Ignore Bait: Highest IQ, Many Questions, Odds makers invited...

KissedOut said:
Exactly. No need for 1000 simulations or other nonsense that people post to show off that they know some statistics. This has nothing to do with statistics, it is a pure probability problem. A simple enumeration, such as yours, is an analytically comprehensive proof, one that would be acknowledged as a proof by any mathematically literate person.
Click to expand...

Except that when this problem was initially posed, it took simulations to get very prominent mathematicians to accept it.

Literal top of their field types.

At the time, it was hotly debated until simulations were done.

Now, it’s regarded as common knowledge.
 
vapoolplayer said:
This is again full of wrong.

The odds of never winning 1/1000 tries is beyond astronomical.

This also has nothing to do with the cardboard box guys which is literally a scam. It’s not based on any math.

You wouldn’t remotely ever be close to 50/50 with the cardboard box guys. You’d win when the bet was low long enough for them to hook you for a big bet.

You’d only win exactly when they want you to win on the box.
Click to expand...
Wrong. When you play infinitely, 1000 tries is not even a thing. My post is correct.

The box guys are an afterthought. You would be at zero percent not 66%. Why do you stab at every detail when we aren't even arguing the same thing?'

Are you one of the Roy's B guys? Much respect on the pool. Hardly any on this thread.
 
straightline said:
Wrong. When you play infinitely, 1000 tries is not even a thing. My post is correct.

The box guys are an afterthought. You would be at zero percent not 66%. Why do you stab at every detail when we aren't even arguing the same thing?'

Are you one of the Roy's B guys? Much respect on the pool. Hardly any on this thread.
Click to expand...

Wrong as usual. Even if you played infinity, the odds of going 0/1000 string is extremely, extremely small. So small, most mathematicians would consider it virtually impossible.

You’re the one who brought up the initial post, said you didn’t agree. Then when literally anyone with half a brain tells you you’re absolutely wrong, you keep going.

You’re also the one who literally just brought up the cardboard guys.


The only intelligent thing you’ve said in this thread is that you don’t gamble. As that would be a disaster of financial management.
 
Last edited:
For example, a true 50/50 coin toss…..

To get 1,000 of one side in a row, you likely couldn’t flips coins fast enough to finish before the universe runs out of gas.

So, 66% would be even less. 33% would be more of a chance…..but however would also be considered zero for any purposes.
 
Though this would probably be a better use of your time than, well…..most anything I’d imagine.

Go to this website and keep pressing the “1,000” button until you die.

You’ll never see the count move 1,000 ahead or 1,000 less of the equivalent of 50% of the total flips.


StatCrunch

www.statcrunch.com www.statcrunch.com
 
vapoolplayer said:
For example, a true 50/50 coin toss…..

To get 1,000 of one side in a row, you likely couldn’t flips coins fast enough to finish before the universe runs out of gas.

So, 66% would be even less. 33% would be more of a chance…..but however would also be considered zero for any purposes.
Click to expand...
If 1000 flips of a coin all fall on one side the null hypothesis is that the coin is fixed and the single trials are not 50/50 ( I realize you said a true 50-50 toss, but it almost certainly isn't if 1000 trials go one way). This would occur 1 in 10^301 times. The upper estimate for the number of atoms in the universe is only 10^82nd.
 
Just some idle conversation here, voicing my confusion. I read about a computer generated coin flip years ago. I think they let it run billions of times or more. There was a high run of one side winning every flip of around 20-22 times. This was wildly improbable as the next highest run was under ten I believe.

Here is where I get confused. If the first twenty flips would have been all heads, the odds of the rest of the series being fifty-fifty remain the same. If there was a thousand flip run of all heads, the trial from there on out would still have fifty-fifty odds. It seems to me if the overall statistics are to remain fifty-fifty, then the tails side would have to do some catching up either with long runs of it's own or a series of shorter runs.

If the odds are fifty-fifty, after a billion flips shouldn't the results be within a very close percentage of fifty-fifty? The computers say that one side might be 10-15% ahead of the other. If so, I say the odds weren't fifty-fifty. Seems like if one side is well ahead the other side has to be favored over the following run if you can stay with it long enough.

This confusion is why I am much more inclined to wager than gamble. I hate to sound like Bert Kinister but my last wager was for a chicken dinner. A single backcut shot, a bad shot to bet against me on. To quote Bert, "Winner, Winner, chicken dinner!"

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
Here is where I get confused. If the first twenty flips would have been all heads, the odds of the rest of the series being fifty-fifty remain the same. If there was a thousand flip run of all heads, the trial from there on out would still have fifty-fifty odds. It seems to me if the overall statistics are to remain fifty-fifty, then the tails side would have to do some catching up either with long runs of it's own or a series of shorter runs.
Click to expand...

If you did a billion flips and the first 20 were heads, then the last 999,999,980 alternated heads/tails, you would have 500.000,010 heads and 499,999,990 tails, or 50.000001% heads and 49.999999% tails. That's pretty close to 50/50 without tails catching up a single flip. If the first thousand were heads and they alternated after that, it would be 50.0001% to 49.9999%. The total number of trials dwarfs any anomaly.
 
Last edited:
APA Operator said:
If you did a billion flips and the first 20 were heads, then the last 999,999,980 alternated heads/tails, you would have 500.000,010 heads and 499,999,990 tails, or 50.000001% heads and 49.999999% tails. That's pretty close to 50/50 without tails catching up a single flip. If the first thousand were heads and they alternated after that, it would be 50.0001% to 49.9999%. The total number of trials dwarfs any anomaly.
Click to expand...
I mentioned it several times in this thread, but repetition is better than re-reading all the nonsense.

Flipping a coin is a independent trials process.

That means, no matter what the last flip was it’s 50/50 the next flip will have a equal chance of being heads or tails.

It’s that simple. Nothing in the past, has any effect on the next flip-ever. It’s “independent”, there’s nothing you can tell the coin to make it change it’s mind and favor one side or the other.

This is a universal principal in math. And it’s a very simple concept, that’s well hidden in some forms of gambling(which really isn’t gambling because the house builds in a edge)


They don’t build those joints on winners-ever.

Best
Fatboy <——-like a edge
 
KissedOut said:
If 1000 flips of a coin all fall on one side the null hypothesis is that the coin is fixed and the single trials are not 50/50 ( I realize you said a true 50-50 toss, but it almost certainly isn't if 1000 trials go one way). This would occur 1 in 10^301 times. The upper estimate for the number of atoms in the universe is only 10^82nd.
Click to expand...

Oh I agee.

Just point it out to the genius who started this thread that really has zero grasp on probably or statistics.

He he seems to think that no matter how small the odds are, if you run it infinitely, that means it would still happen plenty of times.

Which as we know, just isn’t true.

In fact the opposite is true. You might actually be able to flip a coin an infinite amount of times an maybe get it to land on one side 1,000 in a row….once in infinity. Maybe never.

Even if someone was betting on heads or tails and switched they choice often, the odds of losing 1,000 times in a row is nuts.
 
vapoolplayer said:
Wrong as usual. Even if you played infinity, the odds of going 0/1000 string is extremely, extremely small. So small, most mathematicians would consider it virtually impossible.

You’re the one who brought up the initial post, said you didn’t agree. Then when literally anyone with half a brain tells you you’re absolutely wrong, you keep going.

You’re also the one who literally just brought up the cardboard guys.


The only intelligent thing you’ve said in this thread is that you don’t gamble. As that would be a disaster of financial management.
Click to expand...
That's algorithmic rubbish. The original conjecture was of a dealer who is trying to win; to actually beat the player. That would include box guys and any other specificities that you have dismissed or chosen to ignore.

As far as astronomical odds, mathematical infinity is bigger - infinitely bigger.
 
straightline said:
That's algorithmic rubbish. The original conjecture was of a dealer who is trying to win; to actually beat the player. That would include box guys and any other specificities that you have dismissed or chosen to ignore.

As far as astronomical odds, mathematical infinity is bigger - infinitely bigger.
Click to expand...

Again, wrong. When the odds are basically infinitely for it to happen, then it’s still zero.

You’re short sighted and focused on the 1,000 count. The real umber is the odds. Which are very close to infinity.

You yet again are showing your complete lack of understanding.

Also, when the dealer is trying to win, there would be no math odds. As the dealer would be cheating.

No dealer would ever pose a scenario in which someone could win 66% (unless they had odds on the money). They would only bet with someone like you who doesn’t understand the math and they could talk into staying with their initial choice at all times while betting even money.


You have continually introduced factors that have zero to do with the original scenario at all, while somehow still getting the logic and/or odds of the new problem you presented.

You have someone how been able to introduce a “gotcha” into the scenario and still be wrong.

You gotcha’d yourself.
 
Odds of happening = almost zero in infinity

Means that if you run it infinity times, it’s still not going to happen.

Do you even know what 10^301 is??
 
How about what I asked? Con develops the the 1 outta 3 switcheroo for action. What are the numbers? What are the angles?

Obviously, no matter what the mark picks, the con gotta steer him wrong. This is no longer 66%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top