![]() | Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |
Questions re: Probability of Higher Flush by WoO
| August 28th, 2010 at 12:36:22 PM permalink | |
| Wizard Administrator Member since: Oct 14, 2009 Threads: 313 Posts: 6794 |
If we incorrectly assume that each player is dealt cards from a separate deck, then if the probability that one player beats you is p, then the probability that at least one player out of n will is 1-(1-p)^n. My table is based on that assumption. For example, the probability of rolling at least one six in 10 rolls of a die is 1-(1-(1/6))^10 = 1-(5/6)^10=0.838494417. It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet. |
| August 28th, 2010 at 1:43:07 PM permalink | |
| podski Member since: Aug 23, 2010 Threads: 3 Posts: 24 |
So, I believe, is mine. Do I take it then that factoring in the effect of card removal on the chances each opponent after the heads-up calculation is too onerous? Or is it just that it makes bugger-all difference? Sorry for being a pest; my thirst for knowledge gets the better of me sometimes. Cheers! p We Have Assumed Control, We Have Assumed Control, We Have Assumed Control |
| August 28th, 2010 at 2:54:42 PM permalink | |
| Wizard Administrator Member since: Oct 14, 2009 Threads: 313 Posts: 6794 |
Yes. If you wish to factor that in, then a simulation is the easiest way to go. It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet. |
| August 28th, 2010 at 4:22:01 PM permalink | |
| podski Member since: Aug 23, 2010 Threads: 3 Posts: 24 | Coolio. My thanks for your input on this, Sir. 'tis most appreciated! Cheers! p We Have Assumed Control, We Have Assumed Control, We Have Assumed Control |
![]() | Bovada is the only Internet casino endorsed by the Wizard. Here are my reasons why and my promise of support. |
