CHEATING or skewed Game Engine? Need a Statistician!

1551616 divided by

236469831
≈0.007

less than 1%

But, I could be wrong

I play a lot because I love it. Despite the obvious flaws. "What a field day for the heat, singing songs and carrying signs." Everything in life has obvious flaws, but we march on. It's a false dichotomy, to play or not, because something is a bit off. We play on, grab your bootstraps and move on.

Also, the spelling is atrocious on this post: it's Statisticians.

Well there is a mathematical formula that will actually calculate the actual likelihood of this happening. Indeed I have seen enough rolls like this that I do not believe in the random factor. A simple binomial distribution can calculate this.

There were 473 rolls from the above 204 were for the victim 269 against the victim a 43/57 split. About the rate I frequently see when certain people go on “lucky” streaks.

The odds of this occurring is 1.6 times in a thousand 6 games series. So this should be seen about once in a playoff series for players who have made the playoffs a thousand times. However I have seen this occur multiple times in playoff series, so I doubt it is random more likely a program bias for whatever reason.

Thank you Charlie. See folks, 1.6 in a thousand is far rarer than 1 in 64. Now, of course, I hope whatever we find is ... well, changeable for the better.

This is not even CLOSE to being accurate.

What exactly is not accurate? I do believe the mathematics are correct and the occurrence of 269 or more rolls out of 473 rolls going against you is .0016058 if the rolls are considered fair dice and a 50/50 chance. It is just math so that should be fairly easy to disprove if my assumptions are incorrect.

What exactly is not accurate? I do believe the mathematics are correct and the occurrence of 269 or more rolls out of 473 rolls going against you is .0016058 if the rolls are considered fair dice and a 50/50 chance. It is just math so that should be fairly easy to disprove if my assumptions are incorrect.

Just to be clear , are you saying the chance of 269 out of 473 rolls going against you is 1.6 out of 1000??
473 rolls is nothing. Missing 56% of them is completely in line with standard deviation. You would need about 1600 GAMES before you could expect the rolls to land exactly at 50/50

What exactly is not accurate? I do believe the mathematics are correct and the occurrence of 269 or more rolls out of 473 rolls going against you is .0016058 if the rolls are considered fair dice and a 50/50 chance. It is just math so that should be fairly easy to disprove if my assumptions are incorrect.

Just to be clear , are you saying the chance of 269 out of 473 rolls going against you is 1.6 out of 1000??
473 rolls is nothing. Missing 56% of them is completely in line with standard deviation. You would need about 1600 GAMES before you could expect the rolls to land exactly at 50/50

No I am saying having 269 or more rolls go against you in 473 chances occurs 1.6 times if you were to roll the dice 1000 times. The standard deviation of 473 rolls is 10.87 this is 52.2% - 47.8%. This result is 3 standard deviations away from the norm, which is outside the 99.73% of 3 standard deviations, if Stratomatic actually had a normal distribution

While I don't have the knowledge to dispute that, it still doesn't sound right to me. 1000 rolls just isn't that many. If you were stock playing the 2017 season, you would need about 10 seasons in order to get Stanton to average 59 HR's.

Why do you play if you feel this way?

There are plenty of people who believe something is rotten in Glen Haven. Some quit the game for this reason, some of us suckers keep soldiering on.

But, too much fluky crap happens to be totally random. One of my personal favorite conspiracy theories is that certain teams and players are randomly preordained by the game engine to over perform or under perform.

Want a crazy stat, I have the 11.25 mill crazy Barry Bonds card on two different teams, he's played 15 games thus far (yes, I know it's early) with each team, so 30 games total. His combined stat line is:

.171 Batting Average (.362 on card)
.382 On Base % (.609 on card)
Best of all ONLY ONE HOME RUN in a total of 110 plate appearances.

And he is facing about 2/3 RHP's.

I'm sure (at least hope) it will "normalize" at some point, but still crazy bad numbers after 110 PA's.

I wonder how many of you have an extensive history with dice and card leagues?

I absolutely believe the dice rolls are not random, and there are flaws inherent in the game engine. These were not NASA engineers, rocket scientists or Google computer programmers who built the SOM engine -- however it was built. Mmm, that would be an intriguing story to discover -- exactly who built the coding for the SOM game engine. With Hal Richman being the cheap dirtbag miser he is, I'm sure he probably contracted it out to a fluky firm or freelancer. I'm thinking Ukrainian, Russian, or west Texas.

One time (way back when...) Bernie told me that there was one guy at SOM who had written the code and at that time (15 years ago?) was still managing it. My recollection is that Bernie (who was an ivy-league educated developer) thought it was a mess by more modern standards. The computer engine running the game seems to have remained largely unchanged, so probably not much different now.

Interesting data. I've never looked that up for my own teams.