Gambler's Fallacy Folly

[Gizmotron]

It's a fallacy to think that roulette remains in a consistant 50/50 state. Example this 20 reds in a row. If you walked up just ten spins before it started then the actual results would be far from 50/50. If you can't calculate the currant odds then you are forced to depend on factless beliefs .

[kelly]

There are no changes in the odds. 20 reds is just as rare as 10 blacks followed by 10 reds and you will equally often have your streaks interrupted by formations with the same odds like the 2 above.


No wonder there are a 1000 people with a gambling debt problem for each 1 with a gambling winning problem.  They trick you into a belief that you by pure thinking can outsmart the wheel.   

[Gizmotron]

Kelly, the secret is in not out thinking the wheel, it's in out thinking yourself. You must not react when you think that something is due. Following any bet selection process is just the mechanics. The trick is to know if it is working or not. React to the existing facts. That's the way to beat the odds.

[GARNabby]

No wonder there are a 1000 people with a gambling debt problem for each 1 with a gambling winning problem.

Maybe the ones who think that they're winning do exhibit the greater problems?  E.g., even the Wizard of Vegas/Odds, who tries to make a career of it.

A new level of the "Gamblers' Fallacy"?

[MauiSunset]

It's a fallacy to think that roulette remains in a consistant 50/50 state. Example this 20 reds in a row. If you walked up just ten spins before it started then the actual results would be far from 50/50. If you can't calculate the currant odds then you are forced to depend on factless beliefs .

See, this is why I brought up this topic - you are falling victim to Gambler's Fallacy.


The odds NEVER change in Roulette - doesn't matter if 12 Reds are showing the odds of Red or Black or 0 coming out on the next spin are fixed and the same.


Too many gamblers just want to throw Gambler's Fallacy out the window - that somehow the odds change depending what's on that Marquee - they don't change at all for any reason....

[Gizmotron]

So now we have the all purpose excuse for losing. If you are not a professional player you are a victim .

[Kimo Li]

If you have such a gift there is a game of chance called PowerBall, you should give it a try - I've played for 10+ years and I never seem to get the numbers right.....

An artist uses a particular medium to craft his masterpiece.  He or she may have more than one; mine is roulette, greyhounds, and poker, not necessarily in that order.  PowerBall, I'll leave that medium to the gamblers.

Kimo Li

[Hermes]

The gamblig also submits to the natural laws of the universe which can be exploited.
The edge in gambling is still at Baccarat (the best), Roulette, SicBo and Craps. Electronically controlled  games are for losers - that's a fallacy! Even horse/dog/pig or turtles races are controlled by the mafia. BJ controlled by the shuffling machines is also utopia.
Example: We know that one dozen doesn't come often more then 3 times in row. If you will bet after 3 in row with clever progression you win more then lose. You don't need to win always but in the long run win more then lose.
Cheers Hermes

[kelly]

Oh im convinced now.  There is no gamblers fallacy if you are able to lift yourself off the ground in a zen state of the art,  outhink yourself and exploit the laws of the universe or has an artistic approach to the game.

[MauiSunset]

Gamblers who dismiss the Gambler's Fallacy usually seem to have wacky ideas on how Roulette really works - none of these far out ideas can ever be divulged nor proven but they replace the laws of probability.


Just ask someone who doesn't believe in the Gambler's Fallacy what they believe in and you'll find that the laws of science must be thrown out the window in order for their ideas to work.

[Skakus]

...There is no gamblers fallacy if you are able to lift yourself off the ground in a zen state of the art,  outhink yourself and exploit the laws of the universe or has an artistic approach to the game.

Gotta love this game!

[Kimo Li]

This is what I do not understand. If people believe math cannot beat roulette, then why are you playing roulette?, Mathematical Fallacy perhaps. Who knows ... fallacy or not, no more bets.

[MauiSunset]

This is what I do not understand. If people believe math cannot beat roulette, then why are you playing roulette?, Mathematical Fallacy perhaps. Who knows ... fallacy or not, no more bets.

This is a great question.

You have to use and understand math to win at Roulette.

The statistics of Roulette are well know and are unmovable - you can't ignore them.

But it all comes down to luck and how to deal with it.


The same can be said of driving a car - the laws of physics and math are well known.  Still there are only a few world class drivers and 99.999% horrible drivers on the road.....

[Gizmotron]

They say to be a success you must create your own luck.

By the way, what are the odds that five quality trends will occur in the next 100 spins?

[MauiSunset]

They say to be a success you must create your own luck.

By the way, what are the odds that five quality trends will occur in the next 100 spins?

You've got to define "quality trends".


Could be N Blacks in a row.
Could be N double dozens in a row
Could be N numbers in a row
Could be N 6-lines in a row
Could be N streets, corners, splits in a row


N = 2 - ??


Or it could be a random pattern R-R-B-R not appearing N times in a row.


In any case simple look up the probability and multiply - 5th grade math (maybe 1st grade A-P math)