What Would It Take???

[edog743]

O.K sorry I asked

[New2vp]

This might be over simplifying it a bit but all the numbers and all the data is going to do you know good with the RNG. Are we not all just talking about a timing issue? You can play every hand perfectly, play on the right paytable etc. But if you do not hit the button at the precise time you need to you are not going to get the card or cards you need. Am I way off base here?This is basically right, but I think Frank is trying to set up a facility for helping people test whether the cards they get are distributed the way they are supposed to be or some other way.If you are happy that the cards are distributed randomly, you may not be interested; but if you are suspicious that you are not getting a fair shake, Frank's utility might give you some additional insight.Edit:  Speaking of timing!  I didn't see the previous two messages before typing what was above.

[New2vp]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freevpFRE ... ?o=1Thanks s-man, for the help.  It looks like the vp Administrator SAID he was moving the thread, but just moved a few messages, while others are still on vpFREE.  That being said, I could still NOT locate the message that I remember being exceptionally well written.  However, paraphrasing, one of its key messages was "You cannot form valid conclusions by running a test on data that caused you to be suspicious in the first place."  The order must be:  Form your hypothesis, then do the test, interpret the results.  It shouldn't be Ready, Fire, Aim!

[shadowman]

[QUOTE=shadowman]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freevpFRE ... ?o=1Thanks s-man, for the help.  It looks like the vp Administrator SAID he was moving the thread, but just moved a few messages, while others are still on vpFREE.  That being said, I could still NOT locate the message that I remember being exceptionally well written.  However, paraphrasing, one of its key messages was "You cannot form valid conclusions by running a test on data that caused you to be suspicious in the first place."  The order must be:  Form your hypothesis, then do the test, interpret the results.  It shouldn't be Ready, Fire, Aim!
[/QUOTE]

 
If you remove the first "free" above it will take you to vpfree. Then click on the first "what would it take???" comment. At the bottom will be the chain of posts where you may find the comment you are looking for.

[Rebus]

It looks like the vp Administrator SAID he was moving the thread, but just moved a few messages, while others are still on vpFREE.  That being said, I could still NOT locate the message that I remember being exceptionally well written.  However, paraphrasing, one of its key messages was "You cannot form valid conclusions by running a test on data that caused you to be suspicious in the first place."  The order must be:  Form your hypothesis, then do the test, interpret the results.  It shouldn't be Ready, Fire, Aim!

I guess you missed the admin's post moving the thread back to the main forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE/message/119875 I remember the post you descirbed but can't find it readily. There are many, many posts in that thread.

[New2vp]

Thanks, shadowman and rebus.  Yes, you're right rebus, I missed the 2nd change of heart.  I feel sorry for the administrator there; I know he means well.  It's too bad that they have to devise all those rules for a few (or maybe) one poster.S-man, I did try just what you said after you sent me the other hint with freevpfree and wasn't able to locate it after a fairly thorough search.  I'm glad rebus says he recalls the post, so I know I'm not imagining it.It's probably most important that Frank either sees that post or puts in some words such as my warning or his utility could possibly serve to foster more disinformation along with the clarity that it could provide.  Of course, with thousands of video poker players, every day there is someone having a streak in the poorer one ten-thousandth of the distribution, and it would be a shame if they used to hindsight to make erroneous conclusions.

[Frank Kneeland]

Hypothesis: I am better at math than New2VPData: New2VP's recent postsConclusion: Hypothesis rejectedConfidence level: 100%

[Frank Kneeland]

@New2VPSeriously thank you for all your input. I'll be working on the basic data gathering forms and data entry sheet next week. To accommodate for all the most popular games should take me several days. Once I've got that done I'd like you look it over and then we can decide the best ways to process the data once it's entered.If possible I'd like to include tests other than just Chi Squared.Everything will be open source and open for contribution by all. You can even take what I've done and improve it and post it yourselves separately, or I'll happily put your versions on my website if you ask me to with appropriate credit where credit is due.Don't think what I'm making will be a finished product, think of it as a good starting point and please feel free to improve it and contribute.~FK

[Frank Kneeland]

Thanks, shadowman and rebus.  Yes, you're right rebus, I missed the 2nd change of heart.  I feel sorry for the administrator there; I know he means well.  It's too bad that they have to devise all those rules for a few (or maybe) one poster.S-man, I did try just what you said after you sent me the other hint with freevpfree and wasn't able to locate it after a fairly thorough search.  I'm glad rebus says he recalls the post, so I know I'm not imagining it.It's probably most important that Frank either sees that post or puts in some words such as my warning or his utility could possibly serve to foster more disinformation along with the clarity that it could provide.  Of course, with thousands of video poker players, every day there is someone having a streak in the poorer one ten-thousandth of the distribution, and it would be a shame if they used to hindsight to make erroneous conclusions.

I did not read that post, it seems to have gotten deleted, but I am well aware of the phenomenon and the reasons for the test forward methodology. If you remember correctly it was the topic of one of my BIG posts a few months ago in relation to the bias we see in forum posts (those for whom things go as planed, don't post). It's basically the same concept. So have no fear, I got this one.~FK

[moneyla]

Gee... if one of you guys finds machines are not truly 100% random, does that make RS correct?