Investment plays 6-6 -$625
Action plays 19-18 -$1273.00
Total 25-24 -$1898.00
Bankroll $75,000.00
now $73,102.00
411 system now 7-4 61%
The Gambler's Fallacy
Beginning gamblers invariably view their expectations on too narrow a scale. They believe that having a 60 percent expectation means they figure to win 6 of their next 10 bets, or 12 of their next 20 bets, or 30 of their next 50 bets, etc.
Sorry but there is not much chance of that actually happening. The laws of probability are not nearly so precise. As a matter of fact, with a 60 percent expectation, you are not likely to win 6 of your next 10 bets at all.
The idea that expectations will be realized over a very short time is known as the Gambler's Fallacy. It is the same fallacy that causes roulette players to believe that red is more apt to win if black has won several times in a row.
That's not so, of course. Roulette wheels have no memory. It's coincidence. The mathematical law that dictates you will eventually win a number of bets commensurate with your expectation is effective only when dealing with very large numbers. In fact, mathematicians no longer refer to "the law of averages," it's now called the "the law of large numbers."
This same fallacy is at work when sports touts 'prove' they are experts by citing winning records, with only a few observations, such as 10-1, 20-5, 30-8, etc. Even without a good reason, such lop-sided results are bound to occur as a matter of happenstance. They are mathematically inevitable. For example, if all your bets had a winning expect ion of precisely 57.5%, you could expect to win between 48 and 7 of your next 100 bets - a variance from expectation of plus-or-minus 10 percent.
By comparison, you figure to win between 545 and 605 of your next 1,000 bets, which is a variance of only plus or minus 3 percent.
As for your next 10 bets ?...........It's a crapshoot.
It quickly becomes obvious that using past results as proof of future expectations requires having plenty of past results.
The Ping-Pong Balls
It may help to picture this: Let's say a crate of 10,000 Ping-Pong balls falls off a truck in front of your car on the freeway. The box contains 6,000 white Ping-Pong balls and 4,000 yellow Ping-Pong balls, randomly mixed.
The box shatters in front of your car, sending all 10,000 balls bouncing randomly onto the freeway. Let's say you happen to run over and smash exactly ten of those balls. How many white balls do you figure to smash?
The most likely number is six, of course, since 60 percent of the balls are white. But wait - that is only the most likely event of several other very likely events. You are only slightly less likely to smash five white balls, or seven white balls, and only slightly less likely than that to smash four white ones, or eight white ones, etc.....You are restricted to only eleven different possible events:
0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
If you add up all the changes of all the other possible outcomes, smashing anything BUT six white balls out of ten, you can see you are not likely to smash exactly six white balls at all. Even though you do, indeed, have a 60 percent expectations, you will most likely end up with some other 'smash percentage.'
That's because ten observations, or events, are simply too few observations to expect reliable results. The 'universe' of observations, or events, is too small. This is the principle at the very heart of the Gamble Fallacy, and this is the undoing of many a gambler.
And to complicate the matter, if you do not smash precisely six white balls your 'smash percentage' must be at least 10 percent away - or different - from your expectation. Only eleven different outcomes are possible. The closest you can come to 60 percent, unless you hit it on the nose, is either 50 percent or 70 percent.
....But now let's suppose you smashed 1,000 balls instead of ten....In that case, we have a wholly different proposition. In that case, you can be sure you smashed more white balls than yellow ones, and you can be reasonably sure you smashed between 570 and 630 white balls - somewhere between 57 percent and 63 percent of the 1,000 balls smashed. This is assured because the bigger the universe, the more predictable the outcomes, percentage-wise.
Helping your prediction come true with 1,000 'smashes' instead of only 10 'smashes' is the fact that smash 59.9 percent, or 60.1 percent, or 59.8, 60.2 etc. .....With 1,000 balls smashed, you may fail to get precisely the percentage expected, but you cannot miss it by as much as 10 percent. It's virtually impossible to smash only 500 white balls, or as many as 700 white balls because there are too many events more likely to occur; ---- i.e, smashing 599 balls, or 601, or 598 or 602, etc.
Don't rely on double-digit numbers to produce a true expectations; guarantee yourself that you will stay alive long enough to record triple-digit results. That was, and still is, excellent advice.
my 9 years record at the RX TOTAL.......................580-499 +$179,518.00 54%
more to come
Ace
Action plays 19-18 -$1273.00
Total 25-24 -$1898.00
Bankroll $75,000.00
now $73,102.00
411 system now 7-4 61%
The Gambler's Fallacy
Beginning gamblers invariably view their expectations on too narrow a scale. They believe that having a 60 percent expectation means they figure to win 6 of their next 10 bets, or 12 of their next 20 bets, or 30 of their next 50 bets, etc.
Sorry but there is not much chance of that actually happening. The laws of probability are not nearly so precise. As a matter of fact, with a 60 percent expectation, you are not likely to win 6 of your next 10 bets at all.
The idea that expectations will be realized over a very short time is known as the Gambler's Fallacy. It is the same fallacy that causes roulette players to believe that red is more apt to win if black has won several times in a row.
That's not so, of course. Roulette wheels have no memory. It's coincidence. The mathematical law that dictates you will eventually win a number of bets commensurate with your expectation is effective only when dealing with very large numbers. In fact, mathematicians no longer refer to "the law of averages," it's now called the "the law of large numbers."
This same fallacy is at work when sports touts 'prove' they are experts by citing winning records, with only a few observations, such as 10-1, 20-5, 30-8, etc. Even without a good reason, such lop-sided results are bound to occur as a matter of happenstance. They are mathematically inevitable. For example, if all your bets had a winning expect ion of precisely 57.5%, you could expect to win between 48 and 7 of your next 100 bets - a variance from expectation of plus-or-minus 10 percent.
By comparison, you figure to win between 545 and 605 of your next 1,000 bets, which is a variance of only plus or minus 3 percent.
As for your next 10 bets ?...........It's a crapshoot.
It quickly becomes obvious that using past results as proof of future expectations requires having plenty of past results.
The Ping-Pong Balls
It may help to picture this: Let's say a crate of 10,000 Ping-Pong balls falls off a truck in front of your car on the freeway. The box contains 6,000 white Ping-Pong balls and 4,000 yellow Ping-Pong balls, randomly mixed.
The box shatters in front of your car, sending all 10,000 balls bouncing randomly onto the freeway. Let's say you happen to run over and smash exactly ten of those balls. How many white balls do you figure to smash?
The most likely number is six, of course, since 60 percent of the balls are white. But wait - that is only the most likely event of several other very likely events. You are only slightly less likely to smash five white balls, or seven white balls, and only slightly less likely than that to smash four white ones, or eight white ones, etc.....You are restricted to only eleven different possible events:
0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
If you add up all the changes of all the other possible outcomes, smashing anything BUT six white balls out of ten, you can see you are not likely to smash exactly six white balls at all. Even though you do, indeed, have a 60 percent expectations, you will most likely end up with some other 'smash percentage.'
That's because ten observations, or events, are simply too few observations to expect reliable results. The 'universe' of observations, or events, is too small. This is the principle at the very heart of the Gamble Fallacy, and this is the undoing of many a gambler.
And to complicate the matter, if you do not smash precisely six white balls your 'smash percentage' must be at least 10 percent away - or different - from your expectation. Only eleven different outcomes are possible. The closest you can come to 60 percent, unless you hit it on the nose, is either 50 percent or 70 percent.
....But now let's suppose you smashed 1,000 balls instead of ten....In that case, we have a wholly different proposition. In that case, you can be sure you smashed more white balls than yellow ones, and you can be reasonably sure you smashed between 570 and 630 white balls - somewhere between 57 percent and 63 percent of the 1,000 balls smashed. This is assured because the bigger the universe, the more predictable the outcomes, percentage-wise.
Helping your prediction come true with 1,000 'smashes' instead of only 10 'smashes' is the fact that smash 59.9 percent, or 60.1 percent, or 59.8, 60.2 etc. .....With 1,000 balls smashed, you may fail to get precisely the percentage expected, but you cannot miss it by as much as 10 percent. It's virtually impossible to smash only 500 white balls, or as many as 700 white balls because there are too many events more likely to occur; ---- i.e, smashing 599 balls, or 601, or 598 or 602, etc.
Don't rely on double-digit numbers to produce a true expectations; guarantee yourself that you will stay alive long enough to record triple-digit results. That was, and still is, excellent advice.
my 9 years record at the RX TOTAL.......................580-499 +$179,518.00 54%
more to come
Ace