The Law
of Averages
The
law of averages, or correctly named the law of large numbers,
is one of the most misunderstood concepts of gambling and mathematics. Punters more often than not use it in an incorrect context.
Many pokie machine players believe that if the machine hasn't paid anything reasonable of late, then it is 'due'. Consequently they continue gambling believing that the next score is getting closer and closer with every spin.
Unfortunately
this misunderstanding of the law of averages is the downfall of a lot of gamblers. Tied into the law of averages is the similar theory of regression to the mean. It is understandable why some punters misunderstand what it means.
The
theory of the law of large numbers (law of averages) states
that a sample average will get closer to a population average
the more you sample. Its often quoted, to make more
sense, that that ratio of wins and losses will become closer
to what is expected. To show you how this works, lets
look at an example.
Suppose
we are flipping a coin. We know that the coin has a 50%
chance of landing on heads or tails. But suppose
we have already thrown it 50 times and we recorded 35 heads
and only 15 tails. Gamblers who misunderstand the law of averages
will believe that as there have been more heads in the sample
that tails is more likely
to lob in the future.
This
of course is completely incorrect. Each toss of the coin is
independent. In other words, it doesnt
matter how many heads was previously tossed; the probability
of a tail is still 50%. The coin isn't aware of what the previous spin was. Similarly with pokie machines; it
doesnt matter if a particular machine has won or lost
recently, the return is always going to be negative. The
same applies with most casino games. Just because six reds
have being spun in a row in roulette, it doesn't mean that
it is more or less likely for the seven spin to be a
red.
So
how do gamblers get this theory completely mixed up? Well
lets go back to our example that we have thrown 35
heads and 15 tails. This means 70% of our tosses have been
for heads, which is well above the 50% that it should theoretically
average. But according to the theory of large numbers, the
more times we toss the coin, the more likely the ratio of
heads to tails will get closer to 50%. This does not mean
that more tails will be tossed however as most gamblers
would conclude.
If
we were to toss the coin another 950 times and recorded
500 heads and 450 tails, then the ratio would now be
. So even though
still more heads have been thrown than tails after the initial
50 throws, the ratio gets closer to 50% as the law of large
numbers suggest.
So what has this therefore got to do with gambling? Absolutely
nothing. Essentially the law of averages assumes
that you know the average to start off with. In other words
we know that the probability of a coin landing on heads
is 50%. But never in sports gambling do you know the probability
over the long term of a reoccurring event! Further to that,
sports matches are not independent of each other which the
law of averages assumes!
The law of averages has absolutely nothing to do with
sports and horse racing gambling.
It
does however have practicalities in casinos because
we know the probability of success in reoccurring casino
gambling (such as betting on red or black in roulette) it can
be applied here. However, sorry to say, that there is no
way in which the law of averages can help one gain an advantage
over the house and profit over the long term. So to put
it frankly, the law of averages for all gamblers should
be put away in the back shelf never to be touched again.
Just remember that all casino games (with the exception
of card games) and pokie machines etc. are independent.
It doesnt matter what happened before, the probability
of an event (winning) will not change, and will always be
in the casinos favour.
Related
to the theory of the law of averages, but still quite interestingly
different is the theory of regression to the mean.
Matt Elliott
To discuss this article on the Punting Ace forums, click here.
This article is
protected by international Copyright © Elk Publications
Pty Ltd October 2004 Please contact
if you wish to reproduce this article elsewhere.