How is the gambler’s fallacy not a logical paradox? A flipped coin coming up heads 25 times in a row has odds in the millions, but if you flip heads 24 times in a row, the 25th flip still has odds of exactly 0.5 heads. Isn’t there something logically weird about that?

Question

I know it’s true, it’s just something that seems hard to wrap my head around. How is this not a logical paradox?

In: Mathematics

Answer 1

>but **if you flip heads 24 times in a row**, the 25th flip still has odds of exactly 0.5 heads. Isn’t there something logically weird about that?

“**If**” you do that it has already happend. The chance of *having flipped* heads 24 times in a row is 100% if it is your base assumption. That is vastly different of the chance of flipping heads 24 times in a row in your future 24 flips.