"Nowadays, researchers can access a wealth of software packages that can readily analyse data and output the results of complex statistical tests. While these are powerful resources, they also open the door to people without a full statistical understanding to misunderstand some of the subtleties within a dataset and to draw wildly incorrect conclusions.

Here are a few common statistical fallacies and paradoxes and how they can lead to results that are counterintuitive and, in many cases, simply wrong."


https://getpocket.com/explore/item/paradoxes-of-probability-and-other-statistical-strangeness?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Here is an old axion....".There are liars, damned liars, and statistics"

P.S.  I think if we do not have a therapeutic in the next 2 - 3 months, which reduces the virus to a vey bad 2 week case of the flu, ( forget a vaccine, that's a year away unless a miracle occurs ) then we all may be toast...police, firemen, truck drivers delivering food, people stocking the shelves in grocery stores, drivers and workers  for Amazon and other online delivery companies, meat and chicken processing plants   etc etc etc will all eventually become infected...and that's when the survival/ mob mentality will take over and don't expect to see any food in your local grocery store....hope it doesn't happen.

Also be careful of any offers any casino will use to try to get you into a casino....they will do anything to get you in ...caveat emptor.

I was not looking at the article reference C-19, etc.

I thought there was a nice comparison on how something might or might not be applied and as well, where the event comes from and why.  Things most all do not even think about when it comes to:

Statistics
Paradoxes
Fallacy
Probability

Thanks, Alrelax

https://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=18814.0

this is a good topic for high and lo

Sometimes I wonder how the fk Alrelax can provide interesting threads here like this.

as. 

Misunderstanding math, statistics and other scientific concepts or making them go fallacious is a common practice, specially for gamblers.
The most serious ones here preach math can't beat any casino game since it has a house edge. Such people rely upon their own set of assumptions that everybody will bet 1 unit or a constant sum only and thereby lose in the long run, due to the house edge with either less wins than losses or house fees on wins(as in on banker in baccarat). For those math geniuses I have martingale, labouchere and Fibonacci as answers. These can beat any scenario. Now they will come up jumping but table limit will not let you. Well, that is another issue but by altering their bet sizes, they can beat any session mathematically.
             One of the most known and self proclaimed math genius (who has been muted here) tried to convince me as a mathematical concept. Since roulette is a game of negative expectations, sum of negatives will always be negative. nonsense, will there be no positive figures in my wins to add and how can one say that positive ones will always be subdued by the negative ones?
             While I claim to sustain even the worst ever witnessed or even worse cases and win thereafter with average wins in further sessions, I can only laugh on them.