Vernian obscura et Trivia 1
Quentin R. Skrabec Ph.D.
Did Verne predict August 18, 1913, at Monte
Carlo?
The gambler's
fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or
the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the incorrect belief
that if a particular event occurs more frequently than usual during the past,
it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa) when mathematics
established that the probability of such series events does not depend on what
has happened in the past.
The most famous example of the gambler's
fallacy occurred at the roulette tables of a Monte Carlo casino in 1913.
When the last ten roulette wheel spins, the ball landed on black. The word
spread throughout the casino. Gamblers thought a red was long overdue, so they
started betting on red. But the ball kept on landing on black. As the trend
continued, the gamblers became more and more convinced that the next turn would
land on red. The crowds and wagers increased-- and so did their losses. Herd
mentality continued as word spread to the streets of Monte Carlo. It was after
26 consecutive black spins that the ball finally landed on red, and the streak
came to an end. By this time, the losses were staggering. The casino had made a
fortune, but most players were crushed. The event became known as the “Monte
Carlo fallacy,” synonymous with the gambler’s fallacy.
In
his novel Mathias Sandorf, in 1885, Jules Verne
foreshadowed the panic of the 1913 event. Verne’s fictional
characters at a Monte Carlo casino show the same behavior as the future event
in 1913. In a subplot,
Verne takes on the gambler's fallacy, mathematics facing a bettor, the fantasy
of winning through luck or strategies, as well as the moral issues of the
problem gambler. Verne’s gambling fallacy was based on a run of seventeen red
(rouge) cards in trente-et-quarante.[i] Verne's fallacy event is
covered in his chapters “Seventeen Times” and “The Last Game.” The series of
red (rouge) cards caused a rush to the tables with gamblers as the length of
the series increased the odds of a black card. His characters and all the
casino bettors lose most of their fortunes on betting at the end of the series.
Verne’s characters return the next day to bet on the roulette tables. They hit
their winning streak, coming close to “breaking the bank.” They obsessively continue to gamble, dreaming
of millions, but ultimately, the law of chance breaks them.
Verne
outlines the folly of the gamblers and notes and demonstrates the house
advantage in the long run. Verne offers literary proof of the gambler's
fallacy. The point is that regardless of previous results or series run, the
next has about a 48.6 percent chance of red or black with the house advantage.
If you look at the odds of seeing a 17 series color run, it is .0006 percent
for Verne’s 17 red run and less than .00001 percent for the 1913 actual run.
Seeing Verne’s 17 run would be a rare event meeting his description that it
would go down in “the annuals of history.” For an individual, both would amount
to a once-in-a-lifetime event. The
record was registered in 1943 when the red appeared 32 times in a row! The probability of seeing such an event in
French Roulette is (18/37)32 = 0.000000000096886885 percent.
Verne's
characters ( Toronthal and Sarcany) believe in deveine and veine (good and bad
luck) over mathematics and simple chance. However, Toronthal was a problem
gambler looking for methods and strategies to improve over chance. Verne deals with the popularity of various
winning strategies of 18th and 19th-century casino bettors.
Toronthal (a corrupt banker) studies the game, looking for favorable
combinations. Verne’s gamblers try variations of two types of strategies
believed by many Victorian gamblers. The first is to study the roulette wheel
table results called the “Jagger Strategy.” In 1873, a famous world-publicized
event occurred at Monte Carlo. A roulette-playing Englishman, Joseph Jagger,
won $350,000 (millions in today’s dollars”) at Monte Carlo by finding a
roulette wheel with a
mechanical issue bias and seized on it.[ii]
The Martingale strategy more
suitable for trente-et-quarante was one of the gamblers doubling the bet after every loss so that the
first win would recover all previous losses plus win a profit equal to the
original stake. What keeps
Martingale players using the system is they will win their small bet many times
before they run into a streak that wipes out their current table bankroll. Verne alludes to the mathematical faults
of such strategies limited by rules on the maximum bets. A cash bank of money limited any table. In 1885,
Monte Carlo, breaking the bank, would stop the action.[iii]
Verne’s character, Toronthal, believed he could beat the odds. His friend Sarcany (a petty criminal) even
suggests Toronthal obsession to win is a sickness, and he has lost control.
Verne deals with the herd and individual psychology of the gamblers, believing their
bad luck would turn.
QRS
[i] Trente-et-quarante is French “card roulette.’’ Its
series red/black odds and house advantage (1.25% to 2.7%) is similar to French
Roulette and one of the best games for gamblers. Also French roulette/ Trente-et-quarante
have “second chance” rules that lower the house advantage. Note American roulette was two green slots
(house wins) versus one in French roulette so the house advantage is 5.26%.
[ii] The
story goes that he hired six clerks to carefully monitor all six roulette
tables at the Casino Monte Carlo. It was impossible for them to write the
numbers since it would have raised suspicion, so they had to memorise the
outcomes of each spin instead. Then, they would provide this useful data to
Jagger.
No comments:
Post a Comment