~
How did you even derive that meaning from my post? Because literally explained what i meant by that in my next sentence. Context is everything. And obviously OP is referring to the concept of Hot hand which falls under gambler's fallacy. Otherwise he wouldn't have to research the phenomenon and separated it from normal "luck".
Yes, unlike most people here I actually read twice what am I replying to!
And no, this does not fall under gamble fallacy exactly because of the reasons linked in the same article you posted!!!
Quote
A study was conducted to examine the difference between the hot-hand and gambler's fallacy
The researchers found the results of this study to match their initial hypothesis that the gambler's fallacy could in fact be countered by the use of the hot hand and people's attention to the person who was actively flipping the coin. It is important to note that this counteraction of the gambler's fallacy only happened if the person tossing the coin remained the same
A hot hand is based on perceived potential, the gamble fallacy is based on denial of a thing happening!The researchers found the results of this study to match their initial hypothesis that the gambler's fallacy could in fact be countered by the use of the hot hand and people's attention to the person who was actively flipping the coin. It is important to note that this counteraction of the gambler's fallacy only happened if the person tossing the coin remained the same
What I noted for myself was that red numbers very often came up several times in a row. Black numbers also very often came up several times in a row.
At the same time, it was on the gaming tables where the "colored" series appeared that there was the greatest chance of winning. I had very large winning series when playing roulette - up to 20 times in a row when betting on red / black.
At the same time, it was on the gaming tables where the "colored" series appeared that there was the greatest chance of winning. I had very large winning series when playing roulette - up to 20 times in a row when betting on red / black.
This is the thing, our brains are not made to deal with such stuff, we learn and perceive things based on new information, and our brains will start ignoring obvious things like red/black red/black but will never forget streaks that happen 20 times, just how you will remember perfectly where Mclaren passed you with 200kmh but you will struggle to remember the type of other cars that did the same as they are the usual cars you see all day.
Combine this with 1 million games over 1 million tables playing night and day and it's beyond our power of analysis, so bias starts on limited knowledge,!
But of course, if you don;t agree with me you can gamble based on that and see how it goes long term