Mr 600

[couldnthinkof01]

My only point...if I had one at all..is that from a probability viewpoint, I think John's chances were pretty high.

I don't think 23 free throws is within a few thousand of the record for consecutive shots...but it illustrates the spread between an average and a good day.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

23?
You mean to tell me you cant even beat an old man
in goggles shooting granny style?
https://youtu.be/DGl3tlAiYt8
Sad.
Just sad.

Edit- I thought these two guys
were the same person.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BMAB6BAgAEAI&usg=AOvVaw3_vqAz9xy8CO7ExcRtmLwd

 

[logical]

23?
You mean to tell me you cant even beat an old man
in goggles shooting granny style?
https://youtu.be/DGl3tlAiYt8
Sad.
Just sad.

Edit- I thought these two guys
were the same person.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BMAB6BAgAEAI&usg=AOvVaw3_vqAz9xy8CO7ExcRtmLwd

I probably can't beat anyone who plays basketball. I was 9 years old at the time, it was never my game and I haven't played since 1976. It was an illustration of probability, not a brag. It may or may not say something about the difference between a high run that just started as a match and one that was the result of a marathon deliberate attempt to set a right run record. That's up to the reader to decide ( and for non- readers to misinterpret)

 

[couldnthinkof01]

I probably can't beat anyone who plays basketball. I was 9 years old at the time, it was never my game and I haven't played since 1976. It was an illustration of probability, not a brag. It may or may not say something about the difference between a high run that just started as a match and one that was the result of a marathon deliberate attempt to set a right run record. That's up to the reader to decide ( and for non- readers to misinterpret)

Shaq could give me 7 to 10 in free throws and I'd lose

I think if anything, there was at least as much
pressure in Johns attempt, if not more.

626 is incredible not matter which way you slice it.
I dont see anyone jumping out of their seats to beat it.

I just thought the videos of two men in their 70s
One blindfolded and one puttin up a couple thousand
was a fun play on your free throw analogy

 

[skogstokig]

I guess i am not a catalyst for the fakenews and I am very thankful of that. the more #'s I guess the more moving parts as a distraction from the fact that there is not an video footage. I do not blame Mosconi for there not being any video footage - they did not have it.

i'm sure it will come out eventually. maybe john feels that it needs commentary other than his own. maybe you could help him out? commentary by danny h and bobby c.. that would be gold

 

[BeiberLvr]

I sure hope we aren't comparing shooting free throws to running balls in straight pool.

 

[Cardigan Kid]

I sure hope we aren't comparing shooting free throws to running balls in straight pool.

That's what it sounds like.

 

[logical]

I sure hope we aren't comparing shooting free throws to running balls in straight pool.

Of course we are not...at least I know I'm not.

It was just a simple analogy to illustrate the pure mathematical probability that someone who routinely does something fairly well will also likely do it extremely well once in a while. I think it was clear to anyone who wanted to understand it.

 

[ShootingArts]

Even simple luck comes into play

Of course we are not...at least I know I'm not.

It was just a simple analogy to illustrate the pure mathematical probability that someone who routinely does something fairly well will also likely do it extremely well once in a while. I think it was clear to anyone who wanted to understand it.

Poker is a game that lends itself to computer modeling far better than pool. If you model a good player and then replicate that player four more times you would think that after a lifetime of hands are modeled that the players would be roughly even. It isn't what happens, there was a player well ahead, there were a couple distinctly behind. At least over the course of one lifetime, pro poker can be a matter of luck. However, it is worth knowing that if one player is made very slightly less skillful, it is quickly cannibalized! Chris Moneymaker is well known for having the perfect name and a fantastic run of luck one time. He was a lousy poker player for many years afterwards. Doyle called him the most improved poker player he had ever seen which I had to laugh at. Talk about a back handed slap!

Another indication of what can happen, a fifty-fifty coin flip. One was modeled electronically, zero and five volts with the odds being even on either one. In thousands and thousands of tries, the result was once the same nineteen times in a row! Who would believe they weren't being cheated if they lost nineteen coin flips in a row?

Lies, damned lies, and statistics. Strange things happen!

Hu

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Another indication of what can happen, a fifty-fifty coin flip. One was modeled electronically, zero and five volts with the odds being even on either one. In thousands and thousands of tries, the result was once the same nineteen times in a row! Who would believe they weren't being cheated if they lost nineteen coin flips in a row? ...

From Wikipedia:

Perhaps the most famous example of the gambler's fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence: the probability of a sequence of either red or black occurring 26 times in a row is (18/37) to the power (26-1) or around 1 in 66.6 million, assuming the mechanism is unbiased. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an imbalance in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red.[1]
​

and from the Caesar's Entertainment site:

Think your number or color has to hit soon? The longest recorded streak of one color in roulette in American casino history happened in 1943 when the color red won 32 consecutive times. In a row. The people convinced black had to hit next were absolutely right. Eventually.​

That chance is one on two billion, more or less. But how many times has a roulette ball been launched somewhere?

 

[terryhanna]

From Wikipedia:

Perhaps the most famous example of the gambler's fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence: the probability of a sequence of either red or black occurring 26 times in a row is (18/37) to the power (26-1) or around 1 in 66.6 million, assuming the mechanism is unbiased. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an imbalance in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red.[1]
​

and from the Caesar's Entertainment site:

Think your number or color has to hit soon? The longest recorded streak of one color in roulette in American casino history happened in 1943 when the color red won 32 consecutive times. In a row. The people convinced black had to hit next were absolutely right. Eventually.​

That chance is one on two billion, more or less. But how many times has a roulette ball been launched somewhere?

I once saw a guy playing craps make 21 passes in row without crapping out.

I don't know what the odds are on that but it has to be astronomical.

 

[Low500]

I once saw a guy playing craps make 21 passes in row without crapping out.
I don't know what the odds are on that but it has to be astronomical.

Wow...that is dynamite!
You should be a wealthy person if you were fading that pass line.
Way to go.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I once saw a guy playing craps make 21 passes in row without crapping out.

I don't know what the odds are on that but it has to be astronomical.

It seems to be (244/495)^21 or roughly one in three million. The pass odds are slightly less than even money but the house pays even money.

 

[DynoDan]

I once saw a guy playing craps make 21 passes in row without crapping out.

I don't know what the odds are on that but it has to be astronomical.

Happened to me back in ‘67. Last night in the Army before discharge, my pockets stuffed with final monthly pay cash (plus travel & separation pay), but couldn’t get to sleep on account of a noisy barracks crap game, so decided to jump in. Faded the shooter until pockets empty, and had to hitchhike home. He made over twenty straight passes before crapping out.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Faded the shooter until pockets empty, and had to hitchhike home. He made over twenty straight passes before crapping out.

That's only a million-to-one shot. Happens all the time.:smile:

 

[ShootingArts]

the reason I don't like to gamble!

From Wikipedia:

Perhaps the most famous example of the gambler's fallacy occurred in a game of roulette at the Monte Carlo Casino on August 18, 1913, when the ball fell in black 26 times in a row. This was an extremely uncommon occurrence: the probability of a sequence of either red or black occurring 26 times in a row is (18/37) to the power (26-1) or around 1 in 66.6 million, assuming the mechanism is unbiased. Gamblers lost millions of francs betting against black, reasoning incorrectly that the streak was causing an imbalance in the randomness of the wheel, and that it had to be followed by a long streak of red.[1]
​

and from the Caesar's Entertainment site:

Think your number or color has to hit soon? The longest recorded streak of one color in roulette in American casino history happened in 1943 when the color red won 32 consecutive times. In a row. The people convinced black had to hit next were absolutely right. Eventually.​

That chance is one on two billion, more or less. But how many times has a roulette ball been launched somewhere?

One part of me agrees with the crowd. The run of nineteen I mentioned or the run of 32 reds should have to balance out for the odds to be even on the two colors. Not immediately but eventually the odds should even out. Not necessarily with an immediate or long run but with the other color being favored a bit to eventually even things out. If the count was started from the 19 coin flips it would seem that because the run was started from zero, eventually the count would have to return to even.

However I know that isn't what happens. No matter how many times one result happens in a row the odds are still fifty-fifty on the next roll not counting that one magic spot on the roulette wheel that makes the house the winner.

I have always vastly favored wagering over gambling, why I am a pool player.

Hu

 

[jrctherake]

That's what it sounds like.

You have to remember:

Most people don't care about facts. Most people have their minds made up before the facts are given.

When it comes to comparing the new world record of 626 to the old record of 526, it's no different than comparing one politician to another. People will "stay the course" and still vote for someone regardless of what "facts" come out.

People in general, well, they don't like change.

 

[jay helfert]

I once saw a guy playing craps make 21 passes in row without crapping out.

I don't know what the odds are on that but it has to be astronomical.

I stood by the table and watched a doctor friend hold the dice for 45 minutes, making dozens of numbers before finally crapping out over 100K ahead. He looked at me and asked me why I never made a bet. I told him I didn't want to change his luck. He smiled and flipped me a $1,000 chip!

Another time (the full story is in my book) a group of pool players beat the crap table at the Sands so bad they had to shut it down. We may have won about 100K in total on a table with a $200 limit. I watched them refill twice to the tune of 50K each time.

 

[DynoDan]

A bit off-point, but talk of casino odds has me wondering: If the house % is predetermined for slot machines, and since all machines are computerized, would they now all be interconnected (WiFi?) to a master computer? Gamblers still watch heavily-played slots that haven’t payed out, hoping to jump in and catch an overdue jackpot. Are they now thus deluded if the % only applies to the total collection of machines in general?

 

[ShootingArts]

somebody is at the controls!

A bit off-point, but talk of casino odds has me wondering: If the house % is predetermined for slot machines, and since all machines are computerized, would they now all be interconnected (WiFi?) to a master computer? Gamblers still watch heavily-played slots that haven’t payed out, hoping to jump in and catch an overdue jackpot. Are they now thus deluded if the % only applies to the total collection of machines in general?

Now they can even say that the hardware or software malfunctioned and not pay out. Since the software is proprietary and secret, how does the player know? They have to take the words of the kind benevolent casino owners and managers and the good hands people behind them!

I quit playing internet poker because every software examined used by every poker site had superuser software. Want to play poker with your cards face up and the cards of everyone on the table face up except the superuser's? The other thing was people with money in the site were allowed to create dozens of users. Do you want to sit down at a nine handed game when seven of the hands are being ran by the same person?

Personal opinion, electronic gambling is far too open to cheating to play for anything but entertainment. Not that mechanical machines aren't often rigged too. One of the "how it is made" shows took apart an old slot machine. A bar fell into certain slots to determine wins and losses. The slot for the big win had a bolt and nut securely blocking it off!

Hu

 

[pt109]

Now they can even say that the hardware or software malfunctioned and not pay out. Since the software is proprietary and secret, how does the player know? They have to take the words of the kind benevolent casino owners and managers and the good hands people behind them!

I quit playing internet poker because every software examined used by every poker site had superuser software. Want to play poker with your cards face up and the cards of everyone on the table face up except the superuser's? The other thing was people with money in the site were allowed to create dozens of users. Do you want to sit down at a nine handed game when seven of the hands are being ran by the same person?

Personal opinion, electronic gambling is far too open to cheating to play for anything but entertainment. Not that mechanical machines aren't often rigged too. One of the "how it is made" shows took apart an old slot machine. A bar fell into certain slots to determine wins and losses. The slot for the big win had a bolt and nut securely blocking it off!

Hu

A personal thanx for posting this, Hu
I’ve been resisting the urging of many to open a poker account.
I know a few years ago, a hacker could see everybody’s cards....the sap got caught...
...by misplaying a bunch of hands and winning

I got reasonable survival instincts and I listen to them...I’m pretty sure I don’t allow them
to sink to paranoia....I play live tournaments when I can..but I watch the dealer...