this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
70 points (96.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

29786 readers
911 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I can accept the fact that on a Roulette wheel (as long as there are no defects or imbalances in the wheel or ball) that the odds are the same each spin and previous spin outcomes have no influence over the current spin. However, if I see black come up 32 times in a row I am betting on red for the next spin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

The Gambler's Fallacy is Really Odd

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 73 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Tbh if I see black come up 32 times in a row I'm probably betting on black just because I'm gonna start getting suspicious this wheel has actually been biased towards black somehow and isn't as random as it's supposed to be. Is there such a thing as an inverse gamblers fallacy?

[–] originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee 36 points 9 months ago

In a Bayesian sense this would be called updating your prior. You assume the wheel is truly random. After many observations that assumption seems not to hold so you adjust your prior probability that any given spin will land on black to be higher.

[–] Silentiea@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

If you have good reason to believe it's a fair wheel, that's actually still just the gambler's fallacy.

If you have no exceptional reason to believe it's fair, it would be updating your priors, like the other commenter said.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 40 points 9 months ago (23 children)

Humans are bad at statistics and probability. We're naturally wired to find patterns and connections and make decisions quickly without needing to perform calculations. It works for simple stuff but when things get a little complicated our "gut feeling" tends to be wrong.

My other favourite probability paradox is the Monty Hall Problem. You're given the option to pick from 3 doors. Behind 2 of them are goats and behind 1 is a new car. You pick door #1. You're asked if you're sure or if you'd rather switch doors. Whether you stay or switch makes no difference. You have a 33% chance of winning either way. Then you're told that behind door #2 there is a goat. Do you stay with door #1 or switch to door #3? Switching to door #3 improves your odds of winning to 66%. It's a classic example of how additional information can be used to recalculate odds and it's how things like card counting work.

[–] dichotomiker@dresden.network 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

@ImplyingImplications @alt_total_loser I think, probabilities are high, this includes those who confirm their proofs.

Often the problem descriptions suffer from equivocation and unclear process frame.

https://dresden.network/@dichotomiker/111917794923942133

#babylonianLinguisticConfusion

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 33 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Humans are bad at perceiving true probability, we naturally look for patterns as an evolutionary trait. We also have the cultural beliefs around luck which don't actually have any basis in the real world—e.g. I've suffered some bad luck, but it's surely about to turn around.

Gambling games are typically designed to exploit these two traps that most people will fall into without realising.

[–] Gregorech@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

I heard someone say that luck is just chance with a personal attachment.

[–] lauha@lemmy.one 20 points 9 months ago

That is why it is called a fallacy

[–] Drewelite@lemmynsfw.com 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The amount of circular conversations I've had with people...
"So you're telling me flipping heads 10 times in a row is likely? Then do it right now!"
"No, I'm just saying it's not less likely than any other combination."
"Oh I get it." [Flips head] "Right so next ones got to be tails"
🤦

[–] amio@kbin.social 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The important part is "internalizing" that one spin doesn't influence the next. A red won't be more likely after N blacks unless something specifically made it that way. Sequences like "long run of reds/blacks" don't have any actual significance, but "seems like they should" because we're heavily geared towards pattern matching.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Am I weird because I would do the exact opposite. the fact that it landed like this time and time again tells me either the croupier has a biased throwing technique or the wheel is broken atm.

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

No you're not wrong. There's a reverse fallacy called the ludic fallacy: an unwarranted belief that the rules of the game describe how the game actually works.

"Given a fair table, if red comes up 99 times in a row, what are the relative odds of getting red vs. black?"

Mathematician, falling for the ludic fallacy: 1:1

Realist: You're wrong. The table isn't fair. Red is more likely.

However, people tend to underestimate how likely long runs are at a fair table.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 3 points 9 months ago

Thanks for elaborating. :)

[–] amio@kbin.social 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That could be reasonable in certain scenarios, but that's technically not the gambler's fallacy anymore; at that point you're talking about the "something specifically made it that way" I mentioned. I was talking about uniform/fair distribution of outcomes (part of the definition of the gambler's fallacy), otherwise it's just "hey, this distribution is lopsided as hell".

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 4 points 9 months ago

Interesting! Thanks for the heads up.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago

Apparently all roulette wheels have some imperfections and the older the wheel the more pronounced the imperfections become. In other words, these imperfections tend to lead to the ball landing in the same places over and over again. I read an article about a group of gamblers that studied particular roulette wheels, analyzed their flaws, and then made a series of bets, winning big. But, this would tend to attract attention, so they never really played the same wheel more than once.

https://archive.is/UB7hC/again?url=https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2023-how-to-beat-roulette-gambler-figures-it-out/

[–] blargerer@kbin.social 14 points 9 months ago

Fallacy's are Fallacys exactly because they prey on some human emotion or evolutionary brain quirk.

[–] cheenis@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago (2 children)
[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] key@lemmy.keychat.org 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

What a savings

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 2 points 9 months ago

You're going to make it all back next time!

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

There's a story about a numbers runner from back in the day. Some people would bet a different number every day, but a lot would bet the same number every day, even if it never came up.

[The 'numbers' is a gambling game where you pick a three digit number; the runner would collect the bets and make the pay out. From the days before most places had a state run lottery]

[–] SanndyTheManndy@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

it's to do with the priori

[–] Tolstoshev@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago
[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 9 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

The Gambler's Fallacy is Really Odd

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] itsathursday@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You can always bet on odd/even in that case that way you have a chance no matter what colour it lands.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 11 points 9 months ago

That's why they added 0 and 00 (green) so it's not quite 50/50 for odd/even or red/black.

load more comments
view more: next ›