Sorry for any confusion due to the OP. I do think it's an interesting question to consider the external and internal factors that can affect a person's perception of their "luck" in life. As Wiseman found, and we've concluded here, they are often huge contributors to their circumstances, even when they would swear up and down that they've done everything possible to achieve the best outcome.

So it is with my friend.

I get the feeling that few of you have really been close to anyone who "lives under a cloud" and understands how draining it can be. When you consider cutting ties, you have to ask yourself how much is due to variance and how much is attributable to bad decisions? It would be crappy to bug out on a friend who happens to be on the bad side of the curve. I'm not that kind of person. I dig in when a friend needs help, probably to a fault.

Information that you should have had:

I've bailed this person out over and over again, financially and emotionally, over the last five years. I've been there when her family wasn't. I've gone to her family when they've turned their backs on her. I decided I was done over a year ago. I stopped bailing her out.

Often, I can point directly to decisions she's made that caused her troubles. Other times, it's less straightforward.

When someone gets sick every other week do they just have a bad immune system, or is this how their body deals with emotional stress?

As far as I'm concerned, the friendship has been over for a long time. I've realized that I no longer trust her. I've been there since then because at one time I considered her "family" and because often no one else was. Within the next couple weeks, I will be able to break off our last ties.

I would have done this sooner, but it would have been like kicking a dog when they were down. She was just given clearance on one medical problem within the last two weeks. Then, she calls yesterday with a head injury from another car accident. But! She was forced off the road when someone ran a red light and drove off. How could this be her fault? No witnesses, of course.

well theres that kid from hey Arnold

also my roomate wishes he was this person, constantly faking/exaggerating injuries sicknesses etc.

OP: I'm genuinely glad I clicked on this thread. All the tilt I was just feeling because of a session I just played has literally washed over me in the 60 seconds it took to read that post. Dunno if it was a perspective thing or whatever but thanks anyway.

Is having a Tuesday night dodgeball league a beat, brag, or variance?

Or all three?

Seriously, WTF?

im pretty sure I run better than just about any human being alive. Almost every problem I have ever had was directly brought on myself. If my hair wasnt falling out at 22, i would be the luckiest.

It was pretty common in New York when I lived there. I played a couple of time with some friends from work and it was pretty fun.

my younger brother is super unlucky, he broke 5 different bones in different occasions ( one of them he was runover by a car) and he had childhood epilepsy... worst part is that he's been pussy whipped for 4 years by a chick that's like 3 out of 10 both in smarts and looks

curious that i've run so hot in my life comparing to him, maybe i'm going to die of an heart attack within 10 years or something

This thread became "post a tidbit about someone you know who is sort of unlucky"

Being p-whipped by a 3/10 isn't "unlucky".

no? why?

Charlie Sheen

In answer to OP, no. I do not know how to define perpetually unlucky.

I really doubt that "unlucky" events happen to certain people no more often than to other people. To determine the truthfullness of the "woe is me" characters you would have to do an unimaginable amount of work.

My instinct says that people who continually complain about bad luck are more likely than not, "unlucky". But most if not all of the "unlucky" people will have contributed to their own downfall. However this is also true of "lucky" people but they generally run better so it is not so noticed.

If in the first 10 years of your life were "unlucky" then the expected result by the end of your life is going to be "unlucky". If you do not understand this, you don't understand probability or statistics at all.

So to repair 100,000 "unlucky" statement, most will remain equally (or near equally) as unlucky, some will become more unlucky and some will become lucky enough to bring it in line with Mu luckiness and a few will end up net +lucky.

The only thing you can generally say for certain is that all will regress to the mean.

I'm pretty sure this a convaluted way of saying that luck has no memory. Meaning if you are 10 dollars down over 100 flips your expected result over the next 1,000,000 flips will be -$10.

I know you just want to appear really smart - but you just misunderstood what I was saying.

I meant if you were to do a study of the people a previous study labelled as "unlucky" across a fixed time period into the future - you would find that over that time period (ie. ignoring the historical results) they approach a normal distribution of luckiness.

My point was more that past 'luckiness' has little impact on future 'luckiness' and not about regression to the mean.

lol @ 'do you know anyone who sucks at life' thread

I know... well, I know OF quite a few people who suck at life. Every one of them thinks they're unlucky. one of many ways in which poker is just like real life, fish think it's all luck and when they make -EV plays and lose, it's because they were unlucky.

I just responded to what you had written, which was a classic gamblers' fallacy. If you miswrote what you meant, then fair enough.

They don't approach a normal distribution, they are part of the (presumed) normal distribution. They don't even approach Mu in absolute terms but will do (on average) in relative terms.

Even this I take issue with, you're party correct, if we measure luck in a coinflip scenario then yes no outcome affects the next outcome. However past results do affect future results, in that sense luck compounds more so in life than in coinflips.

If you're born in India to a poor family, you're boned no matter how lucky you get in every other "coinflip" you ever face. If you're born to a rich western world family who spoil you, then you have to ****-up monumentally before you don't have a reasonable standard of living.

There is a difference between results and individual outcomes, it is, just that simple.

saw a boy get stomped over 4 peso..

The flying-donkey - I'm going to assume you know what I meant, and realize it was correct, but just want to show off your impressive* statistical knowledge.

Let me end with: I didn't miswrite what I meant. While it may have been ambiguous most normal conversations follow through with real questions instead of just jumping to contrarian conclusions. Most normal conversations also take place without the need for specific legalese as well and rely on the fact that most normal people can gather what is meant from context.

* It's not that impressive and many people here understand it. But I realize you might not get sarcasm on here, so I thought I'd be explicit.

Most normal conversations are verbal and between two people who know each other well enough. In this one, it is neither so forgive me for being formal, which as a default I think people should do untill agreed upon otherwise.

FYI, trying to portray sarcasm in writing is generally going to end in failure.

it does say that, but the point of what i said is that basically long swings are normal in random processes. we shouldn't expect results quickly to fluctuate around zero, we expect low frequency oscillations.

You aren't able to have informal non-super-specific conversations with other people you don't know well or through non-verbal ways?

Take for instance, your comment about India and the Western world. The vast majority of the people in this thread realized that when we're talking about 'lucky' or 'unlucky' we're talking about something fairly relative to the individual.

If we were talking about some absolute scale of luckiness - then this thread is pretty stupid because taken over the whole course of human history anyone that has access to a computer to participate in this thread almost certainly doesn't know anyone that is 'unlucky'.

And FYI, many people can understand obvious sarcasm.

Fair enough, I was a bit out of line. It must have been an oversight from the repeated face palming I've been doing through this thread.

This is an internet discussion. I can't see you and I don't know you, I'll take you at your written word and if it's wrong I'm not going to make allowances for it unless it's an obvious typo.

Re-read what you wrote, you basically said luck evens out for everyone (with a small omission not for some).

No, the defining feature of this thread is "do you know anyone", which I took to mean is this guy an old friend, familiy member co-worker etc.. By the very nature of the question it excludes people from the slums of India.

IRL, the internet is a stupid place to use sarcasm without appropriate emoticons. There are no facial or body cues on the internet, jesus christ you're dumb.

So you recognize that context in one place, but not another? Who's the dumb one?

Anyway, I'll let you get back to sitting in your parents basement enjoying your stupid contrarian conversations. I'm glad I don't know you in real life.

Yours would be the classic enabler position, and your friend knew that. Not that you wanted her to always be in tough spots, but it was a given you would always be there to pickup the pieces. If you stopped last year, then a new enabler would have taken your spot.

Genuine misfortune can happen, for if there is good luck there must be corresponding bad luck. But the age old ditty, you didn't plan to fail, you failed to plan, is applicable to a consistent run of bad joss.

enable me, carv. enable me to find my camera

I worked with a man once who had a tremendous amount of tragedy in his life. His wife was killed by a drunk driver when his only child, a daughter, was in her teens. She got married in her early twenties and ended up having one son. Her husband shot and killed her and then himself in a jealous rage.

My coworker took custody of his only grandson, who then became terminally ill and died.

One of the saddest lives I could possibly imagine.

It doesn't start like that. You're just doing your best to be a good friend. Looking back though, the case can definitely be made.

Just commit me and give me drugs at this point. I'm pretty sure it would exceed my ability to endure.