The gambler's fallacy

[owenallen]

Would writing a multiple choice test, and answering C three times in a row, then assuming the next answer is LESS likely to be C, an example of Gamblers Fallacy?

[QuizmasterLaw]

Though Prof. Shue correctly defines the gambler's fallacy the instances of biased judicial decision making are not examples of it. Judges similarly make worse decisions in the afternoon than in the morning. Those kinds of bias are the result of fatigue, and not due to a failure to comprehend basic probability or a random approach to judicial decision making.

[einareinarsson]

There is one exception. For an exaple the sequence is red red black red black black and you double it ten times from an exaple 1 dollar to 51, 2. Or in dice with better odds 49, 5%, low low high low high high. Then you simulate 2-4 first attempts and if they miss you start on 1 dollar. Then it works.

[osagiee.guobadia-secondytc]

I did not know that this fallacy is called the Gambler since Kenny Rogers sang that song. Good to know about flipping the coin whether it's heads or tails. : 0

[ThomasEdits]

1:45 she said the judge was more likely to grant access to the current one if s/he denied the second one twice when she meant to say opposite 😂😂😂

[drewmckinney]

Reminds me of the group, always going for short term gains and losing long term in massive amounts. As if doing the same thing will hit that royal flush when they've gotten nothing but junk so far. Every percentage and probability approaches mean or average over time, however if that average or mean isn't possible from the equation it's a different story.

[AGunzOw]

Does regression to the mean start to kick in if you got a 100, 000 streak of heads?

[zahidafarooq]

may you please share the link of this paper or the title and journal name of this paper?

[s.sradon]

Land the coin on its side, never let them know your next move.

[Vlixxbeats]

Probability of heads or tails is 50/50 right? Due to this being the case, the recorded history of flips will show over an unknown length that a completely balanced coins results came out to be 50/50. This is just how it works. So for example, the 20 heads in a row that seemingly throws this out of balance WILL be made up for at some point if you recorded spins from that point on. If you also recorded thousands of spins right up to the existence of the 20 in a row, it would also show 50/50. It will balance out to 50/50 statistically over time AT ONE POINT over and over again based off a starting point recording any results before, after, or during current spins. This is an ever-flowing concept that's constant in the universe regardless if you have recorded history or not. Each flip is an independent event yet collectively, the results do show to be accumulative by nature of probability otherwise it wouldn't be 50/50 because long-term results would show a bias. 50/50 implies that the 2 given possible outcomes each account for 50% of the total 100% of the events guaranteed to come next. The 20 heads in a row does change the probability of the next spin just to a completely unknown degree in my opinion. If 20 heads came and you had infinite money, you could safely bet on tails over and over until you win, knowing that each loss means one closer to the win when is does hit tails because it will and it cant hit heads forever. Mathematically it cant because the results wouldn't be 50/50. Events have a probability to hit in a succession or order, for instance heads heads tails heads, that exact order has a probability to occur and this can be said for anything you can think of for things TO occur but the moment you mention the probability of things NOT hitting again after a completely abnormal amount of times mathematically, all of a sudden no math applies, and you're just an idiot believing a fallacy because after 10 spins you started betting the opposite. To be clear I highly recommend not playing anything that offers "50/50" because at the casino there is no such thing, its all slightly less. Roulette or even baccarat isn't 50/50 because of the zero and double zero and the banker commission. Betting against a streak is a good way to lose your money but I don't think its because you simply bet the opposite after witnessing a mathematical abnormality. You had a 50/50 chance of being right when you walked up there to place the bet either way, but after the abnormality it would be unlikely it would produce the exact same string of events again right afterwards, you can still be wrong but doubtful you'd see it again right after. If you put you money on seeing it again right after you'd end up a losing player still. Here's an idea, stop playing anything that's "50/50". Its a dirty game sometimes.

[haristariq]

I don’t understand, the odds of two coin toss being the same face isn’t 50%. For example if you do 10 heads, the chance of an 11 streak cannot be 50%. Maths isn’t my strong suit can someone please explain?

[s.sradon]

Good old-fashioned research, by that I mean unbiased. A similar video today would be politically biased and throw a loaded question fallacy into their research on effects of probability.

[choopsk]

this seems to work with a 50/50 coin toss. But how would this relate to a die that lands on 6 over and over again?

[razvanafloarei]

If every toss of a coin has the chance of getting heads of 50%, do 10 consecutive tosses have 50% chance of getting heads every time?

[ALoonwolf]

I too don't understand how this relates to decision making concerning non-random things like weighing the pros and cons of whether to do this or that. Only fools would be influenced by their previous decisions in this strange way. Oh, yes, that's the majority of people, they behave in very strange ways. Yes, it makes sense now.

[samuelrovai]

where did they get the evidence that the loan officers statement is true

[daffertube]

If you've flipped a coin 10 times and it has landed on heads 10 times and continues to do so, the odds probably aren't 50/50.

Really confused how that analogy (the math of which was not explained) ties into authorities making less than fully informed decisions on what decides if an applicant should pass.

[ALoonwolf]

It's a PARADOX, because if the number of heads and tails is equal, then if it goes out of balance, it MUST eventually go back into balance, so the odds MUST change, but you just never know when this is going to take place. If you flip a coin 50 times, and heads come up most often, then I guarantee that MOST OF THE TIME, in the next 50 flips tails will come up most often. Because probability DEMANDS it!

[lukeskywalkertheauror]

So a judge determining a complex case or a loan officer determining a complex approval or denial is the same as flipping a coin....Not buying that piece of information. But I do think that flipping a coin is always 50/50 and that people have imperfect biases. Misinformation here, tread carefully and actually think about it.

[einareinarsson]

Most people dont want to share and its a sign of greed and greed is always punished. Not because its wrong because its laws of nature. Karma is the consequences of action and the only thingtoconsider is if you want the consequence. Simply as that.