Talk:Beginner's luck

Gambling Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gambling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gambling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GamblingWikipedia:WikiProject GamblingTemplate:WikiProject GamblingGambling articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

WikiProject Gambling To-do:

Current collaborations:

Improve an article to FA

Improve an article to A

Help with the Gambling articles needing attention.
Tag the talk pages of Gambling-related articles with the {{WikiProject Gambling}} banner.
The link to the Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.
Japan section reads as though it was written by the gambling industry - quotes of 160% returns are 'citation needed'.

Opening comment

Hello, I would think another explanation might be that experienced players take it easy on beginners (perhaps even unconsciously). So they might unwittingly throw the game to the less experienced player. But I don't have any sources for (or against!) this, and don't want to add original research.

Cheers,

VTPG (talk) 05:16, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Slot machines

The article as it stands claims that slot machines which have recently been played extensively (without a jackpot) have a higher chance of producing a jackpot. I believe this is not actually a feature of any widely used slot machines (although there are machines where the value of the jackpot increases, that is not the point at issue) and claim therefore is simply a gambler's fallacy. As such I will remove the claim. 72.19.76.225 (talk) 21:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I am struggling to find ANY sources on this topic at all, although I have heard it anecdotally in my life. The only source I could find was the life-hacker article. However, that article links to the Wikipedia page in its lead section, and because of this I believe sourcing it as actually circular sourcing (because that article used Wikipedia as a source). Google scholar gave no results, neither did the multiple search engines I tried. I seems as if no scholarly work on this exists at all.

If anyone can find any sources at all, that would be greatly appreciated.

@Scientific29: Is this original research? (If it is, it is really well written.)

TheMickyRosen-Left (talk) 17:49, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I added another source: the cambridge dictionary definition for beginner's luck. Can't find any other sources of value however by looking through all the tools given by the "more sources needed template." TheMickyRosen-Left (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @TheMickyRosen-Left: I wrote this almost a decade (!) ago, so I'm not sure. But I would guess that it is original research, given I didn't provide any sources. Cheers, Scientific29 (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Human Growth and Development

In some cultures a child is allowed to win early in an activity which would inforce an expectation that he or she is better at something in the beginning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BradVesp (talk • contribs) 10:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]