The Fallacy Of The Maturity Of Chances

[jcojci]

If we talk about coin flip, we need to understand that game need luck to win. We can calculate how big the percentage to win but that is unclear for us to win. The probability of heads or tails will be 50/50 but when the coin is in the air, the probability change and there is no guarantee our prediction can win. But some gamblers feels happy playing that game and they really depend on their luck. But they should realize that they will not win easily if they don't have luck.

[tiCeR]

If we talk about coin flip, we need to understand that game need luck to win. We can calculate how big the percentage to win but that is unclear for us to win. The probability of heads or tails will be 50/50 but when the coin is in the air, the probability change and there is no guarantee our prediction can win. But some gamblers feels happy playing that game and they really depend on their luck. But they should realize that they will not win easily if they don't have luck.

I am trying to follow you but this makes no sense.

As I've heard, "your past doesn't determine your future", but I believe that in sports betting this can work well. It is possible to analyze previous results to decide on the current bet, it is not a guarantee, but generally the results tend to be similar, or are easier to "predict". This is not a certainty, it is just another speculation of the many that exist in the world of betting, the so-called "formula for success".

A while ago someone in the gambling discussion board presented an experiment trying to increase the stakes after every loss I think and it was conducted in sports betting. It wasn't dice. It proved that this can go very wrong very quickly and escalates to amounts you can't afford to lose certainly at some point because even if you go with the favourites or supposed favourites as suggested by the odds, it could still go wrong 10x in a row. Which I think it did in the experiment, but it was only done like a test, not played with real money.

You would think that it is impossible for implied favourites to lose 10x across different events. It wasn't like odds of 1.10 vs 4.90 all the time, but it was odds that you would think can't go wrong 10x.

What costs you money and certainly leads to losing your bankroll when you play in casinos is the house edge. The more you play, the stronger the house edge will kick in as variance goes down.

Your assertion here that probability changes while the coin is flying through the air is hilarious! It isn't relevant.

[Dunamisx]

Are gamblers actually proving out the probability of chances or they are only trying to outsmart their way out in pretense to be gambling, this may be what can lead us to the purpose of having people gambling everywhere, are they doing it with the mindset that they are under the probability of the chances of wining or not, or they were running after the opportunity of making money from it thinking they are smart enough irrespective of the game they are playing.

[crwth]

I also fall into this trap because I think that in a certain slot game, I have lost a lot in a specific time, and I feel and think that I could win just because I lost so much. This is really something to practice and not attend to.

It should be on a case-by-case basis or something.

[Julien_Olynpic]

When we say that past events are not the cause of future events, this is not quite the right way to put the question. In many cases, we mean another question: is it possible to predict future events based on anomalous events of the past? And the answer to this question seems to me to be largely positive. Let me clarify.
1. The result of a coin toss, of course, does not depend on similar tosses in the past.
2. However, anomalous results of such tosses allow us to predict possible future events.
3. For example, if you toss a coin 500 times and the coin comes up heads 500 times, then it is highly likely that the coin's center of gravity is shifted and the coin will also come up heads the 501st time. Or there may be some other reason that makes the toss result non-random.
4. If you are 100% sure that the coin falls absolutely randomly, then the frequent occurrence of one side of the coin in the past may not help you much in the future. Even if you are convinced that the reversal will occur more often in the next 100 throws, it is difficult to make money on this due to the high variance of results.

[Fundamentals Of]

I think all gamblers who have played luck-based casino games have already fallen to this fallacy a number of times. The reason is simple. In a coin flip, although it is possible that heads will turn out each time, is it likely that there will be 20 consecutive flips with heads as a result? It is probably less likely. The same logic applies to dice, roulette, baccarat, and other random casino games. Each game may be completely independent from each other but the possibility that only one result shows up every time is very low.

[peter0425]

I think all gamblers who have played luck-based casino games have already fallen to this fallacy a number of times. The reason is simple. In a coin flip, although it is possible that heads will turn out each time, is it likely that there will be 20 consecutive flips with heads as a result? It is probably less likely. The same logic applies to dice, roulette, baccarat, and other random casino games. Each game may be completely independent from each other but the possibility that only one result shows up every time is very low.

Unconsciously, bettors might fall for this fallacy no matter how hard we try. We know it doesn't work like that but there is always the nagging thought that you might win the next round because you have been losing. But once you wake up and realize that you will keep losing then that is the time you take a break.

[Dave1]

The Fallacy of the maturity of chances is a common mistake among gamblers.

Some gamblers always think past events affects future outcomes.
For example, if a coin is lands heads up several times, some people
Think it's more likely to land tails up next.

But each coin flip is independent and the probability of heads or tails is always 50/50

This is true, that's why card game like baccarat and if you have been in a land base casinos, you will see in some kind of monitor of the pattern of banker and player. And then you will have gamblers look at it, finding the pattern and the cycle and then bet on the next game because of this.

Nevertheless, there is no pattern in their and it's not even 50/50 as there is also the tie game. But for sure, most gamblers likely wanted to see this and so casinos gave this to us so that we will fall for this kind of trap and losses more money in the long run.

[maydna]

I think all gamblers who have played luck-based casino games have already fallen to this fallacy a number of times. The reason is simple. In a coin flip, although it is possible that heads will turn out each time, is it likely that there will be 20 consecutive flips with heads as a result? It is probably less likely. The same logic applies to dice, roulette, baccarat, and other random casino games. Each game may be completely independent from each other but the possibility that only one result shows up every time is very low.

This game is based on the luck. That make gamblers difficult to win because that will depend on our luck. A coin flip will not give us win many times because we never know what face of the coin will show up to us. But many gamblers don't realize that when they play this coin flip, their chance to win will not too big, same as the other gambling games based on the luck. When they lose, their mind will think that they can win in the next rounds but that will not happen easily.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

It's only in sports betting that I know many people believes that the previous outcome can determine the future results too and in most cases it is usually like that. But in casino gambling, I don't believe in such fallacy, that my previous results will determine the future outcome, I don't even know if there are many gamblers with such believe but it's really not going to work like that, the possibility of that being true is just a normal coincidence.

[Smartprofit]

In my opinion, according to the mathematical theory of probability, there is a probability that the eagle will fall out 500 times in a row. The probability of such an event is not zero. Moreover, such an event can occur even without taking into account some defect of the coin. If we talk about roulette or other gambling, then at present, the probability of a defect in the equipment in such situations is close to zero. Only in Jack London's novel could the main character hit the Jackpot by discovering a malfunction of the roulette. At present, nothing like this happens. This is generally a very rare event. Usually, gambling deals with random events. At the same time, since a person looks for patterns in everything, he can very well be fooled by chance. He will see patterns where in fact there are none.

[GreatArkansas]

The Fallacy of the maturity of chances is a common mistake among gamblers.

Some gamblers always think past events affects future outcomes.
For example, if a coin is lands heads up several times, some people
Think it's more likely to land tails up next.

But each coin flip is independent and the probability of heads or tails is always 50/50

This is true, that's why card game like baccarat and if you have been in a land base casinos, you will see in some kind of monitor of the pattern of banker and player. And then you will have gamblers look at it, finding the pattern and the cycle and then bet on the next game because of this.

Nevertheless, there is no pattern in their and it's not even 50/50 as there is also the tie game. But for sure, most gamblers likely wanted to see this and so casinos gave this to us so that we will fall for this kind of trap and losses more money in the long run.

You're right. Each coin flip or game round is separate, so the past doesn't change the chances for the next one.
Still, casinos show those pattern charts to make people think there's a trend or cycle (I can relate, lol). Many players believe they can guess what's coming next, but the game doesn't work that way. In the end, it's just a trick to make peopel bet more and lose more money.

[Josefjix]

The Fallacy of the maturity of chances is a common mistake among gamblers.

Some gamblers always think past events affects future outcomes.
For example, if a coin is lands heads up several times, some people
Think it's more likely to land tails up next.

But each coin flip is independent and the probability of heads or tails is always 50/50

Even the way you are predicting it to be is also wrong too, and I'm going to tell you that nobody actually knows what happens next, or how coins going to fall like.

The outcomes and rewards really based on consistency and not on any strategy thereof, and no player should bother to elaborate themselves thinking they know the secret of getting any chances, it is what it is.

[Natalim]

That 50/50 chance is insane. And every time we gamble, we often speculate on the opposite of the past results. There is no way to increase our chances in this situation because the only thing we can do is to rely on luck and hope for it. That is why I don't choose games like this, because even if we have that 50/50 chance, most often we lose. Unlike in sports betting, where we can use past events to speculate about future outcomes. Sports analysis brings some fortune, which makes more gamblers win than lose.

[kryptqnick]

The gambler’s fallacy is not just a mistake — it reflects a deep conflict between intuition and mathematics. Our brain is naturally wired to look for patterns, even where none exist — like in random events. That’s why, after a series of tails, we feel like a head is “due” to appear. But the coin doesn’t 'keep track', it's not alive and doesn't 'know' what the previous 10 tosses brought.
This shows how human thinking tries to rationalize something chaotic. The gambler’s fallacy appears not only in casinos, but also in investing, sports, and even everyday decisions.

[Darker45]

The gambler’s fallacy is not just a mistake — it reflects a deep conflict between intuition and mathematics. Our brain is naturally wired to look for patterns, even where none exist — like in random events. That’s why, after a series of tails, we feel like a head is “due” to appear. But the coin doesn’t 'keep track', it's not alive and doesn't 'know' what the previous 10 tosses brought.

Speaking of mathematics, here's an alternative view. If it's fair, a toss of a coin has a 50% chance heads and a 50% chance tails. It's mathematics that tells us that in the long run, the result would be more or less balanced. The Law of Large Numbers would say that as the number of tosses increases, the results would eventually converge into the 50:50 ratio.

In which case, while an individual toss is indeed completely independent from previous tosses, if in 500 tosses, the heads turned up 420 times, it must not be fallacious to generalize that tails is worth betting next. Does this sound correct?

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

That 50/50 chance is insane. And every time we gamble, we often speculate on the opposite of the past results. There is no way to increase our chances in this situation because the only thing we can do is to rely on luck and hope for it. That is why I don't choose games like this, because even if we have that 50/50 chance, most often we lose. Unlike in sports betting, where we can use past events to speculate about future outcomes. Sports analysis brings some fortune, which makes more gamblers win than lose.

Someone  was sitting an example that if you flip for like 600 times and got the head repeating 550 times while tail being just 50 times, it means that something is wrong because it was not a fair play, which means that the casino are either cheating, makes me wonder if we really expect that the fairness means that because it's 50/50, must the results be equal or near to each other? You have already said it, we can only rely on luck and the possibility of winning huge in gambling means hitting jackpots or staking with a huge amount at the right time and winning that wagering.

[stompix]

The probability of heads or tails will be 50/50 but when the coin is in the air, the probability change and there is no guarantee our prediction can win.

How does that work?
When one foot is in the air going up it's 75/25, and when it's 20 cm off the ground going down is 25/75? 

Someone  was sitting an example that if you flip for like 600 times and got the head repeating 550 times while tail being just 50 times, it means that something is wrong because it was not a fair play, which means that the casino are either cheating, makes me wonder if we really expect that the fairness means that because it's 50/50, must the results be equal or near to each other?

Deviations can happen, nothing is really impossible, but at the same time it becomes as ridiculous as a btc address collision.
350 heads out of 600 is doable is in the 50k range.
400 becomes messy, is about 10 quadrillions.
550...is ...I don't know how many zeros but over 100, so yeah it can happen but only once in the lifetime of this galaxy, assuming the first dinosaur started tossing those coins and since then every lifeform kept doing it till now 

[$weetne$$]

With coin flip you have to highly depend on luck and it is very true that the past even has almost nothing to do with the next outcome, most times the new outcome is independent of the past but this is different with placing bets on games, and that is because history about sports game has a lot with the outcome of the present stake. This is why casino place their odds based on statistical records and other factors and most gamblers who often record success in gambling often times have good knowledge of the statistics of what has happened between team and history always repeats itself most often  both in sports and other events.

[lionheart78]

The Fallacy of the maturity of chances is a common mistake among gamblers.

Some gamblers always think past events affects future outcomes.
For example, if a coin is lands heads up several times, some people
Think it's more likely to land tails up next.

But each coin flip is independent and the probability of heads or tails is always 50/50

True coin flip result is independent of each other,  People only think that the possibility of landing tails when it is consequently landing heads is due to the belief in the law of averages (which you called fallacy of the maturity of chances), which is not scientifically proven to be true and is known as one of the gambler's fallacy.

I agree that many gamblers believe in this fallacy and are often misled gamblers to believe that if they suffer consecutive losses, they will eventually win, resulting in more losses for many.  This also triggers gamblers to chase losses, which we all believe and witness is disastrous if not stopped.