- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 4/27/13 at 10:26 am to Fearthehat0307
Posted on 4/27/13 at 10:06 pm to HeadyBrosevelt
The last act of the Notorious D.J.S is to ensure that the Pelicanos get the numero uno pick in this draft.
to Big Daddy Stern.
to Big Daddy Stern.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 12:19 am to BobBarker
I still don't know what the team would do if they won the 1st pick. It's kind of scary to think about. They'd probably have to go Noel. So then we'd have two PF/C tweeners that both weigh less than our starting SG. Kind of scary..
Posted on 4/28/13 at 6:24 am to brmark70816
I'd have to grab Len #1 and watch JayJay's stalker melt down
Posted on 4/28/13 at 6:45 am to Fearthehat0307
I agree with Fear
Posted on 4/28/13 at 10:40 am to Toula
If you look at this year blind to other years you are correct. The theory I know to be correct says otherwise, however.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 10:45 am to MrBlue105
quote:
If you look at this year blind to other years you are correct. The theory I know to be correct says otherwise, however.
Would you like someone to explain the example of drawing from a 52 card deck repeatedly? Same odds every time, right?
Posted on 4/28/13 at 10:54 am to MrBlue105
quote:lolwut? have you ever been to a casino or taken a probability course? last year's lotto has absolutely zero effect on this year's outcome.
If you look at this year blind to other years you are correct. The theory I know to be correct says otherwise, however.
if a team has the worst record they get a 25% chance of winning the lotto. let's say they win it and the next year they have the worst record again do you think they somehow get a less than 25% chance of winning the next year?
This post was edited on 4/28/13 at 11:08 am
Posted on 4/28/13 at 12:54 pm to Fearthehat0307
quote:
Fearthehat0307
I'm looking forward to The Voice thread tomorrow so that we can bitch and disagree again.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:02 pm to Fearthehat0307
Yes the probability of a repeat occurrence is .25x.25.. this is standard multiplication botation for the probability of this repeat occurence. No calculator but 1/16 is the probability of the .25 party having a repeated optimum outcome... same can be said about flip of a quarter if it's heads u have .25 of heads again then .125 of heads thrice etc.
This post was edited on 4/28/13 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:10 pm to MrBlue105
quote:the ping pong balls don't care what happened before.
Yes the probability of a repeat occurrence is .25x.25.. this is standard multiplication botation for the probability of this repeat occurence. No calculator but 1/16 is the probability of the .25 party having a repeated optimum outcome... same can be said about flip of a quarter if it's heads u have .25 of heads again then .125 of heads thrice etc.
to get heads 10 times in a row the probability is .000976562 doesn't change the fact that when you flipping that 11th time the probability of heads is .5, as it is independent from the previous 10 tries.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:31 pm to Fearthehat0307
The ping pong balls aren't even real. You are both wasting your time arguing about it. Stern picks the order, kangfirmed.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:51 pm to MrBlue105
quote:
The theory I know to be correct says otherwise, however.
The "theory" you are talking about is commonly called "the gambler's fallacy," because it is false logic. This year's results are 100% independent of last year. Any argument otherwise is absolutely wrong. Feel free to Google "gambler's fallacy" for a full and thorough description why.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:54 pm to Jester
The tree at a roulette table is designed to take advantage of people who don't understand the gambler's fallacy. They see it hit black 5 times in a row, so they bet big on red even though the odds stay exactly the same.
Posted on 4/28/13 at 3:59 pm to Jester
quote:nah brah the ping pong balls have memories. if it seems the same team is about to win they stop and say lol nah and refuse to be picked
This year's results are 100% independent of last year
This post was edited on 4/28/13 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 4/28/13 at 4:02 pm to HeadyBrosevelt
quote:shite your right. probability of pels getting number 1 pick = 100%
Stern picks the order, kangfirmed
Posted on 4/28/13 at 4:26 pm to Fearthehat0307
Coin flip is not good analogy except when repeated af infinitum... You can use Bayes theorem and calculate our odds. With a coin flip there are only 2 outcomes and thus to get heads taild heads tails heads tails is just as unlikely a pattern as all heads and all tails. There is no interference from previous drawings, but that does not change the probabilities that are correct. I already said your example is correct for independent trials. I also know probability theorems to be correct. Since there are 13 other lottery possibilities, it is much more improbable for the same colored ball to come out twice in a row than our ball and a different combination then our ball again. At the end of the day the sum of the partial series of picks will have been very improbable before but id have to do some work to see the least probable and most probable outcomes. Repeat occurences when there are multiple other outcomes are more improbable than combinations with such a slim chance. That is true and such repeats are thus not common as you can see a different winner every year.
I don't work with probabilites anyway. I enjoyed the talk but as I said earlier neither of us are wrong. I don't have anymore time to argue this, but I have made my choice with my logic. This logic isn't contributing to the stability of our residential housIng tower so please don't be so disrespectful. Grow up fearthehat. I hope you can find some love in your life so you can stop being so desperate for righteousness. .. thanks for the response Jester, if you or anyone else has any more logical fallacies to point out in my interpretation of the situation, I'd appreciate it. Let's hope for improbability as that is what wins anyway. Im not a betting man but I know where id put my over/under (above 4)
Tl, dr: I just stated probabilites which were correct, didn't call anyone wrong... so f off
I don't work with probabilites anyway. I enjoyed the talk but as I said earlier neither of us are wrong. I don't have anymore time to argue this, but I have made my choice with my logic. This logic isn't contributing to the stability of our residential housIng tower so please don't be so disrespectful. Grow up fearthehat. I hope you can find some love in your life so you can stop being so desperate for righteousness. .. thanks for the response Jester, if you or anyone else has any more logical fallacies to point out in my interpretation of the situation, I'd appreciate it. Let's hope for improbability as that is what wins anyway. Im not a betting man but I know where id put my over/under (above 4)
Tl, dr: I just stated probabilites which were correct, didn't call anyone wrong... so f off
This post was edited on 4/28/13 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 4/28/13 at 6:34 pm to MrBlue105
quote:thanks for your kind words I hope so too
Grow up fearthehat. I hope you can find some love in your life so you can stop being so desperate for righteousness
quote:you're right I picked up bad habits on this board. the constant arguing on this board is filled with insults and attacks somehow they rubbed off on me. I apologize
please don't be so disrespectful
quote:this is what we are talking about. last year's lottery and this year's lottery are independent trials. bayes theorem uses conditional probability which does not factor into this year's lottery because it is 100% independent of last year. if I claimed that pels will win the next 2 lotterys then in the probability of that happening you could use bayes theorem but when referring to this year even though we won last year you can't use it.
I already said your example is correct for independent trials
quote:when you answered yes to this question
as I said earlier neither of us are wrong
quote:you were wrong and factually incorrect. the team with the worst record is given 25% of the balls or combination of numbers however they do it i'm not sure but they are given a quarter of the possible outcomes. if that team would've won last year and had the worst record again this year their probability of winning this year is once again 25% it is not decreased because they won last year. they once again have 25% of the balls/combinations in the drawing.
if a team has the worst record they get a 25% chance of winning the lotto. let's say they win it and the next year they have the worst record again do you think they somehow get a less than 25% chance of winning the next year?
Posted on 4/28/13 at 6:52 pm to MrBlue105
quote:
Coin flip is not good analogy except when repeated af infinitum... You can use Bayes theorem and calculate our odds. With a coin flip there are only 2 outcomes and thus to get heads taild heads tails heads tails is just as unlikely a pattern as all heads and all tails. There is no interference from previous drawings, but that does not change the probabilities that are correct. I already said your example is correct for independent trials. I also know probability theorems to be correct. Since there are 13 other lottery possibilities, it is much more improbable for the same colored ball to come out twice in a row than our ball and a different combination then our ball again. At the end of the day the sum of the partial series of picks will have been very improbable before but id have to do some work to see the least probable and most probable outcomes. Repeat occurences when there are multiple other outcomes are more improbable than combinations with such a slim chance. That is true and such repeats are thus not common as you can see a different winner every year.
I don't work with probabilites anyway. I enjoyed the talk but as I said earlier neither of us are wrong. I don't have anymore time to argue this, but I have made my choice with my logic. This logic isn't contributing to the stability of our residential housIng tower so please don't be so disrespectful. Grow up fearthehat. I hope you can find some love in your life so you can stop being so desperate for righteousness. .. thanks for the response Jester, if you or anyone else has any more logical fallacies to point out in my interpretation of the situation, I'd appreciate it. Let's hope for improbability as that is what wins anyway. Im not a betting man but I know where id put my over/under (above 4)
Tl, dr: I just stated probabilites which were correct, didn't call anyone wrong... so f off
I'm not sure how to respond.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News