[JohnGalt2341]

Johngalt:

only uses this forum for his own benefit

trying to act like a fukkin hotshot at fukkin REVERSI

need I say more

NO

you USE this forum

I POST on this forum

You need help man. Now that I am aware of how despised you are on SBR all I can do is feel sorry for you. I feel sorry for any and all mentally challenged people including you. I don't think I've ever seen someone hate themselves as much as you obviously hate yourself. Get help while there is still time.

[RudyRuetigger]

You need help man. Now that I am aware of how despised you are on SBR all I can do is feel sorry for you. I feel sorry for any and all mentally challenged people including you. I don't think I've ever seen someone hate themselves as much as you obviously hate yourself. Get help while there is still time.

you use this forum instead of giving back

maybe try that

all i see from you is:

1. help me here

2. i can beat you at a game no one else knows

let me know if I'm wrong

please provide posts where you say otherwise

[JacketFan81]

I'm not sure if he was talking about the Monte Hall problem or not but one thing people seem to forget about the Monte Hall Problem is someone is controlling the situation and they can show you a Goat(or an empty door) no matter what your first choice is. A lot of people call it the Monte Hall paradox which is incorrect. It's actually a perceived paradox which is something else entirely.

There are some situations where percentages can get tricky. Example: Let's say you tested positive for a disease that only 1 in 100,000 people had. However, the test for that disease is only 99.9% accurate. That means for every 1 person that has the disease 10 people will test positive for it that are actually negative. So... if you test positive for this disease it's 10 times as likely to be a false positive than you actually having the disease. So... even if the test is 99.9% accurate it is still likely wrong if you test positive.

This was covered pretty clearly in Nate Silver's book

[JohnGalt2341]

you use this forum instead of giving back

maybe try that

all i see from you is:

1. help me here

2. i can beat you at a game no one else knows

let me know if I'm wrong

please provide posts where you say otherwise

This is from earlier today. https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...100-units.html Look at posts #32 and #33. A noobie asked a question. I gave him a detailed answer. He then said "Thanks for your advice man."

When is the last time anyone thanked you for anything besides if you got lucky on a pick?

[magaman]

Mad math skills in this thread

[JohnGalt2341]

you use this forum instead of giving back

maybe try that

all i see from you is:

1. help me here

2. i can beat you at a game no one else knows

let me know if I'm wrong

please provide posts where you say otherwise

I also gave out several hundred Points for those that could beat me in Reversi 6x6 and several people played me dozens of times and some beat me and I paid them. Check the thread https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...-giveaway.html I also gave several hundred points to people who could get at least HALF of my score in a completed Hexversi game. And a few people did it and I paid them.

I've never seen you give away points once ever! How in the world could you possibly be so self unaware? It's stunning.

[Optional]

Has anyone provided an explanation to how flipping 45 coins at once makes any difference to flipping them one after the other?

Can't see the answer for the swinging dick contest that has taken over the thread.

[JIBBBY]

I say keep it easy and simple but direct and dialed in. Do your capping research and follow trends, winning streaks and the numbers, last 5 games and what have you done for me lately matters.... You'll win in any sport you gamble in if you master that.. Keep your bets consistent and you may just make a living out of sports gambling one day..

I'm not smart enough to factor in all the algorithms and what not.. I'm a ham and egger, grinder and that works for me.. Not a lot of math and science to it from my perspective, just alot of research and trend finding.. Stick to the sports you are hot with and concentrate on those as they will bring you the pay dirt.. They can vary from year to year.. Don't fight the power and chase when you're up against it..

I will say though most IMPORTANTLY there is something to lady luck and good karma. Treat others kindly and be giving in your ways.. Don't be self centered and greedy.. If you are a good person and give you will find yourself winning not only in gambling but in life.. Treat others how you would like to be treated...

My moral post for the day.. ..

Cheers biiitches!! My 2 cents for what ever it's worth..

[LT Profits]

Has anyone provided an explanation to how flipping 45 coins at once makes any difference to flipping them one after the other?

Can't see the answer for the swinging dick contest that has taken over the thread.

My educated guess:

Obviously if you flipped one fair coin 45 times, each flip is 50/50 irregardless of previous results.

In the other example though of flipping 45 coins at once, the flipping has already happened and the results are being revealed afterwards, no longer making it a future event. Thus, just like the Monte Hall paradox from the 21 clip, revealing that the first 44 coins were heads serves as the changing variable. So...what was more likely to happen before the simultaneous flipping, 44 heads or 45 heads? Obviously the odds on both were minuscule but the 45-0 sweep was the most minuscule, so the tails would be favored for the 45th reveal.

[Optional]

My educated guess:

Obviously if you flipped one fair coin 45 times, each flip is 50/50 irregardless of previous results.

In the other example though of flipping 45 coins at once, the flipping has already happened and the results are being revealed afterwards, no longer making it a future event. Thus, just like the Monte Hall paradox from the 21 clip, revealing that the first 44 coins were heads serves as the changing variable. So...what was more likely to happen before the simultaneous flipping, 44 heads or 45 heads? Obviously the odds on both were minuscule but the 45-0 sweep was the most minuscule, so the tails would be favored for the 45th reveal.

That's a good explanation, and probably what the lecturer in that movie clip would use as an answer.

But, how can both these statements be true? "past results have no effect on future results" (whether they are revealed one at a time or flipped one at a time seems to also have zero effect on that statement to me) and "changing variables after previous results do affect the final result".

I've been taught that idea of changing variables and how its always wise to change your pick in that 3 door situation example. But from the very first time I heard it, and every time since, I have not been able to blindly accept it as any sort of useful truth just because a teacher said it.

Where else in sports betting, or life, might this situation actually occur? Where the "host" knows beforehand which door to rule out. Without that information the example falls apart.

I think the Monte Hall paradox is just a bit of a thought exercise that proves nothing.

[semibluff]

The chances of 44 flips all landing the same way, (either heads or tails), is over eight thousand billion to one. Either it's random luck that will happen approximately once every eight thousand billion times or there's an outside influence on the flips. I'd say the outside influence was more likely.

Good luck to anyone trying to martingale that losing streak.

The Monte Hall problem is an exercise in simple probabilities. For those struggling to see why changing doors is the correct solution try it with 52 playing cards, picking one card, (trying to pick the Queen of Hearts), and putting it to the left. Then put the other 51 cards to your right. Now remove 50 'losing' cards from the pile on your right.

[u21c3f6]

My educated guess:

Obviously if you flipped one fair coin 45 times, each flip is 50/50 irregardless of previous results.

In the other example though of flipping 45 coins at once, the flipping has already happened and the results are being revealed afterwards, no longer making it a future event. Thus, just like the Monte Hall paradox from the 21 clip, revealing that the first 44 coins were heads serves as the changing variable. So...what was more likely to happen before the simultaneous flipping, 44 heads or 45 heads? Obviously the odds on both were minuscule but the 45-0 sweep was the most minuscule, so the tails would be favored for the 45th reveal.

If you are always showing the FIRST 44 heads, then the probabilities are no different than flipping a single coin 44 times. However, as in the Monty Hall scenario, if the shower is choosing the 44 to show, then if the throw contained only one tail, the shower would never show the tail just as Monty Hall never reveals the car and therefore the probability changes.

Joe.

[Optional]

Great article here about how many Phds questioned the change door solution for a long time. And how we really need to understand how a "decision tree" works to truly understand why for ourselves.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140413...1/vazs30_1.pdf

[u21c3f6]

Along the same line as this, here is something from my bridge playing days (probably aging myself here).

It is what I know as the principle of restricted choice. Imagine 3 sets of 2 playing cards: one set has 2 black cards, one set has 2 red cards and the other set has 1 black and 1 red card. If we turn over one of the cards and it is red, what is the probability that the other card is black?

Joe.

[Optional]

Along the same line as this, here is something from my bridge playing days (probably aging myself here).

It is what I know as the principle of restricted choice. Imagine 3 sets of 2 playing cards: one set has 2 black cards, one set has 2 red cards and the other set has 1 black and 1 red card. If we turn over one of the cards and it is red, what is the probability that the other card is black?

Joe.

1/3 ?

[u21c3f6]

1/3 ?

Correct. A lot of people might think it is 50/50 but of course it is not.

Joe.

[Optional]

Correct. A lot of people might think it is 50/50 but of course it is not.

Joe.

Phew. Was expecting another mind blower

Nice question though. I did guess 1/2 before I thought about it.

[RudyRuetigger]

this reminds me of an old riddle

A couple has two children. At least one of them is a boy. Assuming the probability of having a boy or girl is 50%, what is the probability that both children are boys?


If you answered 1/2, you’re not without comrades, but the generally accepted answer by statisticians (though not without debate) is 1/3. This is because there are four possible combinations: boy-boy, boy-girl, girl-boy and girl-girl. Since we are told one of the children is a boy (but we don’t know if it’s the first or second child), we can rule out the girl-girl combination, leaving three remaining options. Only one out of 3 is boy-boy, so we get a 1/3 chance.This is a well-known problem known as the Boy or Girl paradox. The other variation is this brain teaser.

[gojetsgomoxies]

This whole flipping 45 coins at once and if the the first 44 are heads then what are the chances that the 45th is a head as well. First I was thinking it's 50%. I still do but trying to figure out if and why that could be wrong. If you did this 100 trillion times so all the different results of how many heads came up are grouped and the occurences of each reflect the true probabilities then 22 and 23 heads would tie for most occurring. 0 and 45 heads would be the least. 1 and 44 would be the second least. So if 45 would occur Im guessing twice as often as 44 then when you see a partial result that would yield either a 44 or a 45 then it will most likely be a 44 since it's twice as likely a 44 was flipped. Im not sure if my logic is correct. Just throwing it out there. Hmmmmmm...

it is still 50% in that situation, as you had said............. as one poster mentioned, i'd seriously question whether the coin is loaded at that point but the idea of the 50% is correct.

the person who said that odds of 45 coins being all tails is astronomical but that's before you tally any of the results. once you've tallied 44 coins then the astronomical odds have mostly already occurred.....

it's like saying flipping heads 4 times in a row is 15 to 1 odds.... are you really going to give more than 15 to 1 odds after heads has come up 3 times in a row? i could get rich if you gave me 2 to 1 over and over again in that spot...

[gojetsgomoxies]

where it would matter what's happened in the past is if you have 50 red balls and 50 black balls and you pull them out of a hat without looking... then if you pick a black ball then the red ball chance has increased.. this is basically what card counting was/is. basically getting to the point where there are only 4 balls left and they're all black.

[LT Profits]

it's like saying flipping heads 4 times in a row is 15 to 1 odds.... are you really going to give more than 15 to 1 odds after heads has come up 3 times in a row? i could get rich if you gave me 2 to 1 over and over again in that spot...

This sounds like you are flipping one coin repeatedly, and it has already been established that when you do that, each flip is 50/50 so the fact that first 3 flips were heads is irrelevant. In the case of the 45 simultaneous flips, the flipping has already happened and the results are being revealed afterwards. So the paradox becomes whether the pre-flip odds of ending up with 44 heads or 45 heads is relevant when determining odds of 45th result.

[BuckyOne]

Ok - In craps it is possible for someone to preset the dice and throw 1000 times and alter the expected distribution. Assuming the thrower has spent countless hours practicing his skills and assuming there was no pit boss saying you cannot throw the dice above the level of the table.

So define flip - what is a legitimate flip? Someone could practice countless hours and develop their skill to the point they may be able to consistently alter the results in their favor - say heads? Offered to bet you 500 to win 500 that in 100 throws he can throw 51 or more heads.

What would your response be if the other bettor offered you 480 to win 500?

[RudyRuetigger]

this reminds me of an old riddle

A couple has two children. At least one of them is a boy. Assuming the probability of having a boy or girl is 50%, what is the probability that both children are boys?


If you answered 1/2, you’re not without comrades, but the generally accepted answer by statisticians (though not without debate) is 1/3. This is because there are four possible combinations: boy-boy, boy-girl, girl-boy and girl-girl. Since we are told one of the children is a boy (but we don’t know if it’s the first or second child), we can rule out the girl-girl combination, leaving three remaining options. Only one out of 3 is boy-boy, so we get a 1/3 chance.This is a well-known problem known as the Boy or Girl paradox. The other variation is this brain teaser.

you guys are welcome

see this is why I don't post useful info

[gojetsgomoxies]

thx for the puzzles......

i was reacting to the person who said that flipping 50 heads in a row was a billion to one. so once you've flipped or uncovered 49 heads that it's still a billion to one to have 50 heads in a row.

as to uncovering 50 coins and the first 49 are heads, i don't remember any other conditions (i think it might have been 45 or 46 flips instead of 50/49 but that shouldn't change the basic idae.) so i wold have thought it was just reading coins in which case i would have thought it was 50% but i will have to think of the puzzles. in the case of the 49 heads, i would think it's "the first 49 coins are heads". i think if you said "the older child is a boy" then it's 50% chance it's 2 boys.

apparently with the puzzle there are 2 answers but it seems like the 1/3 answer is moderately better.