I liked this article a lot, of course it's the kind of thing I write about all the time. I'd like to add this to what Bob said.
Even if you played the same machines an identical number of times two years running, imagine how unlikely it would be for your results to be identical as well. With randomness added the chances of identical results are so small as to be nearly impossible.
Now consider that with two different results in front of you, one has to be smaller, and the other has to be larger. That's just how it works when you compare two numbers.
So what solid conclusion can one make from comparing two results of a random process? Sadly, not a darned thing.
It would be like flipping two coins and trying to infer from the results which one had more heads on it. Look at the coins, make sure they have both heads and a tails for sides, but for goodness sake don't flip them and record the results to learn anything more.
~FK
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vpFREE Administrator" <vpfreeadmin@...> wrote:
>
> Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 31 JAN 2012
>
> "Drawing Conclusions"
>
> http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2012/0131.cfm
>
> <a href="http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2012/0131.cfm">
> http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2012/0131.cfm</a>
>
>
> *************************************************
> This link is posted for informational purposes
> and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
> of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
> discussion of the article must be done in
> accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
> *************************************************
>
