Trading Lessons/Insights From Coin Flipping

Quote from Mike805:

... If anyone wants to re-investigate some of the ideas in whisky's thread, let's do it...
More...

I'm on for it ... where do we start?
 
Quote from OddTrader:

Believe not not (since nothing is absolutely deterministic or absolutely probabilistic): Deterministic=Probabilistic. :)

The real world is Deterministic+Probabilistic!
More...

Interesting view. The world "is" has been banned from empirical accounts.

There is no way to construct a balanced coin to more than a certain accuracy allowed by machines so a bias is inevitable.

Thus, the tossing of a fair coin is just a thought experiement to facilitate development of a theory.

This problem was known in the casino business long time ago and even after significant improvements there is still detectable bias in roulettes that some are able to estimate even in real-time.

I suggest some reading of the facts

"In the early 1990s, Gonzalo Garcia-Pelayo believed that casino roulette wheels were not perfectly random, and that by recording the results and analysing them with a computer, he could gain an edge on the house by predicting that certain numbers were more likely to occur next than the 1-in-36 odds offered by the house suggested. This he did at the Casino de Madrid in Madrid, Spain, winning 600,000 euros in a single day, and one million euros in total. Legal action against him by the casino was unsuccessful, it being ruled that the casino should fix its wheel."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette#Biased_wheels

Thought experiments are only that. The real world is biased, we all know that.
 
Quote from abattia:

I'm on for it ... where do we start?
More...

I think time of day has potential.

Statistically, volatility can be profitable on it own. If one had to flip a coin, what time of day would be the best time to do it?
 
Quote from walterjennings:

Interesting question,

Assuming your methodology is to guess greater from shown numbers less or equal to 50, less for shown numbers greater than 50.

Which means, the only time I would win would be if both numbers are N1,N2 <= 50 or N1,N2 > 50, and I show the number closer to 50. So case1, N1 <= 50. Chance of N2 <= 50 is 50/100 or 50%, case2 N1 > 50, Chance of N2 > 50 is 50/100 or 50%.

So assuming the above logic is accurate, I have a 50% chance of winning, which means given the imbalance of payout, I should have positive expectation.

Mind explaining what I'm missing?
More...

Your assumption is wrong.
The strategy you describe is not good (from my point of view) as it would give you a 100% win probability.

Ninna
 
Quote from nLepwa:

Your assumption is wrong.
The strategy you describe is not good (from my point of view) as it would give you a 100% win probability.

Ninna
More...

Well not a 100% of the time, just positive expectation, given a random game, it is completely within the realm of possibility that my described approach would lose. But regardless, what strategy would you use to make it profitable for you?
 
Quote from intradaybill:

Interesting view. The world "is" has been banned from empirical accounts.

There is no way to construct a balanced coin to more than a certain accuracy allowed by machines so a bias is inevitable.

...

Thought experiments are only that. The real world is biased, we all know that.
More...

Certainly, That is correct!
 
Quote from walterjennings:

Well not a 100% of the time. But regardless, what strategy would you use to make it profitable for you?
More...

Here's how you get 100%:

You either choose two numbers greater than 50 or two numbers less than 50. And you give me the one closer to 50.

With the strategy you described I would loose everytime.


There is indeed a strategy with positive expectancy for me. :)
Here's a hint: the strategy's win probability has something to do with 1/e.

Ninna
 
Quote from nLepwa:

Here's how you get 100%:

You either choose two numbers greater than 50 or two numbers less than 50. And you give me the one closer to 50.

With the strategy you described I would loose everytime.


There is indeed a strategy with positive expectancy for me. :)
Here's a hint: the strategy's win probability has something to do with 1/e.

Ninna
More...

My mistake. I didn't see that I "choose" two numbers. I assumed I randomly generated two numbers between 1-100 and choose a single one to show.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top