It's 4%, AKA the Go Fuck Yourself Post.

[Crazy Diana]

someone owes me 20 coppers

[jackiebrown]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler's_fallacy

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the belief that if deviations from expected behaviour are observed in repeated independent trials of some random process then these deviations are likely to be evened out by opposite deviations in the future. For example, if a fair coin is tossed repeatedly and tails comes up a larger number of times than is expected, a gambler may incorrectly believe that this means that heads is more likely in future tosses.[1] Such an expectation could be mistakenly referred to as being due. This is an informal fallacy. It is also known colloquially as the law of averages.
The gambler's fallacy implicitly involves an assertion of negative correlation between trials of the random process and therefore involves a denial of the exchangeability of outcomes of the random process.

Explaining why the probability is 1/2 for a fair coin

We can see from the above that, if one flips a fair coin 21 times, then the probability of 21 heads is 1 in 2,097,152. However, the probability of flipping a head after having already flipped 20 heads in a row is simply 1/2. This is an example of Bayes' theorem.
This can also be seen without knowing that 20 heads have occurred for certain (without applying of Bayes' theorem). Consider the following two probabilities, assuming a fair coin:

probability of 20 heads, then 1 tail = 0.520 × 0.5 = 0.521
probability of 20 heads, then 1 head = 0.520 × 0.5 = 0.521

The probability of getting 20 heads then 1 tail, and the probability of getting 20 heads then another head are both 1 in 2,097,152. Therefore, it is equally likely to flip 21 heads as it is to flip 20 heads and then 1 tail when flipping a fair coin 21 times. Furthermore, these two probabilities are as equally likely as any other 21-flip combinations that can be obtained (there are 2,097,152 total); all 21-flip combinations will have probabilities equal to 0.521, or 1 in 2,097,152. From these observations, there is no reason to assume at any point that a change of luck is warranted based on prior trials (flips), because every outcome observed will always have been equally as likely as the other outcomes that were not observed for that particular trial, given a fair coin. Therefore, just as Bayes' theorem shows, the result of each trial comes down to the base probability of the fair coin: 1/2

necro post

[Crazy Diana]

roj has since quit because of this thread and now furly is going to challenge lorake and probably quit soon too

[Searia]

I think you all are fucking idiots and should listen to your guild officers, instead of being douche bags just to be douche bags

EDIT:The chance of it happening is completely pointless..... IT HAPPENS... learn to work around it, with it, whatever

[jackiebrown]

yeah this entire thread kinda baffles me, if someone being chased twice in a row is possible at all and it fucks up your strategy why not just change the strategy

and in a thread with people claiming to know about math/statistics theres just 19 pages of bad math instead of someone posting the theorem that states it for them, something they should have learned with that math, unless it's a very elaborate troll

[Sanderz]

yeah this entire thread kinda baffles me, if someone being chased twice in a row is possible at all and it fucks up your strategy why not just change the strategy

and in a thread with people claiming to know about math/statistics theres just 19 pages of bad math instead of someone posting the theorem that states it for them, something they should have learned with that math, unless it's a very elaborate troll

ding ding ding

oh wait lorake and roj are too dumbobjective for that

[geng]

yeah this entire thread kinda baffles me, if someone being chased twice in a row is possible at all and it fucks up your strategy why not just change the strategy

and in a thread with people claiming to know about math/statistics theres just 19 pages of bad math instead of someone posting the theorem that states it for them, something they should have learned with that math, unless it's a very elaborate troll

you do know that this whole thread was just trolls trolling trolls right.

[Searia]

you do know that this whole thread was just trolls trolling trolls right.

I think you all are fucking idiots and should listen to your guild officers, instead of being douche bags just to be douche bags

[Lorake]

yeah this entire thread kinda baffles me, if someone being chased twice in a row is possible at all and it fucks up your strategy why not just change the strategy

and in a thread with people claiming to know about math/statistics theres just 19 pages of bad math instead of someone posting the theorem that states it for them, something they should have learned with that math, unless it's a very elaborate troll

ding ding ding

oh wait lorake and roj are too dumbobjective for that

The original concept was me and Roj arguing 4%, not whether or not this shit really mattered in a boss strat.

Proof by contradiction or my shit stands. Roj either couldn't or got bored and didn't. He at least broke the original equations which were only correct in specific cases, and then wrong otherwise, with solid examples.

And it's ok Sanderz, your hard work for insanity was appreciated.

And finally, grats on necro.

[Roj]

you do know that this whole thread was just trolls trolling trolls right.

LOL ya, I have to admit I didn't really even read Lorake's original post until like page 7-8 and saw what he was actually saying. So then I just wanted to argue about the math...