Re: Just curious if this has anything to do with DERB
Hey, I don't even play 3/6 let alone 30/60 but since this thread has actually forced someone to register in order to post in it, I thought I would chime in, too. I think you're missing the point of the analogy. No one is saying that you have to assume that the coins are all fair before you do the experiment. Let's say that you take 1000 coins and you flip them each 1000 times and you DON'T know whether they are fair or not. If you take the one that lands on heads most and try to make an argument that it MUST be weighted to land on heads more often by building a confidence interval, that argument will be wrong. That argument will be wrong because even IF all of the coins were fair coins, you would STILL expect one of them to land on heads a lot more often than tails. And by selecting that particular one to analyse, you are biasing your analysis. So you can't construct a confidence interval around its results by (implicitly) assuming that it was randomly chosen. That is what the analogy is supposed to show: that having someone perform extraordinarily can be explained even IF they are no different from anyone else.
[ QUOTE ]
I've been reading this thread for a while now, and I got frustrated enough that I had to register and post.
The coin analogy doesn't work.
When you use the coin analogy you are already assuming that DERB must be a losing player, or at the very least that he (or she) will, in the long run, have EXACTLY THE SAME results as everyone else with 30/18 stats. THIS is what is being debated, therefore you cannot begin your argument that he is a bad player by using analogies that assume he is as bad as the 30/18 players you're used to.
When you toss a coin, however many times, you know before tossing it that in the long run, the numbers will tend toward 50/50 because you know that there are only two potential results, and they are both equally likely.
DERB's play might very well not be anywhere close to what you're used to seeing with players with his stats. As has been discussed, there is a great deal more to a player's success than PT stats, and I think if anything is going to be figured out, this is the place to start.
So DERB could be a 2BB/100 winner on a hot streak, or he could still be that 5%, 1%, or 0.3% lottery winner (or a big fat cheater, but I've seen no evidence of that).
All I'm saying is that you CANNOT use the coin analogy because you are simply assuming that all players with DERB's stats - stats taken using a method that doesn't paint nearly a whole picture of how a player plays - will ALWAYS tend toward a certain BB/100.
You are basing your argument on your conclusion. This is fallacious.
My 2 cents, this is all very interesting.
-Matt
[/ QUOTE ]
|