The Gambler's Fallacy (The key to unbiased gambling)

mirakal

legendary

Activity: 3108

Merit: 1290

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: libert19 on August 01, 2019, 11:54:15 PM

Quote from: shoreno on July 31, 2019, 07:09:40 AM

Quote from: libert19 on July 29, 2019, 11:15:16 PM

Concise post. This is why many gamblers (specially new ones) go with Martingale strategy and lose it all.

when i was a newb on gambling before , i dont use strategies but later on i have tried the martingale method but im not dumb to loose all my balance . im only saying that not all uses martingale and not all that who use martingale are loosers . wins or loose itl all depend on your playstyle and not on the strategy/methods that you are using .

I was bit generalizing, since newbie bettors will come to know about it first, and also its easy to discover by oneself.

We can't deny that we were still newbie in gambling we love to experience a lot of betting technique that we read online.
Even me, I use that martingale and experience my bankroll getting busted, but have to accept it as it's part of the journey, I know you guys know how it feels when your bankroll get busted and you are expecting you have discover a method that would give you a easy money but the result is negative.

ethereumhunter

hero member

Activity: 2856

Merit: 541

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: dataispower on August 11, 2019, 09:00:47 AM

Note than winning a particular game with specific method doesn't guarantee you winning the next game, there is no best technique to winning in gambling.

We must remember about that so we don't risk more money to winning the next rounds because we don't know if the strategy or method could win. As long as we can have this in our mind, we can prevent from another losses that might come and the best is we can save the money. The gamblers always make a mistake in gambling, and they don't realize what will happens if they spend too much money. But that can be avoided as long as we can know how to make a limit on gambling.

dataispower

sr. member

Activity: 1330

Merit: 289

Generally speaking I wouldn't say humans are entirely bad at gambling. Some gamblers get more wins than others without applying any technique, It doesn't matter how smart you are. Note than winning a particular game with specific method doesn't guarantee you winning the next game, there is no best technique to winning in gambling. The whole ideology about gambler's fallacy is quite complicated.

libert19

hero member

Activity: 2464

Merit: 934

Quote from: shoreno on July 31, 2019, 07:09:40 AM

Quote from: libert19 on July 29, 2019, 11:15:16 PM

Concise post. This is why many gamblers (specially new ones) go with Martingale strategy and lose it all.

when i was a newb on gambling before , i dont use strategies but later on i have tried the martingale method but im not dumb to loose all my balance . im only saying that not all uses martingale and not all that who use martingale are loosers . wins or loose itl all depend on your playstyle and not on the strategy/methods that you are using .

I was bit generalizing, since newbie bettors will come to know about it first, and also its easy to discover by oneself.

Saint-loup

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 2353

Quote from: Aero Blue on July 29, 2019, 07:49:21 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 07:08:29 PM

One more time, you're not talking about gambling and how we play dice game in reality but about scholar mathematics. I'm sorry but I'm not here to help you to improve your gambling posts for your signature campaign, you make me wasting my time. If you don't care about gambling you're just spamming, so stop quoting me, thank you.

For the sake of the thread, I am going to point out a few issues with your argument. You are not the only one who has fallen victim to these fallacies, but I feel I need to address them now to also help others:

Quote

If you don't care about gambling you're just spamming, so stop quoting me, thank you.

The Appeal to Privacy: "The contemporary fallacy of arbitrarily prohibiting or terminating any discussion of one's own standpoints or behavior, no matter how absurd, dangerous, evil or offensive, by drawing a phony curtain of privacy around oneself and one's actions."[1]

Quote

One more time, you're not talking about gambling and how we play dice game in reality but about scholar mathematics.

The Plain Truth Fallacy: "A fallacy of logos favoring familiar, singular, summarized or easily comprehensible data, examples, explanations and evidence over those that are more complex and unfamiliar but much closer to the truth."^[1]

The Simpleton's Fallacy: "I may be a poor, naive simpleton but I'm not quite sure what that fine and fancy lawyer-talk means in plain English."^[1]

[1]: http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.html

It seems you forgot the fake link fallacy.
Arguing with a link which is broken Roll Eyes

But you have still not explained us why it would be a fallacy to think you're more likely to get one Tails and less likely to get none in the next 2 flips.
HH
HT
TH
TT
Only one possibility on 4, 25% to get no Tails.
Three possibilities on 4, 75% to get one.

And for the next 3 flips
HHH
HHT
HTH
HTT
THH
THT
TTH
TTT
One possibility on 8, 12,5% to not getting one Tails
7 possibilities on 8, 87,5% to get one.

Aero Blue

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 128

Quote from: shoreno on July 31, 2019, 07:09:40 AM

Quote from: libert19 on July 29, 2019, 11:15:16 PM

Concise post. This is why many gamblers (specially new ones) go with Martingale strategy and lose it all.

when i was a newb on gambling before , i dont use strategies but later on i have tried the martingale method but im not dumb to loose all my balance . im only saying that not all uses martingale and not all that who use martingale are loosers . wins or loose itl all depend on your playstyle and not on the strategy/methods that you are using .

You are right about martingale, it's a lose all or double situation at the core. But it doesn't depend on your play style / strategy, but on your short term "luck". By luck, I mean your "current session odds / expected odds". So if the "expected odds" are 50%, but you are winning 70% of the time, your "session odds" are 1.4:1.

shoreno

full member

Activity: 1750

Merit: 118

Quote from: libert19 on July 29, 2019, 11:15:16 PM

Concise post. This is why many gamblers (specially new ones) go with Martingale strategy and lose it all.

when i was a newb on gambling before , i dont use strategies but later on i have tried the martingale method but im not dumb to loose all my balance . im only saying that not all uses martingale and not all that who use martingale are loosers . wins or loose itl all depend on your playstyle and not on the strategy/methods that you are using .

libert19

hero member

Activity: 2464

Merit: 934

Concise post. This is why many gamblers (specially new ones) go with Martingale strategy and lose it all.

Aero Blue

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 128

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 07:08:29 PM

One more time, you're not talking about gambling and how we play dice game in reality but about scholar mathematics. I'm sorry but I'm not here to help you to improve your gambling posts for your signature campaign, you make me wasting my time. If you don't care about gambling you're just spamming, so stop quoting me, thank you.

For the sake of the thread, I am going to point out a few issues with your argument. You are not the only one who has fallen victim to these fallacies, but I feel I need to address them now to also help others:

Quote

If you don't care about gambling you're just spamming, so stop quoting me, thank you.

The Appeal to Privacy: "The contemporary fallacy of arbitrarily prohibiting or terminating any discussion of one's own standpoints or behavior, no matter how absurd, dangerous, evil or offensive, by drawing a phony curtain of privacy around oneself and one's actions."[1]

Quote

One more time, you're not talking about gambling and how we play dice game in reality but about scholar mathematics.

The Plain Truth Fallacy: "A fallacy of logos favoring familiar, singular, summarized or easily comprehensible data, examples, explanations and evidence over those that are more complex and unfamiliar but much closer to the truth."^[1]

The Simpleton's Fallacy: "I may be a poor, naive simpleton but I'm not quite sure what that fine and fancy lawyer-talk means in plain English."^[1]

[1]: http://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/ENGL1311/fallacies.html

Saint-loup

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 2353

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 06:34:21 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 06:21:50 PM

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 04:58:31 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 03:27:15 PM

So if you got already 2heads you have 3chances on 4 to get one tail in the next 2 flips.

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT

In the next 2 flips your chances to get 1 tail are the same as to get 1 head and equal to 0.5. You have 4 possible outcomes with 2 of them having 1 tail - HT, TH (the other two being HH and TT). The outcome TT has 2 tails, while its probability is the same as for 2 heads (HH) and equal to 0.25. In other words, 2 tails is a different outcome than 1 tail in 2 flips. Basically, you are trying to exploit the tendency or weakness of human beings to answer a similar but different question, i.e. not the one asked (an easier one, for the record)

You may want to try again

I'm sorry but the question is about gambling here, so I don't know which question you're trying to reply to but there is no reason to eliminate TT here (eliminate by who BTW?) since it's a valid outcome

Okay, I will try to explain

If you don't eliminate TT, then the correct proposition should be as follows: with 2 flips we have 3 chances out of 4 to get 1 or 2 tails, which would match sequences HT, TH, and TT. Put differently, getting exactly 1 tail is not the same as getting 2 tails with 2 flips. 2 tails in 2 flips violate the proposition of only 1 tail in 2 flips

And while we are at it, it is the same with heads, i.e. 3 chances out of 4 to get 1 or 2 heads, which is HT, TH, and HH. It may look like we have total odds exceeding 1 but that's because sequences HT and TH match both propositions (i.e. they are not mutually exclusive). In simple terms, in this case you can't sum up probabilities

One more time, you're not talking about gambling and how we play dice game in reality but about scholar mathematics. I'm sorry but I'm not here to help you to improve your gambling posts for your signature campaign, you make me wasting my time. If you don't care about gambling you're just spamming, so stop quoting me, thank you.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 06:21:50 PM

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 04:58:31 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 03:27:15 PM

So if you got already 2heads you have 3chances on 4 to get one tail in the next 2 flips.

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT

In the next 2 flips your chances to get 1 tail are the same as to get 1 head and equal to 0.5. You have 4 possible outcomes with 2 of them having 1 tail - HT, TH (the other two being HH and TT). The outcome TT has 2 tails, while its probability is the same as for 2 heads (HH) and equal to 0.25. In other words, 2 tails is a different outcome than 1 tail in 2 flips. Basically, you are trying to exploit the tendency or weakness of human beings to answer a similar but different question, i.e. not the one asked (an easier one, for the record)

You may want to try again

I'm sorry but the question is about gambling here, so I don't know which question you're trying to reply to but there is no reason to eliminate TT here (eliminate by who BTW?) since it's a valid outcome

Okay, I will try to explain

If you don't eliminate TT, then the correct proposition should be as follows: with 2 flips we have 3 chances out of 4 to get 1 or 2 tails, which would match sequences HT, TH, and TT. Put differently, getting exactly 1 tail is not the same as getting 2 tails with 2 flips. 2 tails in 2 flips violate the proposition of only 1 tail in 2 flips

And while we are at it, it is the same with heads, i.e. 3 chances out of 4 to get 1 or 2 heads, which is HT, TH, and HH. It may look like we have total odds exceeding 1 but that's because sequences HT and TH match both propositions (i.e. they are not mutually exclusive). In simple terms, in this case you can't sum up probabilities

Saint-loup

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 2353

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 04:58:31 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 03:27:15 PM

So if you got already 2heads you have 3chances on 4 to get one tail in the next 2 flips.

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT

In the next 2 flips your chances to get 1 tail are the same as to get 1 head and equal to 0.5. You have 4 possible outcomes with 2 of them having 1 tail - HT, TH (the other two being HH and TT). The outcome TT has 2 tails, while its probability is the same as for 2 heads (HH) and equal to 0.25. In other words, 2 tails is a different outcome than 1 tail in 2 flips. Basically, you are trying to exploit the tendency or weakness of human beings to answer a similar but different question, i.e. not the one asked (an easier one, for the record)

You may want to try again

I'm sorry but the question is about gambling here, so I don't know which question you're trying to reply to but there is no reason to eliminate TT here (eliminate by who BTW?) since it's a valid outcome.
I think it's the difference between the(your) theory and the reality. You can change the rules of your theory but not of the reality. In the real life if you get TT you'll win.

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 04:58:31 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 20, 2019, 02:55:05 PM

I disagree with that if you bet 20times on the same side and you lose, the odds are not the same for the next flip (if the flips are really random).
It doesn't mean you'll have 100% chances to win but you'll have more than 50% chances to win

You will have a hard time to prove that unless you implicitly assume the outcomes are not independent while the odds are changing in the process

I'm sorry but I've already put a chart above. If you don't understand it or don't want to understand it, I can't do more for you.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 03:27:15 PM

So if you got already 2heads you have 3chances on 4 to get one tail in the next 2 flips.

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT

In the next 2 flips your chances to get 1 tail are the same as to get 1 head and equal to 0.5. You have 4 possible outcomes with 2 of them having 1 tail - HT, TH (the other two being HH and TT). The outcome TT has 2 tails, while its probability is the same as for 2 heads (HH) and equal to 0.25. In other words, 2 tails is a different outcome than 1 tail in 2 flips. Basically, you are trying to exploit the tendency or weakness of human beings to answer a similar but different question, i.e. not the one asked (an easier one, for the record)

You may want to try again

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 20, 2019, 02:55:05 PM

I disagree with that if you bet 20times on the same side and you lose, the odds are not the same for the next flip (if the flips are really random).
It doesn't mean you'll have 100% chances to win but you'll have more than 50% chances to win

You will have a hard time to prove that unless you implicitly assume the outcomes are not independent while the odds are changing in the process

Saint-loup

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 2353

Quote from: ?? on ??

So are you sure HTHTHTHTHT is not more likely to happen than TTTTTTTTTT ? Do you have real statistics about that?

The probabilities are the same

Statistics refer to past data, and technically they can be any, especially if the sample size is small (the infamous law of small numbers). Probabilities, on other hand, refer to future outcomes, i.e. they do not exist for what has already occurred (but can be obtained from the past data, given large enough sample). So in terms of probabilities HTHTHTHTHT is as likely as TTTTTTTTTT. Simply speaking, it is exactly about mathematics, not actual outcomes (which you seem to mean by "facts" here)

For 4 flips there are 2^4=16 possible combinations
6 have 2heads and 2tails
4 have 1heads and 3tails
4 have 3heads and 1tails
1 has 0heads and 4tails
1 has 4heads and 0tails

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT
HTHH
HTHT
HTTH
HTTT
THHH
THHT
THTH
THTT
TTHH
TTHT
TTTH
TTTT

So if you got already 2heads you have 3chances on 4 to get one tail in the next 2 flips.

HHHH
HHHT
HHTH
HHTT

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: ?? on ??

So are you sure HTHTHTHTHT is not more likely to happen than TTTTTTTTTT ? Do you have real statistics about that?

The probabilities are the same

Statistics refer to past data, and technically they can be any, especially if the sample size is small (the infamous law of small numbers). Probabilities, on other hand, refer to future outcomes, i.e. they do not exist for what has already occurred (but they can be obtained from the past data, given a large enough sample). So in terms of probabilities HTHTHTHTHT is as likely as TTTTTTTTTT (or any other combination of heads and tails), at least as long as it is 50/50 for both tails and heads. Simply speaking, it is exactly about mathematics, not actual outcomes (which you seem to imply here by "facts"). Otherwise, the odds are not 50/50. It is an accounting identity of sorts, which you can't possibly get around

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 28, 2019, 02:45:30 PM

I don't understand what this chart means

Saint-loup

legendary

Activity: 2604

Merit: 2353

Quote from: deisik on July 28, 2019, 12:38:08 PM

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 21, 2019, 05:31:00 PM

According to the statistics you have more chances to get 5heads and 5tails than getting 0heads and 10tails when you flip 10times a coin. Do you agree with that? Yes or no?

You don't specify one important condition. More specifically, you don't specify the exact order in which we are going to see 5 heads and 5 tails. If we are to see them in an arbitrary order, i.e. just 5 heads and 5 tails in 10 flips, then you are correct. Otherwise, if you actually mean a specific order (like HTHTHTHTHT), then the probability of seeing this sequence is the same as seeing 0 heads and 10 tails in any order (which would always be TTTTTTTTTT, of course) as outcomes are independent of each other. I guess this is the source of your confusion

Or maybe you mean something else

Yes I'm talking about observed statistics, not theorical "demonstrations".
So are you really sure HTHTHTHTHT is not more likely to happen than TTTTTTTTTT ? Do you have real statistics about that?
The facts show you're more likely to get 5 heads and 5 tails than getting 0 heads and 10tails, it's not some mathematics from me, it's the facts.

omonuyak

sr. member

Activity: 882

Merit: 269

"Doubles down on loses" has never been the best way to gamble. I have tried this in both betting and dice but it loses money faster than any other gambling strategies. I think we just need to accept the fact that gambling should be played without putting mind for any strategy as in this it is always easy to win than losing as you only depend on your luck.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: Saint-loup on July 21, 2019, 05:31:00 PM

According to the statistics you have more chances to get 5heads and 5tails than getting 0heads and 10tails when you flip 10times a coin. Do you agree with that? Yes or no?

You don't specify one important condition. More specifically, you don't specify the exact order in which we are going to see 5 heads and 5 tails. If we are to see them in an arbitrary order, i.e. just 5 heads and 5 tails in 10 flips, then you are correct. Otherwise, if you actually mean a specific order (like HTHTHTHTHT), then the probability of seeing this sequence is the same as seeing 0 heads and 10 tails in any order (which would always be TTTTTTTTTT, of course) as outcomes are independent of each other. I guess this is the source of your confusion

Or maybe you mean something else

Sharon121212

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 215

Quote from: jake zyrus on July 21, 2019, 06:33:15 AM

I somehow agree with what you said that "Humans are naturally very bad at gambling". I think what the op is trying to say is that, we are naturally bad at gambling but through learning and practices, we improve and become better. We don't actually born good at gambling. We learn and improve through process. And during that process, we also learn to make better decision to avoid losses.

There is no perfection to gambling no matter your years of experience a new guy can come in a get it right while you flop the ways to get gambling perfect this days is by cheating for example hacking system.
While gambling I keep at the back of my mind that the owners of this gambling site never opened the site for them to run at a loss and I would stop feeling as if they owe me or it's my right to win every time

omonuyak

sr. member

Activity: 882

Merit: 269

Quote from: ?? on ??

Quote from: omonuyak on July 22, 2019, 03:16:11 AM

Quote from: mirakal on July 21, 2019, 07:43:05 PM

Quote from: davis196 on July 21, 2019, 07:22:58 AM

What differentiates a good gambler from a bad gambler is the fact that the good gambler knows when to stop,while the bad gambler just wants more and more,and eventually he loses everything.

If that's what you think then you are not thinking of becoming a successful gambler.
A good gambler for me knows how to win, and winning is not easy so factors you've mentioned are possess by a good gamblers.

Quote from: davis196 on July 21, 2019, 07:22:58 AM

It's all about self-control and psychology,not mathematics.

Both are important if you think of winning, some people just don't treat gambling as a complete entertainment, some are ambitious of winning.

Many people gambling, do it to win and even if they are gambling for fun? It is in our intentions to win. My advice is for us to gamble with fun of it but desired to win in all our betting. If we are to continue in gambling we should try to remain positive and also motivate ourselves by making profit from our gambling.

It does not matter the least if you are gambling for fun or pleasure. The end is always a win and a loss and many do prefer and worry about the win. The intensity of winning however is not really high when it comes to someone who is looking for fun. A big number of people do it to make quick money. Uncertainty is an inbuilt trait in gambling and to me, it is a risky investment.

Gambling is investments just that it is a very risky one and since one cannot really win much because of the odd I think we should invest as little as we can so that when you lose you can take it as it is. In the office yesterday during break I began to gambling online in the present of my colleague and when I was losing we began to laugh over it and we find fun in it because the amount involved is small. Investing what you can not really afford to lose is risky taking too high!

Topic: The Gambler's Fallacy (The key to unbiased gambling) (Read 995 times)