is there truth leaving while on a bad streak?

froghump said:

or is there some truth to being a bad streak there is more chance of getting more bad cards? i feel like a mathematician or statistician would say this is complete nonsense./quote]

I'm not a mathemetician or statistician - but this is complete nonsense. Your past hands have zero bearing on what your next hand will be. LuckyChippy is correct, during a bad run you will likely play worse than normal, and you should stop playing any time you feel like you're tilting.

Click to expand...

froghump said:

or is there some truth to being a bad streak there is more chance of getting more bad cards? i feel like a mathematician or statistician would say this is complete nonsense.

Click to expand...

slycbnew said:

I'm not a mathemetician or statistician - but this is complete nonsense. Your past hands have zero bearing on what your next hand will be. LuckyChippy is correct, during a bad run you will likely play worse than normal, and you should stop playing any time you feel like you're tilting.

Click to expand...

froghump said:

like do people say you should leave while on a bad streak because your confidence is down.. or is there some truth to being a bad streak there is more chance of getting more bad cards? i feel like a mathematician or statistician would say this is complete nonsense. but i have had bad days at the tables and they usually just get worse.

thank you

Click to expand...

slycbnew said:

froghump said:

or is there some truth to being a bad streak there is more chance of getting more bad cards? i feel like a mathematician or statistician would say this is complete nonsense./quote]

I'm not a mathemetician or statistician - but this is complete nonsense. Your past hands have zero bearing on what your next hand will be.

Click to expand...

Kind of true... Your past hands relatively affect your future hands.

In Statistics, a lot of our study is on dependent and independent variables.

So, consider two cases:

1) Take the probability that your next hand is AA, GIVEN your previous hand was AA, call it X.

2) The probability your next hand is AA, call it Y.

One can see that X<Y. So yes your previous hands DO affect future outcomes depending on the statistical analysis you are performing.

Click to expand...

sactokid544 said:

slycbnew said:

Kind of true... Your past hands relatively affect your future hands.

In Statistics, a lot of our study is on dependent and independent variables.

So, consider two cases:

1) Take the probability that your next hand is AA, GIVEN your previous hand was AA, call it X.

2) The probability your next hand is AA, call it Y.

One can see that X<Y. So yes your previous hands DO affect future outcomes depending on the statistical analysis you are performing.

Click to expand...

Incorrect. Flip a coin, say it comes up heads. What bearing does that have on the next coin flip? Is it more likely to come up tails?

If you answer "yes" to the last question, you are not understanding statistical probability and causality.

If you're seriously interested in the topic (and it's a very good topic), check out a book called The Poker Mindset - it's extremely good on this topic and (among other topics) discusses bad runs/downswings/tilt very much in line w OP's question.

Oh, and if you're interested (this part has absolutely nothing to do w poker), read a play called Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, there's a really fun "joke" in there related to causality and coinflipping...

Click to expand...

sactokid544 said:

Kind of true... Your past hands relatively affect your future hands.

In Statistics, a lot of our study is on dependent and independent variables.

So, consider two cases:

1) Take the probability that your next hand is AA, GIVEN your previous hand was AA, call it X.

2) The probability your next hand is AA, call it Y.

One can see that X<Y. So yes your previous hands DO affect future outcomes depending on the statistical analysis you are performing.

Click to expand...

slycbnew said:

sactokid544 said:

Incorrect. Flip a coin, say it comes up heads. What bearing does that have on the next coin flip? Is it more likely to come up tails?

If you answer "yes" to the last question, you are not understanding statistical probability and causality.

If you're seriously interested in the topic (and it's a very good topic), check out a book called The Poker Mindset - it's extremely good on this topic and (among other topics) discusses bad runs/downswings/tilt very much in line w OP's question.

Oh, and if you're interested (this part has absolutely nothing to do w poker), read a play called Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, there's a really fun "joke" in there related to causality and coinflipping...

Click to expand...

That's because you are looking at cases independently. When we look at the cases independently, you are correct. The previous flip has no bearing on the next.

But, what if I want to know the probability of a coin landing on tails consecutively 5 times?? Then each coinflip DOES have a bearing on the next. That is my point.

Probability of a coin landing on Tails = 1/2

Probability of a coin landing on Tails 5 times = 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/32

This method is similar to the way you calculate the prob of getting AA consecutively.

Click to expand...

bazerk said:

Um, you may want to run this by your Stat Professor again?

[If I'm understanding your example correctly] -- Being dealt A.A is independent of subsequently being dealt another A.A in the very next hand. Back-to-back A.A is cool though .

Click to expand...

sactokid544 said:

sactokid544 said:

That's because you are looking at cases independently. When we look at the cases independently, you are correct. The previous flip has no bearing on the next.

But, what if I want to know the probability of a coin landing on tails consecutively 5 times?? Then each coinflip DOES have a bearing on the next. That is my point.

Probability of a coin landing on Tails = 1/2

Probability of a coin landing on Tails 5 times = 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/32

This method is similar to the way you calculate the prob of getting AA consecutively.

Click to expand...

Each flip, though, is always an independent event, and prior flips always have no impact on the current flip. If you look at a large sample of flips, you will find "streaks" of heads or tails, including streaks that are statistically relatively improbable.

If you bet 100% of the time that the current flip is always heads, and if the betsize is identical for each flip, over a large sample you will always break even.

If you bet that the current flip is going to be heads or tails based on the history of flips, even if it came up tails the last ten flips in a row, you're guessing.

Click to expand...

slycbnew said:

sactokid544 said:

Each flip, though, is always an independent event, and prior flips always have no impact on the current flip. If you look at a large sample of flips, you will find "streaks" of heads or tails, including streaks that are statistically relatively improbable.

If you bet 100% of the time that the current flip is always heads, and if the betsize is identical for each flip, over a large sample you will always break even.

If you bet that the current flip is going to be heads or tails based on the history of flips, even if it came up tails the last ten flips in a row, you're guessing.

Click to expand...

Each flip is independent IF that is the calculation you are trying to compute.

If you are trying to find the conditional probability that a coin lands on tails GIVEN that it's previous flip was tails, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to NOT consider the previous flip, to make that calculation. Thus the previous flips have a bearing when calculating conditional probability.

To understand my point, answer this question:

-If each flip is indeed independent, no matter which kind of calculation you make, then calculate the conditional probability of 3 consecutive flips resulting in tails...

Answer: It's impossible.

Click to expand...