View Single Post
Old
04-10-2012, 01:27 PM
  #201
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete goegan View Post
Yes. Nordique understands this, blahblah does not.
Quote:
The law of averages is a lay term used to express a belief that outcomes of a random event will "even out" within a small sample.

As invoked in everyday life, the "law" usually reflects bad statistics or wishful thinking rather than any mathematical principle. While there is a real theorem that a random variable will reflect its underlying probability over a very large sample, the law of averages typically assumes that unnatural short-term "balance" must occur.[1] Typical applications of the law also generally assume no bias in the underlying probability distribution, which is frequently at odds with the empirical evidence.[citation n
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_averages

I am quite aware of what I am arguing. The reality is the "Law" is like most law's that govern us. Meaning rather poor.

Since I actually back up most of my data when discussing averages and these concepts, it is more than simple "wishful thinking" as quoted above.

When Nordique forms a coherent argument against what I am saying, I will give credence. Up until now, it's more of "Uh un".

The reality is with a large enough sample size if the odds are 50% that something will occur, after a while it will be statistically around 50%. It might be 50.8%, 49.7%. The larger the same, the closer it will be to 50% - without an outside influence. However, there will be peaks and valleys within that 50%. Those peaks may reach 100%. Those are the peaks in which I am talking about when saying that, eventually, those peaks will benefit us. Sooner or later, the majority of variables will move into our favor. For a time.

So what am I missing here? Is it that you don't agree? If so, with what?


Last edited by blahblah: 04-10-2012 at 01:41 PM.
blahblah is offline   Reply With Quote