We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

BEWARE Increased premium after NO FAULT accident

17891012

Comments

  • starrystarry
    starrystarry Posts: 2,481 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Spiderham wrote: »
    Let me ask you a question. If you were handed a die, rolled it 100 times and didn't roll a single 6, what do you think your probability of rolling a 6 next time would be.

    1 in 6 !!!!!!!

    Now I'm going to bed. Enough!
  • mikey72
    mikey72 Posts: 14,680 Forumite
    Spiderham wrote: »
    ............ I have seen stats showing people with a non-fault claim are more likely to have a fault claim than those who haven't. ..........

    Spiderham wrote: »
    .......Whether someone has been hit or not does not affect their likelihood of making a claim, in exactly the same way that having a fault claim and causing an accident don't make you any more or less likely in having claims in future.........

    Haven't I been saying the second view?
  • Spiderham
    Spiderham Posts: 327 Forumite
    1 in 6 !!!!!!!

    Experience from the die I was handed on my rugby tour tells me that isn't true. It landed on 6 about 2 times out of 3 over the many times I had to roll it over the four days and landed on the 1 face 1 time in 30, I somehow doubt all faces had a 1 in 6 chance of coming up. I think my results were probably representative of the distribution, I had added weight to the theory by the stifled giggles of the tour committee when it kept happening.
  • mikey72
    mikey72 Posts: 14,680 Forumite
    Back to the dice question though for starrystarry, when they're awake again.

    I agree, if you role a dice, you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting any number.
    And the same 1 in 6 next time. And the time after that.

    So, if you role it 60 times consecutively, would you expect to have a distribution of 6 throws of each number to be as likely as having 60 throws of just 6?
    Bear in mind, each throw in isolation is just as likely to throw a 6 as to throw any other number.
  • Spiderham
    Spiderham Posts: 327 Forumite
    mikey72 wrote: »
    So, if you role it 60 times consecutively, would you expect to have a distribution of 6 throws of each number to be as likely as having 60 throws of just 6?
    Bear in mind, each throw in isolation is just as likely to throw a 6 as to throw any other number.
    Personally (assuming you mean 10 of each number) I'd expect the even distribution to be about 3.6x10^42 times more likely, assuming fair dice with a uniform distribution of results..
  • mikey72
    mikey72 Posts: 14,680 Forumite
    edited 26 July 2011 at 12:07AM
    So do we agree, the more times the dice ends up on no accident today, eventually it's going to roll somewhere else.

    (and yes, I meant 10, just got carried away with typing 6 there)
  • lisyloo
    lisyloo Posts: 30,094 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 26 July 2011 at 10:41AM
    So do we agree, the more times the dice ends up on no accident today, eventually it's going to roll somewhere else.
    No.
    It's statistically independent (the dice).

    If you throw a 6 1000 times, the chance of getting a 6 the next time is 1 in 6.
    Yes you'd expect 1/6th of the throws to be a 6, but just because the last 1000 were 6 doesn't affect the next throw (not with dice anyway).
    It's called independence in probability theory.

    (My understanding is based on a Bachelor of Science degree and not anecdotes or lay person opinion/understanding).
  • mikey72
    mikey72 Posts: 14,680 Forumite
    lisyloo wrote: »
    No.
    It's statistically independent (the dice).

    If you throw a 6 1000 times, the chance of getting a 6 the next time is 1 in 6.
    Yes you'd expect 1/6th of the throws to be a 6, but just because the last 1000 were 6 doesn't affect the next throw (not with dice anyway).
    It's called independence in probability theory.

    (My understanding is based on a Bachelor of Science degree and not anecdotes or lay person opinion/understanding).

    So back to you then

    as before

    I agree, if you role a dice, you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting any number.
    And the same 1 in 6 next time. And the time after that.

    So, if you role it 60 times consecutively, would you expect to have a distribution of 10 throws of each number to be as likely as having 60 throws of just 6?
    Bear in mind, each throw in isolation is just as likely to throw a 6 as to throw any other number.


    Is your Bsc in Maths?
  • lisyloo
    lisyloo Posts: 30,094 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    would you expect to have a distribution of 10 throws of each number to be as likely as having 60 throws of just 6?
    The chances of getting 60 sixes is 1 out of 6^60 combinations.
    It's much more likely you'd get 10 sixes as there are a lot more combinations.

    The next throw (we agree) is completely independent of whatever the previous combination.

    So if someone parks on a busy street and there is a random chance of their car being in the wrong place at the wrong time then previous events have no effect whatsoever on future events as they are (like a dice) totally independent.
    What I have always claimed is that the chance of being hit is not random across individuals because some people park on busy streets and others don't so we don't all carry the same risks because of our different lifestyles.
    For exmaple I like to walk to the supermarket so my risk of having my car hit there is zero.

    Is your Bsc in Maths?
    I went for "mathematical sciences" which means I did a mixture of maths, computing and statistics.
    I enjoyed both stats and computing so didn't want to specialise.
    Actually I really enjoyed stats and considered a degree in Operational Research but reality took over and I ended up in IT because there are WAY more jobs in IT than in stats.
    I also considered becoming an actuary but I really couldn't face any more study/exams and I believe it's loads of training/exams, but if I could have put reality aside and done exactly what I'd wanted I probably would have chosen Operational Research.
  • starrystarry
    starrystarry Posts: 2,481 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Oh lisyloo, where were you last night when I needed you?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.