Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Hi

About french european roulette

the chance to hit es 1/37

supose we are looking for 3 standard deviation events

43 hits in 1000 trials is 3 st dev(we played 1 number)

1)what does reaching 3 st dev mean?

2)what is the difference in strentgh of hitting 76/2000, 170/5000 or 319/10000(they are all +3sd)

3)what´s the difference in PLAYING the 1000 2000 or whatever or watch some data where we you find 1 number with 3 st dev?

4)it is the same to reach 3 st dev for 1 number or 2 numbers(neighbors)?

5)having collectede data, you pick 4 numbers(isolated, not neighbors)) that their sum reaches 3 st dev. What is the difference with item 3) or if we actually play every spin?

I hope you undestood my questions

I believe they are hard to answer

Best regards

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

Hi;

Welcome to the forum. It is not hard to understand once we clear up some things

43 hits in 1000 trials is 3 st dev(we played 1 number)

What are odds of hitting this number? I only know american roulette.

If the probability of hitting the number is 1 / 37 then you are correct the result is slightly beyond 3 standard deviations. What conclusion do you want drawn?

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Strait up is 1/37

My quest is to identify a future non-random event before it happens.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

My quest is to identify a future non-random event before it happens.

Unless the wheel is biased you will not find it on a roulette table.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

What do you know about roulette?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

I used to deal it in Las Vegas. I know a little about Ed Thorpe and his methods to find biased wheels. I know about the computer that some players used to chart where the ball would fall.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

I´m an AP.

I lack of strong math to debank some riddles.

I cannot speak here in the open forum.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

You do not have to worry. I am not familiar with that abbreviation. What is an AP?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Advantage Players(AP) are pro-players who only play when they have an edge over the house.

There are several ways to take advantage of the games of chance.

It's hard to believe for people who are not in this business.

I prefer to talk via PM.

Did you understand the questions?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

Hi;

I understand the questions but I can not communicate by PM with you.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

There are 5 questions to answer. They are math questions.

I guess they can be answered

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

Hi;

I will try to be simple in my explanation.

For any group of data there is a mean or average or expected value as it sometimes called in your case 27.027. It is the mean or expected value of the 1000 trials.

In other words the average of hitting your number in 1000 trials is 27.027

Do you follow?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Yes, I know most of the tips about the subject but, some others I don't

Thank you very much for your answers.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

Okay, if you have 3 pieces of data

500, 750 and 1000 the average is 750

if you have

749, 750 and 751 the average is also 750. But the data is much closer together than the other one even thought they have same average they are quite different in spread.

Follow up to here?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Yes

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

The standard deviation is one measure of that spread. It tells us how spread out or how far from the average the data is.

In your case the standard deviation is

That is one standard deviation. We expect 68.26% of the data to be within -1 and 1 standard deviation of the average.

In your case in 1000 spins we expect your number to come up between 21.8990091 and 32.1550448 times 68.26 % of the time.

Follow?

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Yes, the 68-95-99,7 rule

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

Okay, we expect that the data will be within 3 standard deviations of the mean 99.73 % of the time. Therefore it is about 370 to 1 that your result is due to chance. That answers your first question.

Now the question is have you found something meaningful? The answer is maybe!

In my experience such anomalous runs are more common then we think.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

27/1000

The chance to be random for a 3sd event

The count must be done only for played spins.

Past data is measured in a different way

The chance of random event multiplies for 37 when you take past data

Am I right?

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

bobbym wrote:

Now the question is have you found something meaningful? The answer is maybe!

We should know how much data we have, don´t we?

100 500 1000 5000, 3 sd at each of them has different strentgh

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

The standard deviation actually gets larger as n gets larger.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

So, it could be possible that 3sd at 1000 had the same strentgh as to say 4sd at 2000 trials.

Is there a sort of table to know it?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

No, 4 sd is a lower probability of happening. The probabilities always stay the same.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline

**ybot****Member**- Registered: 2012-12-29
- Posts: 49

Isn't easier to find 3sd at 2000 than in 1000.

Do they have the same chance?

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 84,759

You are confusing the standard deviation with 3 standard deviations.

For your problem the standard deviation is 7.252 for 2000 and 5.128 for 1000, the average is the same. But to be 3 standard deviations away from the mean with 2000 you have be outside of 5.27 or 48.78. The probability of this happening is the same for 1000 or 2000. The ranges are different.

For 1000, it has to be outside of 11.64 or 42.41.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

Offline