Problem with your book - Page 8

Combusted · #71 01-03-2006, 05:44 PM

If this guy isn't a troll he deserves to be shot.

loyalguard · #72 01-03-2006, 05:44 PM

No. There is a 50% chance of Red and a 50% chance of black every single time the wheels spins (assuming no greens on the wheel of course!) regardless of what has happened previously.

It could come up red 1,000,000 times in a row and it is still only a 50% chance it will come up red on the next spin.

either master_helmuth is trolling, or so dense as not to listen to many people much smarter than me on this forum that say he is wrong.

master_hellmuth · #73 01-03-2006, 05:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Say there are two roullette wheels. Wheel A has been spun 20 times and has come up red every time! Oddly enough, Wheel B has alternated red and black outcomes for it's 20 spins, and the 20th spin was black. Which wheel is more likely to hit black on it's 21st spin?

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, I'm not saying you can definitely know which wheel is going to hit which, I'm not that dense, and thats why they call it gambling. However, the wheel that hit red 20 times in a row is a little more likely to hit black than the one that has been behaving properly according to probability.

jmillerdls · #74 01-03-2006, 05:53 PM

lol...you can't be serious.

jmillerdls · #75 01-03-2006, 05:54 PM

New Suzzie category is in order.

prana · #76 01-03-2006, 05:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]

And casinos make billions of dollars a year because of dumb tourists who stand on 16's versus a dealer showing ten.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a standard move if the count is right

prana · #77 01-03-2006, 05:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
See: gambler's fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you looked into this yet???

SomethingClever · #78 01-03-2006, 06:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Three weeks ago, I won like $400 in one night playing smart roulette, but whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be El Diablo's gimmick account. Am I right?

master_hellmuth · #79 01-03-2006, 06:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
See: gambler's fallacy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you looked into this yet???

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not the same thing as what I'm saying. I'm not saying that past results DEFINITIEVLY PREDICT future outcomes, I'm saying they make them MORE OR LESS LIKELY. I don't get whey people can't understand this.

Anyway, I don't want to insult the book, I've been reading more of it, and it seems good and I like it. Its just this one concept where I disagree.

Victor · #80 01-03-2006, 06:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Say there are two roullette wheels. Wheel A has been spun 20 times and has come up red every time! Oddly enough, Wheel B has alternated red and black outcomes for it's 20 spins, and the 20th spin was black. Which wheel is more likely to hit black on it's 21st spin?

[/ QUOTE ]

Look, I'm not saying you can definitely know which wheel is going to hit which, I'm not that dense, and thats why they call it gambling. However, the wheel that hit red 20 times in a row is a little more likely to hit black than the one that has been behaving properly according to probability.

[/ QUOTE ]

actually, since roullette wheels are mechanical devices, when it lands on red super often it is most likely that there is an inbalance or groove causing it. so it would be more likely to hit on red in the future.