Embracing the Gambler's Fallacy...

gets you a job commenting for ESPN:

ESPN: "Who or what will be the X-factor in this series?"

Brian Windhorst: "Korver. If he gets going, he can terrorize a defense. The fact that he hasn't been making shots is even more worrisome for the Cavs."

So the idea is that, because Korver has been cold recently, he's bound to be hot now! But what if he has been "cold" because of an undetected wrist injury? Because he has lost his confidence? Because he has been on a drinking binge? Because he has picked up a hitch in his stroke at some point? Any of those reasons for his recent "cold streak" would mean that he might get even "colder" still, e.g., if it is a wrist injury, and continuing to play aggravates it more.


  1. Whoa whoa whoa Gene, he didn't say that it *should* be worrisome for the Cavs, he said it *is* worrisome.

    I am fully prepared to believe that the Cavs' coaching staff has embraced the gambler's fallacy, and Windhorst is just a good reporter.

  2. As I always point out, if the coin comes up heads twice in a row the smart man bets heads on the next flip. Probably the coin is fair, and it makes no difference. But if the coin if weighted it probably favours heads.