Greetings, fellow players. This is my weekly post Outsiders’ Musings, and we’re up to the sixth edition. I’m looking at how often one can expect to win with each dog at the **Springfield Downs**, so I did a bit of an experiment. Over the last couple of weeks every hour I noted down which dog was the winner. The resulting conclusion is bet on Raised by Wolves; you have a 30% chance of winning.

Raised by Wolves IIIIIIII

Obedience School Dropout IIIIIII

Not a Chance II

Drool Britannia IIII

Dogbiscuit IIIIII

Secondly, if you want any extra friends to collect money and snakes off, there’s a good website at http://www.simpsonstappedout.eu/ where you can advertise your Origin name to gather friends. Comments and suggestions to rcsprinter.wikipedia@gmail.com .

Goodbye

Rcsprinter

As I have more money than I need, I bet on the races every chance I get – not to win money, but for the 50 XP that I get each time. (I want all the XP I can get, as I’m trying to get gift boxes for donuts.) I usually bet the 9-to-1 odds race, as the payoff is nice when I do win (which is about 20-25 percent of the time). So I look at it as paying 5000 for 50 XP, which for me is an acceptable trade off.

I have a theory I would love to get help with. It seems certain dogs always win based on what “scenario” (for lack of a better word) comes up. For instance, every time the dogs play poker, Drool Britannia wins. I wonder if you can figure out what scenario is going to happen based on the order of the dogs. To test this theory, could we set up a post for people to list the odds on each dog,what happened in the race (cat jockeys, protest, Fat Tony fixed it, etc), and who won?

Great idea π

Unfortunately, these findings are statistically insignificant. If you have one dog winning 30% of the time, and you have a sample size of only 27 dog races, then your 95% confidence interval is huge – 17.29%

This means that there’s a 95% chance that you’re simply observing random deviations, and that the dog actually wins between 13% and 47% of the time. Note that with 5 dogs, if they all have an equal chance of winning, then they would each win approximately 20% of the time. Because of the low sample size, your results actually don’t come close to disproving the theory that every dog has an equal chance of winning.

If, as Aw said, you also collected information about what the assigned odds were for each dog that ended up winning each race, we could do a significance test on that too. Regardless, without collecting more data, you likely won’t be able to draw any conclusions. If you wanted to be 95% sure of the odds a dog has of winning within 5% of his actual odds, you’d need to run 384 races. (see http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm for an easy statistical significance calculator)

Hi alain – I’ll see what I can find and thanks π

Actually it’s all about probability and EA is giving that to us. So I did a little math and caculated the expected value for each dog and it was negative – for all of them! This means in sum you will lose money on betting on no matter which dog. That’s why i wouldn’t recommend anyone to do so π

You could have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value#Discrete_random_variable.2C_finite_case

Thanks for this ! π

I found on my Springfield the order of the dogs change. I usually just choose the first option and I usually win 70% of the time. I don’t go by the name, I just choose the the top line

This would support the theory that whatever dog is is assigned 1:2 odds actually has the best chance of winning. Note however that the payoff when you win with this dog is only $1250 for a $5000 bet, so every time you lose, you need to win 4 times just to break even. This means that the dog would have to win more than 80% of the time (> 4 out of 5 times) for you to come out ahead. Since you say you only win about 70% of the time (which itself is probably luckier than normal), you’re still losing money over time by going to the Springfield Downs.

Actually. You win 6250. Not 1250. So even though you bet on the top if the list dog. You come out ahead 1250 when you win.

Spend 5000 to win 6250.

So the conclusion reached is??that you cannot win at the dog track?30%winner =70%loser?right or no?

Hi johnny – if you see annie’s comment, it seems that way! π

I would like to see EA add 2 other bet levels to the track. A $2500 bet and a $1000 or $500 bet. It would make playing at the track more fun and possible since I can’t loose $5K with only a 30% chance of winning just $1500.

Even if this is right (and I think it needs a lot more analysis), it screams don’t bet. Multiply your potential winnings times .3 and compare that number to the size of your bet. Now, it’s play money, so if you love to gamble, this the place!

Hey, will you be making a post about the Rich Texan? I’m seriously thinking in buying him π

Hi Charlie – that’s coming soon π

I bought the rich texan he was a great purchase love his lines he says. I say he was well worth the donuts

I bought the rich Texan. His quests are fun

I’m addicted to the dog tracks keep on

loosing money

But does this account for the odds each race? I would be interested to see how often the 1:2 winner paid versus the others, too.

^This