> “Expected value” is a very basic term of art introduced in stats 101. I already know that. My point is it's shitty terminology, even though it's somehow bec

> “Expected value” is a very basic term of art introduced in stats 101. I already know that. My point is it's shitty terminology, even though it's somehow become a standard. Stats 101 also does NOT tell you to "expect" the expected value to happen. GGGGGP however seems to actually use the value to formulate a strategy, and that's where I'm pointing out that this entire formulation of using stats to approach this problem is flawed. You don't have enough chances at the game such that the mean is a meaningful number to consider. That's also why I always refer to it as the mean even if other people call it "expected value". I hate the term with a passion and I will not yield to the wise guys who wrote the books. Honestly I'd rather not have this discussion in English because this isn't a problem in many other languages. In many languages mean is not called "expected" anything.