Mmmm okay.
That look much more convincing even on the specific point I checked.
So from my 10 randoms trials, 8 were far from what you checked, and 2 were one below (I got two 19s).
Still no one of those were at 20 or more.
Now for your second point about the weird results you got, I added a second page to it.
I take this formula: "=INT(1/RAND())*20" which should give random numbers outside of the 95% interval.
If I focus on the 5 most unlikely results you find those as being 230177>471>452>380>340.
In 20 tries here is the result which got the highest 5th: 1340>400>300>140>140.
Here is the result with the second highest 5th: 2960>340>340>160>120.
Here is the one with the highest highest: 63240>2960>200>80>80.
So you beat all those... Again.
Note those series are independant. The only thing which could prevent me from multiplying them (which would be for my simulations to be the most unlikely of 10*20, so 200+ games) is if Muntzer could have taken differents ways of looking at his set.
But yeah that look weird. I suppose there will be follow up by other people, but would be nice for this experience to be done again.
That look much more convincing even on the specific point I checked.
So from my 10 randoms trials, 8 were far from what you checked, and 2 were one below (I got two 19s).
Still no one of those were at 20 or more.
Now for your second point about the weird results you got, I added a second page to it.
I take this formula: "=INT(1/RAND())*20" which should give random numbers outside of the 95% interval.
If I focus on the 5 most unlikely results you find those as being 230177>471>452>380>340.
In 20 tries here is the result which got the highest 5th: 1340>400>300>140>140.
Here is the result with the second highest 5th: 2960>340>340>160>120.
Here is the one with the highest highest: 63240>2960>200>80>80.
So you beat all those... Again.
Note those series are independant. The only thing which could prevent me from multiplying them (which would be for my simulations to be the most unlikely of 10*20, so 200+ games) is if Muntzer could have taken differents ways of looking at his set.
But yeah that look weird. I suppose there will be follow up by other people, but would be nice for this experience to be done again.