{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/1/2014 6:18:42 AM
1
But what everyone else is saying is that there is the same chance to get 4 other items in the 4 weeks.
For example 2 heads and 1 tail.
They just look at it like .5*.5*.5
But what can really occur is
HHT
HTH
THH
which is 3/8 (which is more than 1/8)
Therefore getting other combinations of the items is more likely than 4 in a row
English
-
That's not what happens. I fully understand what is being said but that's like saying combinations that don't produce a specific pattern have a zero percent chance of happening because they didn't happen. It's manipulating results to support a hypothesis. Each combination has an equal chance of occurring. Whether that result presents a specific combination or a combination of all items is not important. A series of 10 heads in a row in a sampling of 100 coin tosses means nothing. The distribution of heads to tails is going to approach 50% the more attempts that are made. The same can happen here after 100 weeks. The probability of any one item being on the vendor on any given week is 16.67%. You can't point at a six item list after 12 or so picks and say that four results in a row are statistically significant in any way, shape, or form.
-
That's not what I'm saying, I'm just saying that this guys calculations and assumption are correct. Not once have I referred to weeks previous the last 4
-
All I'm trying to say is that getting 4 results that are the same in a batch of results is less likely than other combinations Eg. 3 same 1 different Or 4 different
-
*In a batch of 4 results*
