The probability of each play are independent so you always have a probability of 0.75 of failing, doesn’t matter if you have one or one hundred previous failed outcomes.
People usually don’t understand probabilities and randomness, and even when understanding them, it still doesn’t feel right.
I’ve seen your comment thousands of times by people discussing why martingale works when playing roulette (no, it doesn’t since the probability of losing is greater of winning).
You’ve switched the original problem of losing once to losing 8 times in a row, yeah, the probability of losing 8 times in a row is low, but the probability of losing 7 times in a row and winning the 8th time is lower.
Let’s check probabilities:
7 loses and a losing again is 0.75^7 * 0.75 = 0.10
7 loses and wining the 8th is 0.75^7 * 0.25 = 0.03
Again, previous outcomes doesn’t condition the next outcome, yes, the probability of 8 consecutive loses is lower of 3 loses and a win, but 4 loses is more likely than 3 loses and a win. And 1000 loses seems like impossible, but still more probable than 999 loses and a win, because the probability of losing never changes.
That’s the thing about rng, you need a large sample size to accurately determine the odds. 8 isn’t enough, bad luck like hitting 8 75% rolls in a row is bound to happen.
1/4 Wheel is the biggest lie ever told in video games. I did 8 in a row and got nothing once. It’s like 1/10 at best
Getting a 3/4 event eight times in a row has a probability of roughly 10%
It’s still some bullshit!
(3/4)^8 ≈10.01%
Math checks out
The probability of each play are independent so you always have a probability of 0.75 of failing, doesn’t matter if you have one or one hundred previous failed outcomes.
People usually don’t understand probabilities and randomness, and even when understanding them, it still doesn’t feel right.
I’ve seen your comment thousands of times by people discussing why martingale works when playing roulette (no, it doesn’t since the probability of losing is greater of winning).
You’ve switched the original problem of losing once to losing 8 times in a row, yeah, the probability of losing 8 times in a row is low, but the probability of losing 7 times in a row and winning the 8th time is lower.
Let’s check probabilities:
7 loses and a losing again is 0.75^7 * 0.75 = 0.10
7 loses and wining the 8th is 0.75^7 * 0.25 = 0.03
Again, previous outcomes doesn’t condition the next outcome, yes, the probability of 8 consecutive loses is lower of 3 loses and a win, but 4 loses is more likely than 3 loses and a win. And 1000 loses seems like impossible, but still more probable than 999 loses and a win, because the probability of losing never changes.
Your comment isn’t refuting the person you’re replying to. Did you reply to the wrong person?
That’s the thing about rng, you need a large sample size to accurately determine the odds. 8 isn’t enough, bad luck like hitting 8 75% rolls in a row is bound to happen.