Crisis of Faith

[Michael J. Sykes]

You are mistaken. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

-MJS

[daryn]

if free will does not exist, then everything that happens in the world was predetermined. for instance, the dealer shuffles the deck and deals cards out. the order of these cards were already predetermined, and there's no reason to believe they are random.

this is only if free will does not exist.

[Michael J. Sykes]

Then in your view, the existence of free will would be evidence of randomness?

If there was no free will, I do not think this would logically preclude the possibility that events are determined by a combination of random and orderly processes.

-MJS

[CrisBrown]

Hi Michael,

When I was in law school, in the professors' office wing there was a staircase with letters on each stair: A, B, C, D, and F. The joke was that these were the "grading stairs" ... the professors just tossed the final exams down the stairwell and wherever yours landed, that was your grade for the class. (Law school courses typically base the entire grade on the final exam.)

In my first semester, I aced all of my exams, and while I felt fairly confident, I was extremely surprised. So when my faculty advisor asked about it, I said I just got lucky with the grading stairs. He asked why I said that, and I said ... "Hey, grades are a crap shoot."

To my surprise, he nodded and said "From your perspective, that's true." He went on to explain that we students had no way to know a given professor's standards for grading a given exam, and when you don't know how a result is arrived at, then it does appear random from the outside.

In fact, the deal of cards and the roll of dice is not random. With actual cards, it's determined by the shuffle, a decidedly non-random though non-predictable process. Online, it's determined by various factors (depending on the site), typically involving "noisy diodes," time of users' mouse clicks, and algorithms. With dice, it's determined by inertia, kinetic energy, surface resistance and reflectivity, and gravity.

They're not "random," they're simply "unpredictable." Which, for all practical purposes, is as good as "random."

Cris

[adios]

"My question is for those of you who are true believers. Have you ever experienced a run of cards so unbelievably horrible and prolonged that it shook your faith in randomness?"

I would think at some point on the left hand side of the bell curve most would lose faith in randomness. I'm referring a negative swing that happens very, very, very rarely though. So my question to you would be what kind of horrible bad run of cards are we talking about in statistical terms?

[Shaun]

[ QUOTE ]
gee, shaun - you got issues [ QUOTE ]


LOL. This comment illustrates exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. I'm afraid I have better things to do than do a search just to see if a poster's needling remark is out of character . To me, "suck it up" sounds like a smart-a**, snide remark. This isn't RGP. It is a strategy forum. If "suck it up" is a strategy tip then perhaps it would be better to explain it in a more friendly way. But of course, anyone who reads such comments knows what they're about- being an a-hole.

[Michael J. Sykes]

[ QUOTE ]
I would think at some point on the left hand side of the bell curve most would lose faith in randomness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.

[ QUOTE ]
...So my question to you would be what kind of horrible bad run of cards are we talking about in statistical terms?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since I have not truly lost the faith, I have not attempted to quantify my bad luck (though I could try with my pokertracker data). Besides, to do so would be a no win proposition; any such report would be likely to elicit "that's not so bad," "you must play bad," or " I don't believe you" responses. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Regards,

MJS

[stripsqueez]

since you ask...

talk of standard deviation is a fine example of science overtaking reality in my view

what is acheived by a knowledge of standard deviation ? - the answer i expect to get is that standard deviation helps a poker player understand whats happening when he/she goes on an extended loosing streak (other things too but its used in a bad beat context for this purpose) - why does a poker player require that understanding whilst experiencing the loosing streak ?

presumably the understanding in a scientific setting of why he/she is experiencing the loosing streak is comforting - the need is an emotional need - bad beats are an emotional, personal thing - ironic then that science is supposed to comfort the person experiencing a loosing streak

don't get me wrong - standard deviation is a helpful tool in understanding the game but it is not understanding the game to understand standard deviation - playing the game is understanding the game - ideally i would have such a profound understanding of the game that bad beats occured without notice such was my expectation of having them - not true and it will never be true because you never master a good game

the path to a profound understanding ?

suck it up

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[daryn]

just because i say this: if there is no free will, then there is no randomness to the universe.


doesn't mean i mean this: if there IS free will, then there IS randomness to the universe

i should hope you understand this


also, i'm pretty sure i said that if there was no free will, then there is no need for things to be random. that's different than saying that things are not random.

[Shaun]

[ QUOTE ]
since you ask...

...ideally i would have such a profound understanding of the game that bad beats occured without notice such was my expectation of having them - not true and it will never be true because you never master a good game

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[/ QUOTE ]

Well said. That probably feels better, too.