Statistical Anomaly -- You will never witness this
-
It took me 237 standard packs before I pulled a diamond (Paul Goldschmidt, sold for 10k).
Let's do some math; in the 375k cost of those packs, I had a 1:50 chance of each individual pack containing a diamond.
Or a 49/50 (.98) chance that they wouldn't contain a diamond.
Compound statistics tells us we can multiply the probability of independent events to find a compound probability. For example, .98^2=.96 meaning that if you opened 2 packs there is a 96% chance you won't get a diamond (which makes sense, it's two packs). Or in 10 packs, .98^10=.82, there is a 18% chance of a diamond in 10 packs, not great, but almost 1/5 of every 10 pack bundle will have a diamond.
How about my first 236 packs before a diamond? .98^236=0.0085. As a percentage we move the decimal place over so there was a .85% chance of this happening. I had a 99.15% chance of getting a diamond but I didn't. Statistics don't care about your feelings, and that stat changed the moment I opened pack number one. Each event was independent, the game doesn't care if I'm 200 packs in and am "due", the next pack is always 1:50, the game doesn't care if you just pulled Trout, 1:50 on the next pack. And as I saw this game show an ounce of sympathy on pack 237, with my first diamond, following a streak that happens less than 1% of the time, I saw the blue high diamond lights, before being greeted with a pull of 10,000 stub value, a small reward for the 375k lost.
-
But did I really lose 375,000 stubs if I got to witness a streak of a mathematical anomaly before my eyes? During those last 20 or so packs, I was almost rooting for myself not to get a diamond, just to witness the event at hand. Had I gotten through 150 packs, .98^250 = .0064, I would've witnessed an event with a .64% chance of happening, and I could have kept ripping to watch the math unfold in exponential decay.
Even so, the odds of me going 236 packs without a diamond (.0085) and then only pulling one on pack 237 (.02) is .0085*.02 = .00017. And then the odds that my last 13 packs would not have a diamond (.98^13) were .76.
.76*.00017= .000013 or a .0013% chance. This sequence will only happen 1 out of every 100,000 times it is tried, and it undoubtedly is not something that most players try (opening 250 packs and only pulling a diamond on #237). I did something that you will never do, and while I lost 360,000 stubs doing it, nobody can ever take this away from me, and will likely ever replicate the events which took place. You can tell me that that is bad pack luck, but that individual sequence, is something that will likely never be replicated.
-
I mean technically speaking, you didn't lose 375k, because while you didn't pull diamonds, you pulled other stuff of less value
-
Way too much math there, but my pack luck has been horrible this year. My best pull all year is Corbin Burnes. Sold for 35k at the time. I’ve pulled Pete Alonso like 5 times. Other than that, very few diamonds at all.
-
@kpdevine_xbl said in Statistical Anomaly -- You will never witness this:
But did I really lose 375,000 stubs if I got to witness a streak of a mathematical anomaly before my eyes? During those last 20 or so packs, I was almost rooting for myself not to get a diamond, just to witness the event at hand. Had I gotten through 150 packs, .98^250 = .0064, I would've witnessed an event with a .64% chance of happening, and I could have kept ripping to watch the math unfold in exponential decay.
Even so, the odds of me going 236 packs without a diamond (.0085) and then only pulling one on pack 237 (.02) is .0085*.02 = .00017. And then the odds that my last 13 packs would not have a diamond (.98^13) were .76.
.76*.00017= .000013 or a .0013% chance. This sequence will only happen 1 out of every 100,000 times it is tried, and it undoubtedly is not something that most players try (opening 250 packs and only pulling a diamond on #237). I did something that you will never do, and while I lost 360,000 stubs doing it, nobody can ever take this away from me, and will likely ever replicate the events which took place. You can tell me that that is bad pack luck, but that individual sequence, is something that will likely never be replicated.
You've given me something to shoot for. I've never counted packs between diamonds before...now I'm going to start.
If you look at how the odds turned out, they are still better than winning the lottery. Maybe you should play
(just kidding, no statistician plays the lotto). -
Or.....NEVER EVER buy packs.
-
@kpdevine_xbl said in Statistical Anomaly -- You will never witness this:
But did I really lose 375,000 stubs if I got to witness a streak of a mathematical anomaly before my eyes? During those last 20 or so packs, I was almost rooting for myself not to get a diamond, just to witness the event at hand. Had I gotten through 150 packs, .98^250 = .0064, I would've witnessed an event with a .64% chance of happening, and I could have kept ripping to watch the math unfold in exponential decay.
Even so, the odds of me going 236 packs without a diamond (.0085) and then only pulling one on pack 237 (.02) is .0085*.02 = .00017. And then the odds that my last 13 packs would not have a diamond (.98^13) were .76.
.76*.00017= .000013 or a .0013% chance. This sequence will only happen 1 out of every 100,000 times it is tried, and it undoubtedly is not something that most players try (opening 250 packs and only pulling a diamond on #237). I did something that you will never do, and while I lost 360,000 stubs doing it, nobody can ever take this away from me, and will likely ever replicate the events which took place. You can tell me that that is bad pack luck, but that individual sequence, is something that will likely never be replicated.
Pretty sure myself and others could do it too( a dig against our luck not you kieran)
-
"Only" needed Trout Acuna, Degrom, Mad Max and Tatis to finish live series. Today i finally just spent stubs on Trout to finish AL. Decided to do a whew thats over with and bought 1 pack. Acuna! Just used rest of stubs on Mets down to 20k and just need Tatis..almost to Randy.
-
Statistically speaking, 0.85% WILL witness this…per your math. And yea, don’t buy packs my man.
-
@bob_loblaw1984 said in Statistical Anomaly -- You will never witness this:
Statistically speaking, 0.85% WILL witness this…per your math. And yea, don’t buy packs my man.
I’m more talking the .000013
-
I once went well over 100 Ballin packs with no diamonds. Between mid 2020 and into 2021. Didnt buy any those were just from programs and what not.
-
@kpdevine_xbl said in Statistical Anomaly -- You will never witness this:
It took me 237 standard packs before I pulled a diamond (Paul Goldschmidt, sold for 10k).
Let's do some math; in the 375k cost of those packs, I had a 1:50 chance of each individual pack containing a diamond.
Or a 49/50 (.98) chance that they wouldn't contain a diamond.
Compound statistics tells us we can multiply the probability of independent events to find a compound probability. For example, .98^2=.96 meaning that if you opened 2 packs there is a 96% chance you won't get a diamond (which makes sense, it's two packs). Or in 10 packs, .98^10=.82, there is a 18% chance of a diamond in 10 packs, not great, but almost 1/5 of every 10 pack bundle will have a diamond.
How about my first 236 packs before a diamond? .98^236=0.0085. As a percentage we move the decimal place over so there was a .85% chance of this happening. I had a 99.15% chance of getting a diamond but I didn't. Statistics don't care about your feelings, and that stat changed the moment I opened pack number one. Each event was independent, the game doesn't care if I'm 200 packs in and am "due", the next pack is always 1:50, the game doesn't care if you just pulled Trout, 1:50 on the next pack. And as I saw this game show an ounce of sympathy on pack 237, with my first diamond, following a streak that happens less than 1% of the time, I saw the blue high diamond lights, before being greeted with a pull of 10,000 stub value, a small reward for the 375k lost.
I went over 300+ before I got a diamond. Is there a pity system like other games?
-
Compounding stats don't take effect in any form of gambling. It's actually called the gamblers fallacy, and there's a bunch of information you can find on it.
The basic idea is just because you didn't pull a diamond in your first pack, your odds aren't somehow better in your next pack. The pack odds aren't somehow 1 in 49 now, or 1 in 40 after 10 packs. The odds remain 1 in 50 for every pack.
-
All packs: 34 out of 1189
BIAG: 3 of 79 (including an active 0 for 34 streak)
Headliners: 5 of 95 (including only 1 actual headliner pull) -
I have always doubted the 1:50 odds on these packs because there is no way I have seen those kinds of results on packs in this game. I am intrigued to keep track though going forward because I think I have seen worse streaks than yours. I play Madden a lot as well and people complaining about Madden pack odds are spoiled... because the odds of getting value from packs here is way worse and has been since I started playing a few years ago. I like opening packs, but learned not to spend a single Stub on them in this game... you will lose stubs 99.9 % of the time on standard packs.
-
Just for curiosity would like to know if the packs were all saved up reward packs or packs bought with stubs???
-
A admin locked this topic on
