Horse race:tilting the possibility

  • Thread starter Thread starter FilupSmith
  • Start date Start date
FilupSmith
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
So, today we were studying the introduction of probability. For me it is fairly simple (for now).

My question is something we discussed during class today.

When betting on a horse before a horse race - say, a race of 5 horses, the odds ARE NOT 1/5 because the odds are not equal (eg. one horse may be faster).

So, what about if you placed a bet AFTER the race, assuming you don't know anything about any of the horses nor the outcome?

The way I think about this is that before the race, the horses had different chances of winning - tilting the possibility of winning or losing, and that after the race, although they HAD altering chances, the new 'guessing' chance is now indeed 1/5, is it not?

I'm not sure what to think, so I hope you guys can help :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In my opinion it would be wrong to consider finding probability of something once you know its outcome.

What is the probability of 2 of heart coming from a well shuffled 52 cards? That would be 1/52. Once a card is chosen there is no question of probability.

Though what can be said even after the card is chosen (irrespective of 2 of heart comes or not) is that the probability of 2 of heart coming was 1/52.
 
FilupSmith said:
So, today we were studying the introduction of probability. For me it is fairly simple (for now).

My question is something we discussed during class today.

When betting on a horse before a horse race - say, a race of 5 horses, the odds ARE NOT 1/5 because the odds are not equal (eg. one horse may be faster).
If you know something that changes the 1/5 probability for each, that should be applied. If you don't know anything, then 1/5 is a good guess
So, what about if you placed a bet AFTER the race, assuming you don't know anything about any of the horses nor the outcome?

The way I think about this is that before the race, the horses had different chances of winning - tilting the possibility of winning or losing, and that after the race, although they HAD altering chances, the new 'guessing' chance is now indeed 1/5, is it not?
If you have no new information, there is no reason to change your original guess. That is true regardless of what you knew before the race.
Probability theory is best looked at as "guessing information" theory. You make a guess based on your current information, regardless of when the experiment took place. A tossed fair coin has a 0.5 probability of heads until you know more about it -- even if it was tossed earlier. There is a subject called Bayes' Theory that tells you how to adjust probabilities for your guess as you get more information or hints.
 
You are talking about two different things.

FilupSmith said:
When betting on a horse before a horse race - say, a race of 5 horses, the odds ARE NOT 1/5 because the odds are not equal (eg. one horse may be faster).
Here you are talking about the probability of each horse winning the race, and assuming there are differences between the horses' capabilities, the probability for each horse is different.

FilupSmith said:
So, what about if you placed a bet AFTER the race, assuming you don't know anything about any of the horses nor the outcome?
Here you are talking about the probability of you picking the winning horse, and assuming you don't know about the differences between the horses' capabilities before the race the probability s 1/5. This does not change after the race: assuming you don't know which horse actually won the race the probability of choosing which one did win is 1/5.
 
Ok. I wasn't sure. Thanks :)~| FilupSmith |~
 
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Replies
14
Views
7K
Replies
53
Views
8K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top