Warrior General Games

You are both right, well in a way. Blue, your coin flip theory is right if you think about the odds of a individual game. And Puma is right there when you think about a game in a series of games, not a particular game. Lottery is bit different like is calculating card odds. Of course when you get a lottery ticket with seven numbers(we have 7 here in Finland) in a 39 number lottery the odds of winning are excactly 1:15380937 or approximately 0,0000065%.
This is calculated by calculatin and multiplying odds of the individual numbers coming up in the Lotto:
7/39*(6/38)*(5/37)...*(1/33)= 1:15380937

And yes you were right, with 15 Streaky the odds of a good game are 78%

If you wan't to go for it all you can calculate the odds for a particular game in a series of games being bad while other games being good. That will take some paper and nerves.. I won't do that, but that doesn't mean I can't

understand that the answer to these 2 questions are different:
a)whats the probability that i flip heads in one coin flip
b)whats the probability that i flip heads at least once in 2 coin flips

and when you make a claim like
Originally posted by BiggerBlue
it is very possible and highly likely that all 16 games you're on a Good streak.
you're no longer talking about a), you're talking about b)

Monsterkill hits the issue right on the point. Everytime you are calculatin odds of something happening you have to know few terms: a) OR b) AND

Sometimes those are combined but not in this case. Why this topic even goes on.

Streaky=Great for D-Linemen period

OP checking in,
and truly appreciate the math and statistics debate. But would still love some more Yes or Nos

Yes, happy now

Not arguing that streaky is good or bad, just jumping on the chance to have a math geek moment.

Using the basic binomial trials equation, assuming a 22% chance for a bad day is correct.

Zero bad days = 1.88%
One bad day = 8.47% (Chance of 0-1 = 10.35%)
Two bad days = 17.9% (Chance of 0-2 = 28.27%)
Three bad days = 23.59% (Chance of 0-3 = 51.86%)
Four bad days = 21.62% (Chance of 0-4 = 73.48%)

If you don't believe me, spend 2 minutes - go load up any of the binomial probability calculators on the web and check the math.

To get two or less bad days season after season ... would certainly take some luck. Three or less, I'd buy depending on the number of seasons. You can assume with *relative* confidence you'll get at worst four bad days in a season. That doesn't mean you won't get zero or sixteen ... just that the chance for either of those to happen is extremely unlikely.
(Roughly a one in 33 billion chance for sixteen bad days ...)

And stepping away from probability for a moment ... the AVERAGE number of bad days in a season ... this really is junior high math. 22% chance, 16 days ~ 0.22 * 16 = 3.52 bad days on average. Which seems to make sense given the individual probabilities above.

Originally posted by BiggerBlue
I seriously hope you don't care about it because I'm tired of trying to teach simple math to a... well.... let's just hope you're not out of public school system yet because clearly the nation has failed you if you did.

You still don't get it, I'm not the idiot that claims 10 coin flips = 5 heads and 5 tails, you are when you claimed, in an absolute statement, that a Streaky of 15 will earn you "3-4 bad games a season", when I say no, it depends, at the end of the day, on each players' own chances.

This isn't hard to understand, but of course you won't admit it because heaven forbid you admit you're wrong in public when all evidences show it.

Again, it's not hard, any person with any math knowledge will tell you.

You have a player with 15 Streaky, what is the chance of him playing game one to have a good game? 78%
Game two comes around: what is the chance he gets a good game now? Please please tell me you're not stupid enough to say .78 x .78 = 61%, no, the answer is still, 78%.
Game three rolls around, what is the chance you will have a good game then? 78%.

Each game's outcome is independent of past experiences.

Everyone knows the casino roulette history number displays are for suckers who think they can guess what will come up next based on prior returns. Anybody with any knowledge of math knows each spin in roulette is absolutely independent of last spin.

Once again you failed to understand my coin flip example. Just because you flipped head on the first flip that don't mean on your second flip the chance is 25% head (.5 x .5) and 75% tail. No, the second flip chances are the same: 50% head and 50% tail.

I do not understand why this is so hard for you to comprehend.





It's not what I am failing to comprehend, the problem is what you're failing to comprehend. You take the individual probability of one roll and somehow come to some crazy conclusion about what would happen over the course of several rolls. I specifically pointed you to a dice roll example that virtually mimics exactly how streaky works. Did you even read the link I posted or did you simply ignore it and continue running your mouth?

BTW, just read Gambler's post and he lays it out pretty well too.

I think all you guys just got trolled. ( sorry TGP )

There's no way that guy was as dense as he led you all to believe.

Consider yourself trolled and.....

/thread

Math nerds are arguing the same thing in different ways.

-Point A: Chances of a good game are around 80% for each game
TRUE

-Point B: Be prepared to have 3-4 bad games a season
ALSO TRUE

Note that Point B doesn't state that you will definitely have 3-4 games a season (sometimes you'll have more, sometimes you'll have less) but that you need to be aware that bad games will happen and 3-4 is the approximate amount of times that bad games will occur.

Originally posted by Loco Moco
I think all you guys just got trolled. ( sorry TGP )

There's no way that guy was as dense as he led you all to believe.

Consider yourself trolled and.....

/thread



Dammit. I knew I shouldn't have ever responded after my first post.

Originally posted by TheGreatPuma
Dammit. I knew I shouldn't have ever responded after my first post.

I could continue to show why Point A is true and Point B is not true, but I think this thread has over lived its usefulness. Move on.

Originally posted by flipmo
You are both right, well in a way. Blue, your coin flip theory is right if you think about the odds of a individual game. And Puma is right there when you think about a game in a series of games, not a particular game. Lottery is bit different like is calculating card odds. Of course when you get a lottery ticket with seven numbers(we have 7 here in Finland) in a 39 number lottery the odds of winning are excactly 1:15380937 or approximately 0,0000065%.
This is calculated by calculatin and multiplying odds of the individual numbers coming up in the Lotto:
7/39*(6/38)*(5/37)...*(1/33)= 1:15380937

And yes you were right, with 15 Streaky the odds of a good game are 78%

If you wan't to go for it all you can calculate the odds for a particular game in a series of games being bad while other games being good. That will take some paper and nerves.. I won't do that, but that doesn't mean I can't

What I'm trying to say is Puma is dead wrong when he says anyone with Streaky can expect 3-4 bad games in a season. How did he get that? Because 3-4 is about 22% of 16 games and therefore it will absolutely happen. I'm saying no, it doesn't work that way.

You can just as easily have 16 good game seasons (which happened to my players once, most of the time it's 1-2 bad games per season) and theoretically you can have all 16 bad games in a season (as rare as the statistical chances are.) Some people can get Streaky and have 6 bad games if their luck is bad enough. But to tell people here in this forum that you WILL and EXPECT 3-4 bad games is the wrong answer. Better to just inform people that statistically, every game you have 78% chance to have a good game, would you take that risk or not?

*woosh*

Originally posted by BiggerBlue
What I'm trying to say is Puma is dead wrong when he says anyone with Streaky can expect 3-4 bad games in a season. How did he get that? Because 3-4 is about 22% of 16 games and therefore it will absolutely happen. I'm saying no, it doesn't work that way.

You can just as easily have 16 good game seasons (which happened to my players once, most of the time it's 1-2 bad games per season) and theoretically you can have all 16 bad games in a season (as rare as the statistical chances are.) Some people can get Streaky and have 6 bad games if their luck is bad enough. But to tell people here in this forum that you WILL and EXPECT 3-4 bad games is the wrong answer. Better to just inform people that statistically, every game you have 78% chance to have a good game, would you take that risk or not?

So, what would your expected value be?

Originally posted by BiggerBlue
What I'm trying to say is Puma is dead wrong when he says anyone with Streaky can expect 3-4 bad games in a season. How did he get that? Because 3-4 is about 22% of 16 games and therefore it will absolutely happen. I'm saying no, it doesn't work that way.

You can just as easily have 16 good game seasons (which happened to my players once, most of the time it's 1-2 bad games per season) and theoretically you can have all 16 bad games in a season (as rare as the statistical chances are.) Some people can get Streaky and have 6 bad games if their luck is bad enough. But to tell people here in this forum that you WILL and EXPECT 3-4 bad games is the wrong answer. Better to just inform people that statistically, every game you have 78% chance to have a good game, would you take that risk or not?





It's called an expected value. Puma isn't saying that you're guaranteed 3-4 games, he's saying that given that you have a 78% chance of having a good streaky day on any individual day, if you were to calculate the most likely scenario at the beginning of the season, it would involve you having several bad streaky days.

This is really basic statistics--you can't just as easily have 16 good games. That's a much lower probability. All we're doing is taking the summation of unrelated individual statistical events and looking at the probability distribution.

Obviously if you're calculating these probabilities halfway through the season the expected values change, but based on the number of games left, not conditional on the past results.


So if you wanted to give someone an accurate depiction of the costs and benefits of using Streaky, you could say 'in any given individual game you're highly likely to have a good day. However, over the course of a season you will most likely have anywhere from 3-5 bad days, with the number fluctuating depending on your luck. If you were to play the season an infinite number of times, on average you would have around 3.5 bad days.'

But to say that it's at all likely that someone will have 16 good days is false--there's a 98% chance it won't happen, and simply because it's happened to you doesn't mean it's an outcome someone should reasonably expect when choosing Streaky.