Yep, more gamblers fallacy for you. GOOD TIMES!

[MrJ]

Here is a question I asked at the Wiz site. I can always tell when its a good question based on if I get few responses. People are so inconsistent when it comes to GF.

A) All 38 numbers are in a hat. I blindly pick one number, its the #17. I go to the casino and make a small bet on the 17, for ONE spin, never bet again and then went home. Did I just use gamblers fallacy?

B) One day later I change my mind, went back for ONE MORE SPIN of the 17. Did I NOW use gamblers fallacy?

Ken

[Gizmotron]

A) no - if you used wishfull thinking.

B) no - but if you keep coming back for the same bet then you might.

[MrJ]

"B) no - but if you keep coming back for the same bet then you might" >>> This is where the s**t gets tricky. Keep coming back? How many times? 7 times? 40 times? Over what period? What if it was 15 times but over nine months, is that gamblers fallacy? What if it was a different table but sticking with the #17, gamblers fallacy? What about a different casino but sticking with the #17, gamblers fallacy?

Ken

[Gizmotron]

Ken, what if you determined that 17 was currently in a state of being the hottest number?

[MrJ]

Is your question in regards to my question or is this example something different?

Ken

[MrJ]

There's no determinating anything. The 17 was pulled from a hat and the history board is not working.....you have no stats.

Ken

[kelly]

In this case it is your belief which is important.  If you picked 17 out of a hat and had decided to bet whatever came out of the hat, it is NOT GF.  You just didnt have a clou what to bet and let the hat decide. 


If you came back the day after and decided to do a repeat because it went well yesterday it still wouldnt be GF. 


If you think 17 is due because it also came yesterday at 18.00 sharp,  it IS GF.


As for DS your hero Allan Kriegman believes in dealers signature.  Like it or not.

[Gizmotron]

I guess I blended two active threads here. Any time someone expects anything is due, for any reason, that includes the odds, then that's some form of gamblers fallacy.

[MrJ]

An oldie but a goodie but I have to post it again. I love the different answers.

Gamblers fallacy will never help you? Hmmm

I'll pick 3 numbers for you and 3 numbers for myself, all flat betting.

I have tracked the last 600 spins. The 3 numbers I choose for you, are the 3 with the fewest hits. (BTW, there is no damn bias in the wheel)

For myself, whatever 3 numbers have three hits on it, most recently.....in the last 'X' number of spins. In other words, presently hot.

We keep betting until 2 of our 3 numbers gets a hit, thats the winner. If we did this experiment 500 times, it SHOULD come close to you winning 250 times and I win 250 times, correct?

(Close to 250, I'm not saying it would be perfect)

Who would say 'YES Ken', it would be around 250 and 250 over and over again?

Ken

[MrJ]

I guess I blended two active threads here. Any time someone expects anything is due, for any reason, that includes the odds, then that's some form of gamblers fallacy.

But does 'due' ONLY mean furthest back? What if the 18 has hit six times in the last 22 spins and I'm betting on it (hot). Does that mean I think the 18 is due?

Ken

[kelly]

In one single test it could go either way but if you did the experiment with some 100 samples of 600 spins you would come out equal.  You probably dont believe it if your only test tool is some numbers and a pen and paper but if you can run it on a computer on a larger scale you would be surprised what you see because the computer can run much more samples much faster.  Handtesting with pen and paper is the perfect illousion tool in roulette system development.  Many productive man hours has been lost on that account.

[Gizmotron]

Ken - " Who would say 'YES Ken', it would be around 250 and 250 over and over again?"

You might know this or you might not but I spent a decade learning how to detect hot numbers. On every 300 spins you get three hottest numbers. Almost all hot streaks of a single number end by 450 spins. Guess what? The same thing holds true for the coldest numbers. So your 600 is far to much into the natural location for change to have occured. This is best learned from computer simulation research.  My answer is yes based on this.

[MrJ]

I'm a hot number fan, cant help it. I bet one number per spin these days.

Ken

[Gizmotron]

I know Ken. I've been listening.

[nitrix]

A: No.

B: Depends. I think if you expect a hit in less than 36 spins, you're trying to be lucky. And past 36 spins, you're betting because it's "due to happen".

At least that's what maths and the gamblers "fallacy" is based upon...

It's just theory, I've yet to see a working system based on one or the other. people also like to name it positive progression & negative progression, from your expectation of making a profit in a given time. What it really is is flat betting a number..

I dunno. Its all the same In My Humble Opinion.

Different words. Different thinking.