CHEATING or skewed Game Engine? Need a Statistician!

I'm not a statistician, but, I can make a conclusion based on inference.

If the probability of flipping a coin 100 times and getting heads five times in a row is 3% (per Google example), then surely, the probability of one specific manager out of 100 not getting favorable dice rolls six times in a row in six games would seem to be somewhat, if not significantly, lower than 3%. I would also surmise that if 100 teams are playing their finals over a five day period, it's a reasonable bet that one of those 100 managers will experience an outcome similar to yours. You're only playing six games, so, I guess that means that if a particular individual makes it to the finals 100 times, it's a reasonable bet he will experience an outcome similar to yours one time.

So, in summary, you would need to make it to the finals 100 times and have the "six for six" thing happen to you more than once before we could raise any eyebrows and go "WTF?". Or you would have to identify 99 other managers playing their finals and find one other manager who had the "six for six" outcome thing happen before we could raise our eyebrows and go "WTF?" Or you would have to identify 199(?) or more managers playing the finals and find out none of them had the "six for six" outcome before we could raise our eyebrows and go "WTF?" Or you would need to make it to the finals at least 200 times and not experience the "six for six" outcome again before we could raise our eyebrows and go "WTF?". We need to draw a lot of "cards in the deck" before we can make a meaningful conclusion about a skewed game engine.

Or to put it a different way, the probability of a manager having Ron Santo hit a triple in the sixth inning on a Wednesday immediately after Felipe Alou pops up to the shortstop is extremely low, but, it's not an event that would make us raise our eyebrows and go "WTF?" unless it happened with a frequency higher than the expected probability.

All I can say is this - I've played the CDROM game since it came out in the 80's and am currently in a league that uses it. If I have a complaint, it's that there seems to be an abnormal amount of times when you get the same roll in consecutive rolls. That's when I start doubting the game engine.

- The Sheik

If the last roll was a 6-6, then the probability of the next roll also being a 6-6 would be the same as any other roll being a 6-6. That is 5/216. Not really that uncommon given that there are around 70 rolls per game.
In fact, it is probably improbable to have a whole game go by without at least one duplication.

Maybe someone can explain this, bottom 10 Lance Parrish roles a 5-2 off of Hal Newhouser [fly(rf)B]. Instead it is scored a single to CF scoring a run and we lose. Would've lost on the fly out, but why did it become a single to Center?

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/game/playbyplay/438536/47

Definitly something wrong here!

From stratomatic wiki site -- rules.

(21.0) Bringing the outfield in
(21.1) This is an option for Super Advanced play. This strategy is used only when the potential winning run is on third base with fewer than two outs and the game can end on a sacrifice fly.
If the defensive manager positions the outfield IN, make these adjustments:
(21.2) On a reading of "fly()B?" subtract 7 from the baserunner's speed instead of adding 2.
(21.3) Consider all readings of "fly()A" and "fly()B" to be a single with the runner on third scoring.

Thanks milleram, did not see that in the rules, my bad.

I've written support about a couple worse than the outfield in thing, when there were good explanations---I had to go look for that rule because of the difference between FlyB? and a plain FlyB.

I actually wonder why all the FlyB? are on hitters cards and plain FlyB are on pitchers cards myself.

Think. If there was anything other than random luck involved here that would mean someone made the effort to write code to specifically favor one team.

Given how cheap they normally are do you really believe they would spend the programming effort to skew results for whatever reason?

Exactly. I took 500 words to try to say this and it didn't come across well..You did it much better in far fewer words.

Think. If there was anything other than random luck involved here that would mean someone made the effort to write code to specifically favor one team.

Given how cheap they normally are do you really believe they would spend the programming effort to skew results for whatever reason?

Yup, Valen, that's definitely a piece of the puzzle too. Thank you!

However, what'd be your explanation for the same skewing to continue for just one team ... not both teams ... for the very same team ... not just any team in any finals ... 4 more times in each and every Finals game following the one I'd profiled at the beginning of this query?