way that these odds could have been calculated to such a precise number for the very reasons you mention, and I have made some posts deconstructing my original premise.

At any rate, I have nothing more to say on the matter of the calculations. I have neither the data, the software, nor the requisite know-how at my disposal. I just don't see how they could have come up with the necessary data, and I am as curious as you are to find out what they used to come up with their figure.


What I can say about the whole fiasco is that it was a bad idea to start with. To dangle such a whoppingly large carrot in front of their noses, one that dwarfed the actual tournament total purse, created an environment for a type of play that carried little resemblance to the way a typical tourney should go.

Based on the early buzz CJ's trying to create for the movie, Earl was interviewed about how he trained specifically for this purpose - to run ten racks before anybody else did and take home the million. Does anyone really believe he went to the pool room and practiced his safety play all day long? Why would he ever push out or play safe when it would automatically end his bid for the bucks?

In the real world, players don't take high-risk shots in the hopes that they will drop in. This whole thing reminds me of attempting high runs in straight pool challenges. They are somewhat meaningless in how they relate to the actual game of 14.1. The guy sprays the rack with a set-up break shot and tries to make every ball he can because there in no opponent to run out the rest of the set when you miss. Appleton's 200 and out this summer means a heck of a lot more to me than if he broke Mosconi's 526. It was real straight pool in a tournament setting. The "Million Dollar Challenge" was not real 9-ball, it was a race to get to 10 consecutive racks first. That fact in and of itself brought the odds against it happening way down, and surely offset the "tournament pressure" by large factor.

And don't ask me by how much, I haven't a clue.:wink:

Very, very good statement here. I also don't know how they calculated such odds, which is why I'm hoping CJ can answer and throw some info our way. I agree that it should be so high in the millions, but I don't believe it's as low as 4,000 as some have posted.

Also very true on Appleton's 200 run. Well put.

 

[CJ Wiley]

the "big picture" of the "Million Dollar Challenge Tour",

Hey CJ whats up i was lucky to have ben there and seen this great event and my memory might be a little hazy but i remember the whole room got real calm when everybody realized Earl had a five pack going and i may be wrong but i thought Earl ran six racks before he was told to let the camera start filming because the last five racks had to be on tape for the million thats how it was 11 but i might be wrong its a little fuzzy but i clearly remember when Earl made the combo to win the million he jumped about ten feet in the air and the crowd went crazy and it took a good 30 to 45 minutes to stop and everybody there was lucky to see EARLS ‎MIRACLE MILLION

You are correct, Earl was in such a ZONE that he refused to let Jay Helfert rack the balls on the 6th game, and we didn't have time to get the camera ready either. This whole thing happened so fast and so unexpectantly we were all caught off guard. I will always remember when someone ran in the office where we were at the time and yelled "EARL'S ON 5 RACKS!!!"

The last thing I would have ever dreamed was someone running 10 racks the first day......we all knew it "could" happen, however we thought someone would run 8 racks and win the $25,000 first.....or maybe the 9 racks for $50,000.....but who, in their wildest dreams would have thought someone.....ANYONE...would do it the first day.

Calculate the odds anyway you want, but running those racks on the FIRST DAY was nothing short of a miracle.......and there's more to the miracle, many things had to happen, and yes, the 11th rack kept the insurance lawyers from being able to take a stand about the "last 5 racks".

The combo DID win the 'Million Dollar Challenge'...however, if he hadn't ran the 11th one he may not have received the money!.....How brutal would that have been? The good news he would have still got the $50,000, and in retrospect that would have been better for the "big picture" of the "Million Dollar Challenge Tour", but obviously not as good for Earl Strickland.

 

[CJ Wiley]

One way or another the expectations of winning & the fear of losing must be addressed

That was me, and I really meant it sorta tongue-in-cheek. I genuinely wanted to know what possible existing stats were available that allowed such an enormous number to be derived. With so many documented 8-packs out there, why are the chances astronomically higher just to run two more? It didn't make sense to me, it still doesn't, and apparently it doesn't to many other people. Extremely unlikely? Yes. But 7.8 million to 1? It just begs the question, "How so?"

You aren't calculating in the most important, deciding factor......the "Faint Factor".

This factor is why players of the highest level can give up handicaps that seem impossible...no one wants to admit they are subject to this factor, and we all are.

We learned to face and accept this factor (by studying the Samurai) before the gambling match....this, if effect, freed us from the viscous backlash of the "Faint Factor" rearing it's ugly head during the the battle. One way or another the expectations of winning and the fears of losing must be addressed.....or else.

"When we can't accept defeat we will not experience victory on {the the Game's} Life's battlefield!"

'The Game is the Teacher'

 

[patrickcues]

We're doing the post production/editing now and it will be out the first of December, we may take some early orders, with some additional incentives. I'll let you know asap.

We're looking forward to the release, I've been holding on to this story for over 17 years and the time has finally come to fruition - doing the interview, and going through the magazines, and legal papers is bringing back a lot of great and not so great memories......it was "almost" pool's biggest breakthroughs with 12 events, (televised) and the biggest prize in pocket billiard's history....oh, well, such is life, maybe the timing was not quite right......although now it my be,

We believe pool's "down-cycle" is fixing to change, of course to make any changes in life we must first be "willing to believe" or change will never occur. "anything the mind can believe, the will can conceive, the Game can achieve"

well consider one sold!!! Let me know when. You should come back in February to Tourny!!