Question about dice...

[tyche73]

up dated

(5.56% / 50% / 44.44%) (22.76% / 32.41% / 44.83%)

[john9blue]

up dated

(5.56% / 50% / 44.44%) (22.76% / 32.41% / 44.83%)

That was eighteen rolls. Play more Conquer Club.

[maniacmath17]

Ok we got rid of KLOBBER. Back on topic. Terrible losses. How can we explain them? The 32 v 2 is actually likely to have happened once by now in the history of CC based on total dice rolled. But that doesn't explain something like losing a 30 v 1 which I heard someone say they lost. The chances of THAT happening given the number of CC dice rolled is about 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, or 1x10^30.

Basically if the universe started over 1x10^30 times we would still probably be the only universe to lose a 30v1. Are we just that special? Or maybe we can start thinking about how to fix the likely streakyness inherent in the dice.

[john9blue]

Ok we got rid of KLOBBER. Back on topic. Terrible losses. How can we explain them? The 32 v 2 is actually likely to have happened once by now in the history of CC based on total dice rolled. But that doesn't explain something like losing a 30 v 1 which I heard someone say they lost. The chances of THAT happening given the number of CC dice rolled is about 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, or 1x10^30.

Basically if the universe started over 1x10^30 times we would still probably be the only universe to lose a 30v1. Are we just that special? Or maybe we can start thinking about how to fix the likely streakyness inherent in the dice.

That's actually not right... if the odds were 1/10^30, the odds of losing 3v1 would be about 1/10, which they aren't.

5 million games played, averaging 10 rounds a game, averaging 4 players a game, makes 200 million turns. If each turn averages 10 rolls, that's 2 billion rolls. Each roll can start a streak.

The odds of losing 30v1 are 1/10^13, always playing the odds. This will happen once every 10 trillion rolls. The odds of this ever happening in Conquer Club history are 1/5,000.

Let's try 32v2. Losing 32v2 all against the 2 (which is the most likely scenario) will happen once every 100 million times. Losing all but 1 against the 1 (the least likely scenario) will happen every 90 trillion times. Even with the most likely scenario, this only should have happened 20 times in Conquer Club history.

This includes multi-turn streaks and multiple attacks, which have probably not been recorded because they are harder to keep track of. My numbers are generous, too.

The math here is not exact because the full calculation is painful. But I think it gives you an idea of how improbable these rolls are.

[maniacmath17]

Haha, wow you're right. I should have realized i punched it into the calculator wrong once I got such a big number. Ended up doing 30^27th power instead of 3^27th. Your calculations look pretty accurate. The 1 out of 5000 for 30 v 1 is still pretty significant, enough to suggest possible streakyness.

And this of course is just 1 bad dice experience. There's probably been other similar ones, which when factored in would give even more proof to the likely dice streakyness.

[KLOBBER]

Actually, you're both wrong.

If such a scenario ever happened, of which there is no proof, then the odds of it happening were 100%.

If it didn't happen, which is probably the case, then the odds were 0%.

[xelabale]

Actually, you're both wrong.

If such a scenario ever happened, of which there is no proof, then the odds of it happening were 100%.

If it didn't happen, which is more likely, then the odds were 0%.

OK Klobber - define odds for us. If you don't do it I will assume you acknowledge that you are wrong by your silence, as you usually don't answer awkward questions...

[KLOBBER]

Odds bodkins!



Since you have volunteered the fact that you somehow don't know the definition of the term "odds," you are free to look it up on any of numerous online dictionaries. If you were looking for the truth, I would give it to you.

However, by asking your opponent instead of just looking it up directly, you betray the fact that what you're really looking for is an argument, not the truth.

Your failure: Stupid questions don't warrant answers.

[john9blue]

Actually, you're both wrong.

If such a scenario ever happened, of which there is no proof, then the odds of it happening were 100%.

If it didn't happen, which is probably the case, then the odds were 0%.

You're right. But we aren't talking about "if it happened", we're talking about "if it could happen". I am saying how improbable those rolls are, disregarding whether the people who claimed them are telling the truth or not.

Stay on topic!

[KLOBBER]

Actually, you're both wrong.

If such a scenario ever happened, of which there is no proof, then the odds of it happening were 100%.

If it didn't happen, which is probably the case, then the odds were 0%.

You're right. But we aren't talking about "if it happened", we're talking about "if it could happen". I am saying how improbable those rolls are, disregarding whether the people who claimed them are telling the truth or not.

Stay on topic!

Actually, the subject was something that supposedly already happened, not something that "could" happen, but since you bring it up, yes, it "could" happen, but as Judge Judy says in such a brutally dismissive tone, "Shoulda, coulda, woulda!" She uses this phrase to draw people out of their imaginary reveries and back into reality, as I am attempting to do with you.

I agree that the rolls were improbable, because I haven't seen any proof that they actually happened, and since there is no proof that they happened, then you are wrong, and their probability was 0%. However, even if they had occurred, then you are still wrong, and in that case their probability was 100%.

[john9blue]

I agree that the rolls were improbable, because I haven't seen any proof that they actually happened, and since there is no proof that they happened, then you are wrong, and their probability was 0%. However, even if they had occurred, then you are still wrong, and in that case their probability was 100%.

So if you don't see any proof, then they can't possibly have happened? What if I told you I'm drinking Snapple right now? Of course, you have no proof, so I can't possibly be drinking Snapple. What was I thinking?

You live in your own little world, klobber. I suppose all those people you cheated points out of don't have feelings either... they're just pixels on a screen to you. It's too bad there are people that are this self-centered.

[KLOBBER]

I agree that the rolls were improbable, because I haven't seen any proof that they actually happened, and since there is no proof that they happened, then you are wrong, and their probability was 0%. However, even if they had occurred, then you are still wrong, and in that case their probability was 100%.

So if you don't see any proof, then they can't possibly have happened? What if I told you I'm drinking Snapple right now? Of course, you have no proof, so I can't possibly be drinking Snapple. What was I thinking?

You live in your own little world, klobber. I suppose all those people you cheated points out of don't have feelings either... they're just pixels on a screen to you. It's too bad there are people that are this self-centered.

Sounds to me like you're drinking something, but it's not Snapple.

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Also, this thread is about dice, so keep on topic.

[Woodruff]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

[KLOBBER]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

There is neither, as I have never cheated.

Also, this thread is about dice, not your cheating, so stay on topic.

[Timminz]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

KLOBBER didn't cheat. He simply employed a tactic that was so against the spirit of competition, that the powers that be made a rule to stop others from employing the same tactic in the future. One thing he has been smart enough to do, was to change his tactics once they became illegal.

You don't need to rely on the dice, if your opponents don't play.

[john9blue]

It's true that according to the rules of the site, klobber didn't cheat. I wasn't looking to start a discussion on that because I think we are all familiar with klob's tactics. My point was that he doesn't really give two shits about anyone else besides himself, and that he has a sad life if he considers what he does here as an accomplishment.

[Timminz]

You mean, "The Dice", right?

[ppgangster]

He simply employed a tactic that was so against the spirit of competition, that the powers that be made a rule to stop others from employing the same tactic in the future. One thing he has been smart enough to do, was to change his tactics once they became illegal.

I would have liked to see that!

[KLOBBER]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

KLOBBER didn't cheat. He simply employed a tactic that was so against the spirit of competition, that the powers that be made a rule to stop others from employing the same tactic in the future. One thing he has been smart enough to do, was to change his tactics once they became illegal.

You don't need to rely on the dice, if your opponents don't play.

Employing tactics on a game site is the very central principle of game competition.

I don't need to rely on dice because I rely on skill and intelligence instead.

[Woodruff]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

There is neither, as I have never cheated.

I didn't say you cheated. To say such a thing would require proof, which I clearly stated there is none (that I am aware of). I said there is evidence that you may be playing against the spirit of the rules even now.

Also, this thread is about dice, not your cheating, so stay on topic.

My cheating? Excellent...what evidence do you have for my cheating, KLOBBER? I'm quite curious. Or is this where you simply don't respond again, knowing you have no viable answer?

As well, I didn't alter from the topic, I merely followed an existing chain which you were active in.

[maniacmath17]

Since the dice are unpredictable, you will NEVER know the "chances" beforehand, under any circumstances, and neither will anyone else. ...and guess what? The dice designers WANTED IT THAT WAY.

You've already lost all credibility in this thread KLOBBER. Based on that statement, you don't even know what the chances are to roll a 6 on a single throw. How could you possibly engage in any discussion where we talk about MULTIPLE dice throws?

Either learn the basics of calculating odds, or stop trolling this thread.

[KLOBBER]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

There is neither, as I have never cheated.

I didn't say you cheated. To say such a thing would require proof, which I clearly stated there is none (that I am aware of). I said there is evidence that you may be playing against the spirit of the rules even now.

Also, this thread is about dice, not your cheating, so stay on topic.

My cheating? Excellent...what evidence do you have for my cheating, KLOBBER? I'm quite curious. Or is this where you simply don't respond again, knowing you have no viable answer?

As well, I didn't alter from the topic, I merely followed an existing chain which you were active in.

You think you're good at semantic games, but you're not. Report me, and we'll all see that nothing comes of it.

Back to the subject, which is dice.

[Woodruff]

Also, I never cheated, and I have never been found guilty of cheating. Go ahead and report me, and you'll also be disappointed, because I have never cheated and will never be found to have ever cheated. You need to get some evidence before you falsely accuse someone, and you have none.

Incorrect. There absolutely, certainly IS evidence. There simply isn't proof.

There is neither, as I have never cheated.

I didn't say you cheated. To say such a thing would require proof, which I clearly stated there is none (that I am aware of). I said there is evidence that you may be playing against the spirit of the rules even now.

Also, this thread is about dice, not your cheating, so stay on topic.

My cheating? Excellent...what evidence do you have for my cheating, KLOBBER? I'm quite curious. Or is this where you simply don't respond again, knowing you have no viable answer?

As well, I didn't alter from the topic, I merely followed an existing chain which you were active in.

You think you're good at semantic games, but you're not. Report me, and we'll all see that nothing comes of it.

Report you for what? I haven't seen anything from you in this thread worthy of reporting you for.

[KLOBBER]

Since the dice are unpredictable, you will NEVER know the "chances" beforehand, under any circumstances, and neither will anyone else. ...and guess what? The dice designers WANTED IT THAT WAY.

You've already lost all credibility in this thread KLOBBER. Based on that statement, you don't even know what the chances are to roll a 6 on a single throw. How could you possibly engage in any discussion where we talk about MULTIPLE dice throws?

Either learn the basics of calculating odds, or stop trolling this thread.

Since the dice are designed to be unpredictable, and they are just that, they are perfect as they are.

Nobody knows beforehand what the chances are, since the dice are unpredictable, just as they are designed to be, and you have proven nothing but the fact that they are unpredictable. Thank you for your help; you've done a better job of this than any other dice complainer I've seen.

[KLOBBER]

Report you for what? I haven't seen anything from you in this thread worthy of reporting you for.

I have never done anything on this site that warrants reporting to Admin, so that question is indeed a stumper.

However, since this thread is about dice, not your cheating, you can be sure that you will be reported.