Probability paradoxes in gambling.

[Julien_Olynpic]

Have you ever thought about this: can probability paradoxes be applied to gambling? After all, if there are situations in which probabilities become, so to speak, anomalous, then surely there is a temptation to apply these anomalies in gambling? I mean such well-known probability paradoxes as the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox. In all of these (and some other) paradoxes, there are disputes about which probabilities we choose. Usually, there are disputes between the odds of 2/3 and ½. The Monty Hall paradox is a well-known paradox. Some commentators believe that if the player changes his initial choice, his chances increase from 50% to 66%. Some commentators are sure that the chances remain at 50% in any case.
The Bertrand Box paradox is a slightly less well-known paradox, but the debate about probabilities is similar.
I can tell you a little about this paradox. There are three boxes, each containing 2 coins. The first contains 2 gold coins, the second contains one gold coin and one silver coin, and the third contains 2 silver coins. We choose a random box and take a coin out of it. Let's say our coin is gold. What is the probability that another coin from the same box is also gold? Some people think that this probability is 2/3 and explain this by the fact that there were 3 coins in the boxes in total, and now there are 2 left, which means the probability is 2/3. Personally, I think that there is no paradox here and the probability of taking out the second gold coin is ½. The logic is simple:
If we took out a gold coin, then it is definitely not the third box, which contains 2 silver coins. This means that it is either the first box (which contains 2 gold coins), or the second (which contains one gold and one silver coin). If we opened the first box, then the second coin must be gold, if we opened the second box, then the second coin must be silver.
-------------


In this regard, I would like to ask you the following questions:
1. What do you think is the true probability of events in the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox?
2. If there are anomalies in the calculation of probabilities, can these anomalies be used to develop strategies in gambling? In other words, can this be used to create a gaming system in which your understanding of these and other probability paradoxes would become an advantage over other players or over the bookmaker?

[crwth]

After revealing the first door, I believe the Monty Hall problem would increase the chances of getting it right based on Adding the percentage From the Revealed door. You have to understand that this is just the focus, but there is still the probability of a 33% chance of you losing.

if it were me, I would still grab that opportunity thanks to the added chance.

[bitbollo]

I don't think that pure based mathematical or statistics methods are truly helpful for any game prediction.
There are too many factors that must be take in account. Some could arise during the live match... For sure this approach could bost profit but I don't think its something really useful for betting decision.

[Poker Player]

Have you ever thought about this: can probability paradoxes be applied to gambling?

Not fruitfully.

I don't think that pure based mathematical or statistics methods are truly helpful for any game prediction.

Me neither. For me these paradoxes are an example of how mathematicians can obsess about imaginary problems, with long calculations included. Those paradoxes have no application in the real world (unless you make a TV program on purpose). If these paradoxes were of any use in gambling, there would already be many rich mathematicians thanks to them, but this is not the case.

[satscraper]

Mentioned paradoxes have nothing to do with real life gambling because they are paradoxes. No one gives you  "the next chance" and you bet is  in fact a one-shot which results either in win or loosing.  Mathematicians like to call paradoxes the puzzles resulted from the square pitch. Thus OP has  dreamed the whole thing up.

[m2017]

In this regard, I would like to ask you the following questions:
1. What do you think is the true probability of events in the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox?

I think that we can't do without mathematical calculations (research) and specialists who know how to do it. It is unlikely that my opinion will reflect an objective assessment of this.

2. If there are anomalies in the calculation of probabilities, can these anomalies be used to develop strategies in gambling?

But wouldn't the use of these anomalies be an abuse of the casino's "weakness", which is certainly reflected in the terms of the gambler's "user agreement"? And here the question of the morality of using such anomalies arises.

In other words, can this be used to create a gaming system in which your understanding of these and other probability paradoxes would become an advantage over other players or over the bookmaker?

How about using the methods Edward Thorp uses to beat the casino?

[DaNNy001]

Have you ever thought about this: can probability paradoxes be applied to gambling? After all, if there are situations in which probabilities become, so to speak, anomalous, then surely there is a temptation to apply these anomalies in gambling? I mean such well-known probability paradoxes as the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox. In all of these (and some other) paradoxes, there are disputes about which probabilities we choose. Usually, there are disputes between the odds of 2/3 and ½. The Monty Hall paradox is a well-known paradox. Some commentators believe that if the player changes his initial choice, his chances increase from 50% to 66%. Some commentators are sure that the chances remain at 50% in any case.
The Bertrand Box paradox is a slightly less well-known paradox, but the debate about probabilities is similar.
I can tell you a little about this paradox. There are three boxes, each containing 2 coins. The first contains 2 gold coins, the second contains one gold coin and one silver coin, and the third contains 2 silver coins. We choose a random box and take a coin out of it. Let's say our coin is gold. What is the probability that another coin from the same box is also gold? Some people think that this probability is 2/3 and explain this by the fact that there were 3 coins in the boxes in total, and now there are 2 left, which means the probability is 2/3. Personally, I think that there is no paradox here and the probability of taking out the second gold coin is ½. The logic is simple:
If we took out a gold coin, then it is definitely not the third box, which contains 2 silver coins. This means that it is either the first box (which contains 2 gold coins), or the second (which contains one gold and one silver coin). If we opened the first box, then the second coin must be gold, if we opened the second box, then the second coin must be silver.
-------------


In this regard, I would like to ask you the following questions:
1. What do you think is the true probability of events in the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox?
2. If there are anomalies in the calculation of probabilities, can these anomalies be used to develop strategies in gambling? In other words, can this be used to create a gaming system in which your understanding of these and other probability paradoxes would become an advantage over other players or over the bookmaker?

Trying to use mathematics or statistics to predict the outcome of gambling might just be a big mistake anyone can ever make, just because mathematics can be applied to some real life situations doesn't mean it's also applicable to gambling..A friend tried to use what he knows about probability in mathematics to play dice and coin game , I tried to tell him that everything is programmed in ways we don't know and it's definitely not a statistical programming but he refused and he ended up losing a lot of money

[Jawhead999]

The thing is, when you try to apply these paradox in betting, it doesn't work like what you calculate and you will blame the paradox when you loss too big. Also, I wonder what games that you can apply with paradox? minesweeper?

A friend tried to use what he knows about probability in mathematics to play dice and coin game , I tried to tell him that everything is programmed in ways we don't know and it's definitely not a statistical programming but he refused and he ended up losing a lot of money

Yeah because they rely with their calculations and believe lose is a part of game, unfortunately they gamble over than they can afford to lose.

[speeder]

Trying to use mathematics or statistics to predict the outcome of gambling might just be a big mistake anyone can ever make, just because mathematics can be applied to some real life situations doesn't mean it's also applicable to gambling..A friend tried to use what he knows about probability in mathematics to play dice and coin game , I tried to tell him that everything is programmed in ways we don't know and it's definitely not a statistical programming but he refused and he ended up losing a lot of money

No one can know or understand for sure when gambling will win and when will lose. So I think that if we can start the game with good thinking while gambling, bro, if we can't win gambling, there will be more chances of losing gambling.  .So I think before I gamble I think before I gamble.

[swogerino]

Have you ever thought about this: can probability paradoxes be applied to gambling? After all, if there are situations in which probabilities become, so to speak, anomalous, then surely there is a temptation to apply these anomalies in gambling? I mean such well-known probability paradoxes as the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox. In all of these (and some other) paradoxes, there are disputes about which probabilities we choose. Usually, there are disputes between the odds of 2/3 and ½. The Monty Hall paradox is a well-known paradox. Some commentators believe that if the player changes his initial choice, his chances increase from 50% to 66%. Some commentators are sure that the chances remain at 50% in any case.
The Bertrand Box paradox is a slightly less well-known paradox, but the debate about probabilities is similar.
I can tell you a little about this paradox. There are three boxes, each containing 2 coins. The first contains 2 gold coins, the second contains one gold coin and one silver coin, and the third contains 2 silver coins. We choose a random box and take a coin out of it. Let's say our coin is gold. What is the probability that another coin from the same box is also gold? Some people think that this probability is 2/3 and explain this by the fact that there were 3 coins in the boxes in total, and now there are 2 left, which means the probability is 2/3. Personally, I think that there is no paradox here and the probability of taking out the second gold coin is ½. The logic is simple:
If we took out a gold coin, then it is definitely not the third box, which contains 2 silver coins. This means that it is either the first box (which contains 2 gold coins), or the second (which contains one gold and one silver coin). If we opened the first box, then the second coin must be gold, if we opened the second box, then the second coin must be silver.
-------------


In this regard, I would like to ask you the following questions:
1. What do you think is the true probability of events in the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox?
2. If there are anomalies in the calculation of probabilities, can these anomalies be used to develop strategies in gambling? In other words, can this be used to create a gaming system in which your understanding of these and other probability paradoxes would become an advantage over other players or over the bookmaker?

The probabilities like that are real only in offline gambling as although it can be cheated the way online gambling "cheat" is disgusting.No more than a few days ago I played slots for the last time as you cannot win anything with them and I choose Pragmatic provider and out of 70 buy bonus,I got 19 wins and 51 lost games,not a single time reached the final level of the bonus and quite a few of the lost sessions ended up with 0x wins.

That type of probability can be a synonym of a Poker play where the probability you have to win grows or diminishes with each card that is shown for example in Texas Holdem Poker so that paradox you talk can be found in offline casino,and in online one only in games of skill.Unfortunately they cannot used to develop any strategy in gambling as simply it won't work.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I feel that all of that is very necessary in every mechanical and thermal problem, but in gambling it becomes very useless because if it were proven to work so authentically in gambling, we have a lot of experts in mathematics who can provide solutions to every mechanical and thermal problem, but when it comes to gambling, all their calculations can be futile because gambling works on the principle of luck and not so much mathematical calculations. 

[Julien_Olynpic]

But wouldn't the use of these anomalies be an abuse of the casino's "weakness", which is certainly reflected in the terms of the gambler's "user agreement"? And here the question of the morality of using such anomalies arises.

I don't think it's an abuse. Firstly, it hasn't been proven yet that it can work, for example, in betting because these are completely different situations. Secondly, even if it did work, then surely no one would torture themselves with such questions. The only problem is that no one knows how to use it in gambling. But in general, in my opinion, productive knowledge cannot be a forbidden advantage. After all, betting is a competition of minds.

[Yatsan]

Have you ever thought about this: can probability paradoxes be applied to gambling? After all, if there are situations in which probabilities become, so to speak, anomalous, then surely there is a temptation to apply these anomalies in gambling? I mean such well-known probability paradoxes as the Monty Hall paradox and the Bertrand Box paradox. In all of these (and some other) paradoxes, there are disputes about which probabilities we choose. Usually, there are disputes between the odds of 2/3 and ½. The Monty Hall paradox is a well-known paradox. Some commentators believe that if the player changes his initial choice, his chances increase from 50% to 66%. Some commentators are sure that the chances remain at 50% in any case.
The Bertrand Box paradox is a slightly less well-known paradox, but the debate about probabilities is similar.
I can tell you a little about this paradox. There are three boxes, each containing 2 coins. The first contains 2 gold coins, the second contains one gold coin and one silver coin, and the third contains 2 silver coins. We choose a random box and take a coin out of it. Let's say our coin is gold. What is the probability that another coin from the same box is also gold? Some people think that this probability is 2/3 and explain this by the fact that there were 3 coins in the boxes in total, and now there are 2 left, which means the probability is 2/3. Personally, I think that there is no paradox here and the probability of taking out the second gold coin is ½. The logic is simple:
If we took out a gold coin, then it is definitely not the third box, which contains 2 silver coins. This means that it is either the first box (which contains 2 gold coins), or the second (which contains one gold and one silver coin). If we opened the first box, then the second coin must be gold, if we opened the second box, then the second coin must be silver.
-------------

Some may agree, some might not but if I understood it correctly, the whole range of context of the probability paradoxes  is not only limited to gambling. It also demonstrate much more powerfully that a simple intuition is (at times) misleading. This is only based on what I have known so far and from my searches, but such paradoxes can actually defy the result that is opposite to our expectations (which only shows the complexity as a whole of the probability theory). In the case that you are the person making decisions, you really need to be careful not to miss these differences. I mean take it from me, someone impulsive in his younger years (I don't know better then so I usually do something that is not so brilliant). You have to look into all variables and their correlation with each other always. Bcoz generally speaking, even if we know that most of gambling strategies are based on statistics and probability (plus skills of course), learning more of probability theory like how to apply it better, can greatly enhance the efficiency of our decision making skills. Paradoxes only provides a glimpse of how for some it offers the possibilities that do not turn out straightforward (not everything tho). It gives a broader insight that helps us to make much more rational choices not only in terms of gambling but rather also in other areas of risk and uncertainty.

[Darker45]

2. If there are anomalies in the calculation of probabilities, can these anomalies be used to develop strategies in gambling?

But wouldn't the use of these anomalies be an abuse of the casino's "weakness", which is certainly reflected in the terms of the gambler's "user agreement"? And here the question of the morality of using such anomalies arises.

If a casino has a weakness, I think gamblers are free to exploit it. It isn't the gamblers responsibility to take care of the casino, to perform regular evaluation and audit, to make sure they're in perfect shape. In the first place, they shouldn't be launching games which make the players rich and the operator poor. I wonder which specific part of a casino's user agreement classifies this as a violation.

...After all, betting is a competition of minds.

It depends on the specific game but, in general, gambling isn't a competition of minds but a game of luck. Common gambling games aren't puzzles. They're very simple games whose winning edge is always on the side of casinos.

[Julien_Olynpic]

This is actually a very difficult question - what is the percentage of luck in sports betting and what is considered luck. The word "luck" itself is interpreted differently by many. Sometimes as chance, sometimes as a favorable opportunity. But when talking about sports betting, we understand that not all factors are chaotic. Still, many games can be predicted. After all, if this were not the case, then there would be no long-term profitable players in sports betting, but they do. How is it possible for long-term profitable players to exist? Only because they manage to correctly predict the results of sports matches. This means that the random factor is not always as important as we think.

[Porfirii]

Isn't that the same mechanism as in TV shows where the contestant makes a choice, then part of the solution is revealed (a door or box is opened, additional information is given, etc) and the presenter gives him the option to change his initial choice? That is a very interesting topic and I intend to delve deeper into it, as I can't remember what was the right solution and why: was it better to stick to the first choice, or the odds where better if you changed? I think that the key was that the odds changed after the event of revealing the additional info but in what sense?

[Text]

Successful sports bettors seem to exploit patterns that aren't purely random, indicating that there's more at play than just chance. These bettors might not be using probability paradoxes per se, but they are definitely leveraging a deeper understanding of the factors that influence outcomes.

I believe that as long as the strategies used are within the rules of the game, they are fair play. Betting is indeed a competition of minds, and those who can outthink the system without breaking the rules are simply using their skills to their advantage.