dagreenblazer
New member
The 159 above has a Minus symbol in front if it - that means the zeros go the other side of the decimal point - it's a Negative Power - it's 10 x 0.1 if i round up by 158 places.
Last edited by a moderator:
Evolution's Monopoly - stats are off
- Thread starter Stevej
- Start date
-
- Tags
- casino complaints
The 159 above has a Minus symbol in front if it - that means the zeros go the other side of the decimal point - it's a Negative Power - it's 10 x 0.1 if i round up by 158 places.
IguanaBob
Active member
10 to the power of 159 would put the zeros on the left side of the decimal, it's a huge number
10 to the power of -159 puts the zeros on the right side, it's a tiny number
the number is multiplied by 10 to the power of -159. In other words you start with that value and divide it by 10 then you do it again and again until you've done it 159 times. That is the probability of getting 482 or less from 7566
For example:
3000 = 3x10^3
300= 3x10^2
30= 3x10^1
3= 3x10^0
0.3= 3x10^-1
0.03= 3x10^-2
0.003=3x10^-3
10 to the power of -159 puts the zeros on the right side, it's a tiny number
the number is multiplied by 10 to the power of -159. In other words you start with that value and divide it by 10 then you do it again and again until you've done it 159 times. That is the probability of getting 482 or less from 7566
For example:
3000 = 3x10^3
300= 3x10^2
30= 3x10^1
3= 3x10^0
0.3= 3x10^-1
0.03= 3x10^-2
0.003=3x10^-3
Last edited by a moderator:
dagreenblazer
New member
If being generous and giving them back 158 zeroes, the above 3 probability sums read 7.889 x 10 x 0.1, 1.53 x 10 x 0.1 and 2 x 10 x 0.1 at best - I don't know what the odds of winning lottery 22 times in a row are but I'm pretty sure it adds up to more than any of these add up to, plus that's not even what the results are describing.
Binomial distribution just models probability within whatever data set you give it, so if doubles are rolling in under frequency then quite obviously the model is going to show this - and expecting it to correlate with Expected Values is unrealistic full stop.
Last edited by a moderator:
IguanaBob
Active member
You are clearly an idiot. I've explained what the mathematical sums mean and I'm not going to get bogged down any further arguing with an imbecile
The probability of getting less than 482 is 2.33 x (10 to the power of -159); that is you start with 2.33, divide it by 10 once to get 0.233, divide it by 10 again to get 0.0233, divide it a third time to get 0.00233 and so on until there are 158 zeros between the decimal point and the 2. That is just how the notation works.
Again, my money is on the tracksino data being faulty, but if it isn't then the only other alternative is the rolls being fudged in some way. It's an either/or Tracksino or Evolution, they can't both be right.
The probability of getting less than 482 is 2.33 x (10 to the power of -159); that is you start with 2.33, divide it by 10 once to get 0.233, divide it by 10 again to get 0.0233, divide it a third time to get 0.00233 and so on until there are 158 zeros between the decimal point and the 2. That is just how the notation works.
Again, my money is on the tracksino data being faulty, but if it isn't then the only other alternative is the rolls being fudged in some way. It's an either/or Tracksino or Evolution, they can't both be right.
dagreenblazer
New member
The reason i responded was because i was trying to help you.
If you want to start throwing insults around then fine, feel free to believe in whatever conspiracy theories & mis-calculations you wish.
Your modelling data is absolutely exemplary and Evolution have 100% definitely engineered the dice to deliberately not roll doubles, and they've also definitely installed a video screen in the plexiglass surround so we can't tell it's all pre-recorded anyway, and definitely every single presenter is in on this.
Call the police - there must be millions of doubles out there just waiting to land if only they were allowed to.....in fact I'm pretty sure rolling less doubles than expected violates the UN Standard Charter on Human Rights too.....what swines!
Let's hope your investigation concludes with these slippery game providers being arrested, as without their evil fixing Monopoly would be a guaranteed investment vehicle.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stevej
New member
Relax man.
My opinion is that, in any case, they are not doing anything illegal, it's just that people don't understand how their games work. For me they are not live games.
Let me know if you find a single day in history where the doubles were at least in their average level. That event does not exist in history.
IguanaBob
Active member
I am now completely convinced that the problem is entirely within tracksino's data. At the time I looked it said 0 doubles in last hour, however the Monopoly Live history shows several recent 4 rolls that were in fact 5 rolls, which could only happen with doubles.
Last edited by a moderator:
Stevej
New member
Yeah, that seems to be the case. Those stats are completely off. Well, maybe it is legit then!
Stevej
New member
I became interested, so I got the data from tracksino. I calculated the accurate count of doubles using python, and then performed a cumulative probability analysis.
1month:
n = 7524 # number of trials
k = 1013 # number of successes
p = 1/6 # probability of success on a single trial
The cumulative probability of getting 1013 or fewer doubles in 7,524 rolls is: 1.0441032956734961e-14
I'm pretty sure this is the correct amount of doubles. It's bit low still and quite unlikely event, but I still can't verify if there are no errors in the data, so I just leave it there.
1month:
n = 7524 # number of trials
k = 1013 # number of successes
p = 1/6 # probability of success on a single trial
The cumulative probability of getting 1013 or fewer doubles in 7,524 rolls is: 1.0441032956734961e-14
I'm pretty sure this is the correct amount of doubles. It's bit low still and quite unlikely event, but I still can't verify if there are no errors in the data, so I just leave it there.
