Gamblers Fallacy (not what you think)

[Mr J]

Meaning, its not the same kind of thread where we all argue (I hope), its a simple question.

If a roulette/casino gambling author was writing a book, would you agree >>>  When he wrote about 'gamblers fallacy', we are reading HIS past experiences, HIS views on the subject, HIS definition, HIS opinions. True or not? (Yes I know, he could be doing some interviews etc. asking other players.)



Ken

[birdhands]

I agree absolutely, although I bet he wouldn't.

[MauiSunset]

Do a Google Search on Gambler's Fallacy and you will find 49,500 pages on the internet about the topic - lots of folks reporting about the fallacy.  Here's a great explanation nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

Basically, the fallacy says that if Red shows up 15 times in a row that Black is "overdue" to make an appearance.

This requires God spend a lot of time keeping track of a lot of Roulette wheels in order for this to come true; I pity the supreme being - boring.

Flip a coin and Red is Heads and Black is Tails - within an hour or so you will have 15 Red or Black in a row - it means nothing.  Your hand doesn't keep track of the Red or Black - the next flip is totally random.

The reason the Marquee is above every Roulette table is to force your mind to find patterns and your flawed knowledge of random numbers to take over and make a bet - "it's overdue to appear".

Take out a quarter and start flipping - you will quickly prove to yourself that there is nothing there - just the Gambler's Fallacy......

Most authors just plagiarize other material from other folks now - it's super easy now with $49 tools that will turn any copied paragraph into a paragraph that Google finds as unique - not appearing in the known internet.  No need to do interviews or any real research - just copy the material.

[birdhands]

Meaning, its not the same kind of thread where we all argue (I hope), its a simple question.

Nice try.  And you got a condescending explanation of something you already new as well.  Bonus!

[Mr J]

The link you posted......so is the AUTHOR of that definition, his opinion?

If we looked up the word.......'fast' (as an example), is it only an opinion from that author?

Ken

[Mr J]

"Nice try.  And you got a condescending explanation of something you already new as well" >>> Not a clue what you are talking about bro. My point, lets not call each other improper names along with insults. Seems fair, just like adults.

Ken

[Kelly]

He writes his opinion but his opinion could easyli be based on facts. If you think red or black is due after 5 blacks i can easyli prove to you, on real spins,  that its not, thats a fact.  Gamblers fallacy is a fact that can be proven, not an opinion.

I know that NASA could present as many facts as they would, you would still call it their opinion. 

[Mr J]

I have stated MANY MANY MANY MANY times, get off the.......black is now due BS. My point is and ALWAYS WAS, that *ANY* method posted (according to the AP crew) is gamblers fallacy.

Ok AP guys, a question for you. Not counting AP (cough), name a couple styles of betting (methods) that are NOT gamblers fallacy. Kelly seems to think it only applies to the EC's.

Lets see how many we get. From that list, I'll post it at AP (cough) sites and see if they agree, cool?

Ken

[Kelly]

It applys to all betting styles if the style is based on past spins.  I dont know why you would post such a question on a ap site if was not for causing trouble. People there is way past this stage.

[birdhands]

"Nice try.  And you got a condescending explanation of something you already new as well" >>> Not a clue what you are talking about bro. My point, lets not call each other improper names along with insults. Seems fair, just like adults.

Ken

I was referring to the fact that Maui is already arguing with you, as well as telling you what you already know and not answering your question.  As for insults and improper names, now I don't have a clue what you are talking about. 

Sam

[Mr J]

"I dont know why you would post such a question on a ap site" >>> Who said I would? Lets try again Kelly. So can you name any styles of betting (methods)? If you can, they are.........

[Mr J]

I was referring to the fact that Maui is already arguing with you, as well as telling you what you already know and not answering your question.  As for insults and improper names, now I don't have a clue what you are talking about. 

Sam

My mistake Sam, I thought it was directed towards me.


Ken

[Kelly]

I said all strategies based on past numbers is gamblers fallacy, why is that hard to read ? You are the strategy expert, you tell me which strategys are not based on past numbers. Close your eyes and spread 10 chips on the table could be one of them.

[Mr J]

I said all strategies based on past numbers is gamblers fallacy, why is that hard to read ? You are the strategy expert, you tell me which strategys are not based on past numbers. Close your eyes and spread 10 chips on the table could be one of them.

Thats not a method. Kelly, it seems like I'm arguing with you but I swear thats not what it is.

If your answer is.... you cant think of any, well, thats an answer. My point being, gamblers fallacy is NOT only about the EC's. My other point was and still is, the AP crew says that *ANY* form of betting other than AP, is gamblers fallacy. A load of BS (?), I just want to hear it.

I'm not talking about some goof who throws the chips up in the air, come on now.

Ken

[Kelly]

Yeah well, i dont know what you mean. Advantage play takes advantage of slight anormalys in the wheels but you dont believe there are for example tilted wheels in the casinos today. There are semi tilted wheels in just about all casinos and that can be taken advantage of if other conditions fits too. The probabilitys are getting screwed towards the player when you up front knows how 1/2 the spin will go down, in particular the last half. 

Im done, hair splitting debates is not my strong side.

[Kelly]

-