Hey all, just wondering are the tournament draws totally random? It's just that in the latest 9 ball speedy, if you ranked people by tournament wins then in round 3, 1 played 2, 3 played 4 and 5 played 6, with the new 1 playing 3 in the next round. Is this purely coincidental or is there an initiative to let less experienced players have an easier route to the final? Just curious

It is random, sorted.

It is random yes, however i would say that i have noticed the better players often get drawn against less accomplished/experienced players for atleast the first two rounds... strange

Edited at 19:03 Thu 10/07/08 (BST)

Contradicted yourself there, random, end of.

How can you try and make it an end of a thread when one you're not a mod and two people might like to discuss this???

If you're not intrested... don't post!

Edited at 19:04 Thu 10/07/08 (BST)

It's nothing strange about it. There are simply many many more low rank players than there are high ones, so of course most of the time the high rankers will not be drawn against each other.

If you put 1 red stone and 9 blue ones in a bag, then make a random pick, 9 in 10 times that is gonna be blue. In short, 90% of the time.

That's not far from the real ratio between tourny players either (depending on where you draw the line between high and low obviously), so in short, for every tourny where two top players meet in the first round, there's gonna be 9 where they don't.

Not entirely true, there are more factors to that statistic, but the point is simple: Random is random.

Sorry toppers, there is only one valid answer though, no.

you do make a lot of sense jan.. and i may have been unclear with my previous post... yes i understand it is random however it was an observation over quite a few games that i was pointing out Nothing in that was intended to disagree with it being random.

Also, it's common human nature to expect too perfect distribution of something random. When people see streaks, they tend to over-react. Always keep in mind that the data set you are working with is often pretty limited, and that streaks and anomalies are what makes it random in the first place.

A perfectly distributed selection (with no apparent patterns at all) isn't random at all - it is on the contrary very much predictable ;)

i'm confused

The draw is random... that's all you need to know

i likw when people debate

Statistics is a complex topic so no worries there

The point was that humans tend to see patterns where none exist.

If you draw one million random numbers between 1 and 10, you will more than likely find 11111 somewhere in that line of numbers. That does not mean that 1 is over-represented or that the random generator is somehow broken. It is on the contrary perfectly normal, and what makes random.... well, random

If we look some more at that example... 1 million numbers...

The number 1 should occur about 100000 times (one tenth of a million, since 10 possible numbers for each draw). For every time 1 occurs, there is another 10% chance the next number will also be 1. For every combination of 11, there is yet another 10% chance of the next number also being one (for a total of 1% change of a 111 combo)

So in a line of a million numbers, you will find about 10000 occurances of "111". Yet another 1000 of those will be "1111".

So if you have a random generator where you see no such streaks at all, the generator is broken

Any step you take to avoid a random result from producing any given combination means being less random.

also you probably remember the better players as they are in the later stages of more tournaments so there names are better known so if you see them playing it will catch your attention more then normal,

So in a line of a million numbers, you will find about 10000 occurances of "111". Yet another 1000 of those will be "1111".

So if you have a random generator where you see no such streaks at all, the generator is broken

I am assuming the smiley face is there so as not to mislead people since what you are saying is technically incorrect

If you have a random generator each number drawn is totally an independent event not influenced by anything that happens before or after. Clearly the figures you quote correctly relate to probability however there can be no certainty. Therefore you cannot say that if you drew 1 million numbers you will find about 10000 occurences of 111 or you will find about 1000 occurences of 1111 because there is also the possibility (a much lower statistical probability granted) that you could find none - and that wouldnt necessarily mean your random number generator was broken.

It's not incorrect at all.

It is *statistically* what will occur. That does not mean it's "guided" in any way, it merely means that over a large enough amount of data, that is the outcome you will eventually, on average, see.




Probability is what it is all about - never said otherwise ;)

I was just explaining why it's not surprising to see such streaks in a large enough data sample. That can't be turned around to imply that such streaks are guaranteed in any way. The likelyhood tho, goes towards 1.0 the larger the data sample gets.





Never did :D But as long as you make sure to include the "about" - then yes you can in fact say that ;)

It's just a statistical average outcome - given a large enough data sample.

Ironically, even perfect randomness IS predictable to a certain point, given a large enough data sample :D

For example, you can guess the total amount of "1"s in a set of a million very very accurately ;)




Quite correct. That likelyhood tho, as the data sample grows, goes toward 0

(probably not the correct terminology, forgive me but never done statistical math in English before lol)

Edited at 00:02 Sat 12/07/08 (BST)

I think you will find that I didn't disagree with any of the mathematical/statistical theory that you put forward.

However the part I quoted in bold (accepting completely the fact that its not in your first language) is technically wrong. To use the word will, even in conjunction with about, implied a certainty in the outcome of what you are saying which when you are talking in terms of probabilities, and a random number generator, cannot be the case - no matter how large the sample or how near to a probability of 1.0 you get.

You can say, for example, that 'you may' or 'you could' or 'you might expect to find about 10000 occurences of 111 in a series' or else you could say that 'the probability is that you will find about 10000 occurences of 111 in a series' as those are not statements of a definite outcome.

It's a minor and subtle difference but is completely vital to conveying the correct meaning of your explanation for those reading it.

Probability is what it is all about - never said otherwise ;)

the point being that you never mentioned it at all which is why I did simply to assist a reader in understanding that this was the particular branch of maths/statistics that you were seeking to explain.

ps Please could you show me how you format your posts to get a greater content in each one? Thanks

Edited at 08:06 Sat 12/07/08 (BST)

I think only moderators can do that arcade

Thanks Jan you've explained pretty much everything so i have no further questions

You are a bit too caught up on the term certainty. It simply means 100.0% probability, something you never achieve in this context.

BUT, here's the important part: You DO reach 99.9999999999999999999999999%. That's only a matter of having a large enough data sample

The larger the data set, the closer you 100.0 you get, and even a fairly limited data set quickly moves into the 99.99% range.

Yes, there will always be a minute level of exceptions to the probable outcome, but again, understanding mathematical limit values (again uncertain of the correct math term here in English), the probability of those exceptions occuring heads toward 0.0% as the data sample grows toward infinite.