[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
From OP:Is this correct? Since the probability cannot be reduced 0%, even with 0.0000276% chance of getting 20 reds in a row we will and do get 20 reds in a row. Does it mean that there is even a possibility of 100 reds in a row? Or even 1000 reds in a row?

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How can you not factor in infinity when reading the initial post? That's assuming you've read it, however. To say that the probability of winning 3 powerball lotteries in a row is equal to 0 is ignorant. I assume you've never taken calculus or covered any course material dealing with limits?

[/ QUOTE ]
When I read about the probability of unusual and unfortunate events in a "gamblers" forum, I assume it is related to risk tolerance. When you introduce "infinite" trials, you can show that any finite bankroll will come to ruin even in +EV games. This is then "corrected" by introducing the concept of the "infinite bankroll" ...

Siegmund hit the nail on the head.

You think that it makes sense to factor infinity into this problem of 1000 red spins in a series, in a game that at best can produce 100 trials per hour, in an effort to prove that it can and will happen. You then say that it is ignorant to disregard a 1:147,107,962^3 event in a game that provides two trials per week.

I can appreciate the comments in the thread that note these unusual events might happen in the first series of play, but so what? People take risks of greater magnitude all the time, flying, pressing a brake pedal, walking on a sidewalk, etc. Put in perspective, are you suggesting that what we consider to be acceptable risk with our life on a moment to moment basis would be an unacceptable risk with our fortune? Because "it can and will happen"?

Even casinos recognize how unusual the events are from the OP -- that's why they've set limits. They recognize that even their substantial, yet "finite" bankrolls may not survive the non-occurrence of these events.