SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Monty Lenard who wrote (121846)8/6/2000 3:49:24 PM
From: hmaly  Respond to of 1574004
 
Monty Re....<<<<I have never seen a "formal" study on this and probably should have put a disclaimer on my statement. (i.e. Based on "my" trading experience the odds are better than 9 to 1 that a gap of "that size" will be filled)<<<<<<<<>

Monty, you say that there is a 90% chance that a gap of this size will be filled. You also say that all gaps other than this one have already been filled. In other words, over 90% of the gaps AMD has had the past yr. have already been filled. Isn't it statistically likely that this gap will not be filled, as that would put the percentage up to 100%, which would be a higher percentage than even your statistics allow. Why are you arguing against your own statistics?

Secondly, statistics look at the past in order to determine the future, but statistics are not absolute. they are the likelihood of something happening, not the absolute certainly. For instance, if you flip a coin and it comes up heads, what is the percentage chance the next coin toss will be tails. 50% again. And if heads comes up ten times in a row, what are the odds that the next flip will be heads; 50% again. The point is as The Watson Youth pointed out is that there are many reasons that the gap fills in; but the existence of statistics is not one of them . In other words, what happens determines the statistics, statistics do not determine what happens.