Shuffle odds (Split from Most Math. Improbable)
I can do the same using a false riffle shuffle almost 50% of the time. I do it slow because of my small hands.Quote: geoffI was playing a game of single deck blackjack once and the dealer shuffled up and dealt. The odds of the cards ending up in that exact sequence was nearly 80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,403,766,975,289,505,440,883,277,824,000,000,000,000!
Someone real good at it showed this to me. it is funny to see it in action. Even others do it with a tapered deck.
BTW, you showed a very big # and maybe do not really know how you showed it.
It is what I do at work, when I work.
I know what 52! equals
also 999!
not your number!
have to be careful using !s
even 24!!
is different from
24!
I do not think that a 1 in 1000 or even a 1 in 2000 event is Mathematically improbable
even a Royal Flush in Video Poker at 1 in 40,000 is fun - not improbable, but I have seen a few last year by me and a few by others.
Maybe after I hit Powerball tonight I will have a different story
Sally
Quote: mustangsallyI can do the same using a false riffle shuffle almost 50% of the time. I do it slow because of my small hands.
Someone real good at it showed this to me. it is funny to see it in action. Even others do it with a tapered deck.
BTW, you showed a very big # and maybe do not really know how you showed it.
It is what I do at work, when I work.
I know what 52! equals
also 999!
not your number!
have to be careful using !s
even 24!!
is different from
24!
I do not think that a 1 in 1000 or even a 1 in 2000 event is Mathematically improbable
even a Royal Flush in Video Poker at 1 in 40,000 is fun - not improbable, but I have seen a few last year by me and a few by others.
Maybe after I hit Powerball tonight I will have a different story
Sally
I'm not really sure what you mean. The number I quoted was just 52! in long number form to emphasize it. 8×10^67 is another way to write it I suppose. Unless you meant the ! at the end of the number which was just supposed to be an actual exclamation and not another factorial. That was my fault.
Quote: geoffI was playing a game of single deck blackjack once and the dealer shuffled up and dealt. The odds of the cards ending up in that exact sequence was nearly 80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,403,766,975,289,505,440,883,277,824,000,000,000,000
LQTM!
Quote: geoffI was playing a game of single deck blackjack once and the dealer shuffled up and dealt. The odds of the cards ending up in that exact sequence was nearly 80,658,175,170,943,878,571,660,636,856,403,766,975,289,505,440,883,277,824,000,000,000,000
I've heard this before that a shuffled deck will never be repeated so it is a beautiful and unrepeatable thing, but then got shot down by all the smart people in the forum. They said it was not true.
I don't know the odds but one time I got two aces, split them and got two more aces, then no more splits, dangnabit!
Quote: FrGambleI've heard this before that a shuffled deck will never be repeated so it is a beautiful and unrepeatable thing, but then got shot down by all the smart people in the forum. They said it was not true.
I don't know the odds but one time I got two aces, split them and got two more aces, then no more splits, dangnabit!
Assuming a deck of cards has been shuffled 1 billion times a day for the last 8 centuries (when the modern 52 card was created give or take) if you were to shuffle up a deck right now the odds of it matching any permutation shuffled up in that time span is 3.75×10^−54. As you might imagine this is such a small possibility that the odds are vastly on the side of it never occurring. If you want something that will really never happen try and shuffle up the same 8 deck shoe as someone else.
Quote: FrGambleI've heard this before that a shuffled deck will never be repeated so it is a beautiful and unrepeatable thing, but then got shot down by all the smart people in the forum. They said it was not true.
That assumes you're shuffling randomly. Humans don't do that, especially if they're trying not to. There are stage magicians that can execute a perfect riffle or Faro shuffle, and doing that 8 times puts a deck back in the order it started with. Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is8zSSe9Kt4
Here's a better article:
http://discovermagazine.com/2002/oct/featmath
Quote: geoffAssuming a deck of cards has been shuffled 1 billion times a day for the last 8 centuries (when the modern 52 card was created give or take) if you were to shuffle up a deck right now the odds of it matching any permutation shuffled up in that time span is 3.75×10^−54. A
That is not quite the same thing. I think you want the birthday problem.
Estimating the number of shuffle-ups is interesting. Now I am sure that there are more than a billion a day, but of course there were a lot less in earlier days.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThat is not quite the same thing. I think you want the birthday problem.
Estimating the number of shuffle-ups is interesting. Now I am sure that there are more than a billion a day, but of course there were a lot less in earlier days.
It's similar to the birthday problem, but it's actually different. The birthday problem is for when any pair matching amongst the group works. Here it one specific person matched with one amongst the rest.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThat is not quite the same thing. I think you want the birthday problem.
Estimating the number of shuffle-ups is interesting. Now I am sure that there are more than a billion a day, but of course there were a lot less in earlier days.
i don't think there are a billion single-deck shuffles on earth in one day. There are only 86,400 seconds in a day. Even if there were 10,000 shuffles every second, that's not a billion. I don't think there are anywhere near 10,000 shuffles a second... I am talking about real, physical cards, not inside computers.
Quote: MathExtremistThat assumes you're shuffling randomly. Humans don't do that...
What are non-magician humans doing then that allegedly causes the order of cards in a deck to be repeated?
Quote: geoffIt's similar to the birthday problem, but it's actually different. The birthday problem is for when any pair matching amongst the group works. Here it one specific person matched with one amongst the rest.
I don't think so. I think we are asking what the probability that two decks of shuffled cards have ever been the same.
Quote: sodawateri don't think there are a billion single-deck shuffles on earth in one day. There are only 86,400 seconds in a day. Even if there were 10,000 shuffles every second, that's not a billion. I don't think there are anywhere near 10,000 shuffles a second... I am talking about real, physical cards, not inside computers.
I think that if we include shuffling machines we get to a billion a day. It's one deck per 7 or 8 people on earth.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI think that if we include shuffling machines we get to a billion a day. It's one deck per 7 or 8 people on earth.
why would, on average, every 7 or 8 people on earth need to have a deck shuffled once per day? not that many people are playing cards each day on earth. It's a tiny, tiny minority.
Quote: sodawaterwhy would, on average, every 7 or 8 people on earth need to have a deck shuffled once per day? not that many people are playing cards each day on earth. It's a tiny, tiny minority.
Well, it's an average. It gets skewed by extreme cases. The guy sitting alone at the 3CP table getting 40 hands per hour really brings that average up.
How many casinos are there in the world? How many magicians practicing? How many bridge clubs? How many backroom cards games? How many automatic shuffling machines being tested? How many groups of guys playing a hundred hands of poker over some beers on a thursday night?
Quote: AxiomOfChoice
How many casinos are there in the world? How many magicians practicing? How many bridge clubs? How many backroom cards games? How many automatic shuffling machines being tested? How many groups of guys playing a hundred hands of poker over some beers on a thursday night?
fewer than a billion per day, that's for sure. haha.
Quote: paisielloWhat are non-magician humans doing then that allegedly causes the order of cards in a deck to be repeated?
Let's say you have 52 cards (one deck). The top ten cards are labeled A, B, C...J, where A is on top and J is the tenth card down. Cut the deck in half so you have 2 piles. One pile has A-J cards and the other has none of those ten. Shuffle the two piles perfectly. The order of the cards, starting from the top, is now: AxBxCxDx...xJ where the x cards are the cards that were shuffled between the A-J cards. If you deal those cards, one to me, one to you, one to me, one to you....one of us will get all A-J cards and the other will get all the "x" cards.
I'm not saying that's what happened in that scenario, but you get the point -- shufles aren't random. An AP playing blackjack can track slugs of cards through the shuffle (ie: everyone gets a ten or A one round. Well just like the A-J example above, they're gonna be clumped together for the next shoe.). Or they can sequence the cards (ie: the C card is an ace, so if the AP sees the AxBx combo come out of the shoe, they could expect to see the Ace (C card) come out next). Of course, that requires a weak shuffle AND a dealer who can riffle the cards almost perfectly.
Quote: RSShuffle the two piles perfectly.
And how does a non-magician human do that?
Quote: paisielloAnd how does a non-magician human do that?
Ummmm......a dealer who can riffle the cards well?
Quote: RSUmmmm......a dealer who can riffle the cards well?
Ummmm.....does "well" mean "perfectly" in your world?
Quote: paisielloUmmmm.....does "well" mean "perfectly" in your world?
Dealers can do it.
Quote: RSDealers can do it.
I understand your point that a dealer shuffle is not perfectly random. But what is the probability that a dealer (non-magician) using the standard shuffle (2 riffles, 1 strip cut, 1 riffle, 1 cut) will ever actually end up with the same exact order of cards? Still highly improbable.
Quote: paisielloWhich is what was already stated previously.
So why keep asking? Fuck. You ask HOW it can happen and I explain how it can happen.
Personally, I think the "shuffle of a deck" idea is dumb for two reasons:
1) It is not in the spirit of this question. The question refers to the least probable event which could be conceiveably gambled upon as a proposition bet in a casino. We might bet on the event of a streak of 5 straight ties in baccarat, but not on the exact order of the next 20 some cards. This is not to say we could not calculate such probabilities, we can. However such proposition bets would be essentially meaningless in a casino. Hence it is not in the spirit of the question.
2) If you want to argue that 1) does not matter, I will blow your shoes shuffling out of the water.
(you are welcome to build you own embellishments to those, but suffice to say 416! is very, very small by comparison)
Quote: RSSo why keep asking? Fuck. You ask HOW it can happen and I explain how it can happen.
Clearly you have not understood what I was asking. I'll recap it for you here:
1) The original post claimed the odds of any deck being sorted in a specific was P=1/52! which was so improbable that you would never expect it to occur in the lifetime of the universe.
2) One response was this was only true assuming random shuffling and that stage magicians can actually execute a perfect shuffle 8 times to get back to the original sorting.
3) I then asked about a non-magician since the implication was that you could somehow get a repeated deck unintentionally and therefore void the claim made in 1).
4) You then jumped in about shuffle tracking which I don't think was relevant at all but the implication was that you could somehow get a repeated deck unintentionally i.e. P<<1/52!
5) So I explicitly asked what the probability was for a standard shuffle sorting and you repeated item 1) which contradicts the implication you made in 4).
So I don't think you have explained "it".
Quote: endermikePersonally, I think the "shuffle of a deck" idea is dumb for two reasons:
1) It is not in the spirit of this question. The question refers to the least probable event which could be conceiveably gambled upon as a proposition bet in a casino. We might bet on the event of a streak of 5 straight ties in baccarat, but not on the exact order of the next 20 some cards. This is not to say we could not calculate such probabilities, we can. However such proposition bets would be essentially meaningless in a casino. Hence it is not in the spirit of the question.
2) If you want to argue that 1) does not matter, I will blow your shoes shuffling out of the water.The convolution of the probabilities of the exact subsets of gaseous molecules I breath in each breath during my time in the casinoThe exact quantum states of every subatomic particle in my brain during a single hand of poker
(you are welcome to build you own embellishments to those, but suffice to say 416! is very, very small by comparison)
I agree with your analysis. Its just mental masterbation by people who "dont get" the question..or want to show off an obtuse view of the world. I guess it could be calculated what are the chances of finding someone with the exact same DNA makeup somewhere in the world. That would be an even bigger number than the identical shuffled deck "contribution" to the conversation. Or the chair you sit on having the exact same number of molecules as any of the other chairs in the world. Even if the chairs weight the exact same weight to the 1 millionth of an ounce....who is to say that the distubution of the weight is equal among the padding, the metal, the leather, the plastic.
some chairs have gum stuck underneath, some chairs are worn, some chairs are repaired, some chairs have slight imperfections...oh my god...what a great improbability of finding a chair in the casino with the exact same molecular weight as another in the world.
I agree it has nothing to do with the spirit of the question, and people who pretend that I didnt fullly explain the intent of the question is just looking for a reason to talk about nonsense. Plenty of others, like yourself figured out the intent of the question. Its not hard....especially when thw first post give an idea of the intent and leads the way.
If someone did indeed witness 2 decks shuffled in the exact same order of cards..that would qualify as a good example to the original question.That would qualify as the most improbable event actually witnessesd or being "involved with".
Quote: LarryS
I agree with your analysis. Its just mental masterbation by people who "dont get" the question..or want to show off an obtuse view of the world. I guess it could be calculated what are the chances of finding someone with the exact same DNA makeup somewhere in the world. That would be an even bigger number than the identical shuffled deck "contribution" to the conversation. Or the chair you sit on having the exact same number of molecules as any of the other chairs in the world. Even if the chairs weight the exact same weight to the 1 millionth of an ounce....who is to say that the distubution of the weight is equal among the padding, the metal, the leather, the plastic.
some chairs have gum stuck underneath, some chairs are worn, some chairs are repaired, some chairs have slight imperfections...oh my god...what a great improbability of finding a chair in the casino with the exact same molecular weight as another in the world.
I agree it has nothing to do with the spirit of the question, and people who pretend that I didnt fullly explain the intent of the question is just looking for a reason to talk about nonsense. Plenty of others, like yourself figured out the intent of the question. Its not hard....especially when thw first post give an idea of the intent and leads the way.
If someone did indeed witness 2 decks shuffled in the exact same order of cards..that would qualify as a good example to the original question.That would qualify as the most improbable event actually witnessesd or being "involved with".
An event's probability has to be defined before hand or it's meaningless. Yes the odds of hitting a jackpot are very low, but the odds of seeing someone hit a jackpot at some point when you spend enough time in a casino is very high.
Quote: geoffAn event's probability has to be defined before hand or it's meaningless. Yes the odds of hitting a jackpot are very low, but the odds of seeing someone hit a jackpot at some point when you spend enough time in a casino is very high.
except a deck of 52 cards being shuffled to an exact order of a previously shuffled deck can never be verified in the real world as the cards go in a shoe, or get delt in poker with the remaing cards not viewed. Even if it happened it would not be witnessed.
when I witness a drink spilled on the felt....what are the chances that the exact same amount of liquid on a molecular level was spilled anywhere else in the world. Chaces are I witnessed a one of a kind event. And molecular scientists could calculate the chances of it happening again. Except its meaningless. Who cares.
Quote: LarrySexcept a deck of 52 cards being shuffled to an exact order of a previously shuffled deck can never be verified in the real world as the cards go in a shoe, or get delt in poker with the remaing cards not viewed. Even if it happened it would not be witnessed.
when I witness a drink spilled on the felt....what are the chances that the exact same amount of liquid on a molecular level was spilled anywhere else in the world. Chaces are I witnessed a one of a kind event. And molecular scientists could calculate the chances of it happening again. Except its meaningless. Who cares.
I would guess it is the same number of people who care about someone once witnessing 2 four of a kind hands in a row.
Quote: geoffI would guess it is the same number of people who care about someone once witnessing 2 four of a kind hands in a row.
at least it deal with reality. There might be another thread that you might want to start asking what is the most improbable theoretical event you can think of in the universe,
Personally I am more interested what people actually experience.
Just as there is a thread on what famous people you gambled with.......not who theoretically would you want to gamble with....that is a different thread.
Onehas to do with reality....and one has to do with unexperienced fantasy.
If someone wrote of witnessing 2 fours of a kind hands in a row, I would find that interesting, as that is what this thread is about.
If that doesnt intereest you...fair enough.....you can start a thread on molecular reoccurance, or quantum theory, or theoretical card shuffling.
this is why I worded it ":that you have been involved with".....Reading in the paper about someone who wins powrball, or walking by a person who wins a 1 million jackpot in a casino ..is not being :involved:.
Quote: LarrySat least it deal with reality. There might be another thread that you might want to start asking what is the most improbable theoretical event you can think of in the universe,
Personally I am more interested what people actually experience.
Just as there is a thread on what famous people you gambled with.......not who theoretically would you want to gamble with....that is a different thread.
Onehas to do with reality....and one has to do with unexperienced fantasy.
If someone wrote of witnessing 2 fours of a kind hands in a row, I would find that interesting, as that is what this thread is about.
If that doesnt intereest you...fair enough.....you can start a thread on molecular reoccurance, or quantum theory, or theoretical card shuffling.
this is why I worded it ":that you have been involved with".....Reading in the paper about someone who wins powrball, or walking by a person who wins a 1 million jackpot in a casino ..is not being :involved:.
Oh well in that case the most mathematically improbable even I've ever been involved with in a casino is I was once dealt a deck of cards. The odds of it being in that order is (1/52!). I'm not sure why this sort of talk seems to personally offend you, but if you like you are welcome to create a thread on mathematically improbable events at less than 5,000:1 odds if you'd like.
Quote: geoffOh well in that case the most mathematically improbable even I've ever been involved with in a casino is I was once dealt a deck of cards. The odds of it being in that order is (1/52!). I'm not sure why this sort of talk seems to personally offend you, but if you like you are welcome to create a thread on mathematically improbable events at less than 5,000:1 odds if you'd like.
The part of your story that doesn't add up is that the dealer dealt all the way to the bottom of a single deck!
Quote: geoffOh well in that case the most mathematically improbable even I've ever been involved with in a casino is I was once dealt a deck of cards. The odds of it being in that order is (1/52!). I'm not sure why this sort of talk seems to personally offend you, but if you like you are welcome to create a thread on mathematically improbable events at less than 5,000:1 odds if you'd like.
these type of folks never quite make it through a job interview.
they answer the questions technically correct without reading into the intent of the question...just looking at a technical loophole to answer in an obscure way. As if to say..look at me look at me.....I can find a way to avoid the question by giving an obscure take.......I am so so clever.
and thats the problem
and when they dont get the job they wonder why.
Kind of reminds me of a scene in the movie "Unstrung Heros". There is a sign in a diner "all the coffee you can drink 50 cents". The the man orders another cup, and is asked for 50 cents more. He says "the sign says all the coffee you can drink for 50 cents"....and the waitress says "yeah.....that was all the coffee you CAN drink for 50 cents.."...ITS ANOTER 50 CENTS FOR THIS CUP.
technically that is an interpretation.....but in reality with that logic that diner in the real world would be out of business.
Quote: geoffOh well in that case the most mathematically improbable even I've ever been involved with in a casino is I was once dealt a deck of cards. The odds of it being in that order is (1/52!). I'm not sure why this sort of talk seems to personally offend you, but if you like you are welcome to create a thread on mathematically improbable events at less than 5,000:1 odds if you'd like.
Geoff, your answer is that of a smart aleck student who wants to slip in a small, obscure fact in to a lecture to make himself feel important. Larry's first post had events well outside of 5000:1. If you are simply trolling, go ahead. However as LarryS stated:
Quote: LarryS (edited for length)There might be another thread that you might want to start asking what is the most improbable theoretical event you can think of in the universe,
Personally I am more interested what people actually experience.
Just as there is a thread on what famous people you gambled with.......not who theoretically would you want to gamble with....that is a different thread.
So please go with the spirit of the thread. If you really want to discuss shuffle probabitities start a thread on it. I will probably throw in a post or two if you pose an interesting question.
Quote: endermikeGeoff, your answer is that of a smart aleck student who wants to slip in a small, obscure fact in to a lecture to make himself feel important. Larry's first post had events well outside of 5000:1. If you are simply trolling, go ahead. However as LarryS stated:
(edited for length)
So please go with the spirit of the thread. If you really want to discuss shuffle probabitities start a thread on it. I will probably throw in a post or two if you pose an interesting question.
It's not really trolling. Several other people posted in response with interest about an improbable mathematical situation and we had what 12 posts about it? They were on topic and relevant to the situation, but apparently that is trolling. I understand the thread creator doesn't like my answer, but other people did and were interested.
It is instead more sensible to focus on events which are understood at the macro (human) level without needing superhuman understanding.
Quote: geoffIt's not really trolling. Several other people posted in response with interest about an improbable mathematical situation and we had what 12 posts about it? They were on topic and relevant to the situation, but apparently that is trolling. I understand the thread creator doesn't like my answer, but other people did and were interested.
yes .other people are as socially backward as you..stop throwing them under the bus.
exclaiming that you are just like others who dont know better is not really a great argument.
you can claim that others pick their noses in public like you....but that doesnt mean its acceptable.
its not that I dont like your answer..its that your answer is immaterial. If you did find 2 sets of 52 cards that were shuffled into the same order...then that would be a great storey.
But what are the chances of another BJ table in the world having the exact same scratch on the wooden frame. The exact depth , length,....its incredible how idiotic we can get with nonsense like you bring up.
Thankfully the majority of the folk have the ability to understand the question and answer it without trying to say "look at me look at me..i am so so smart" If you are insecure and want to show off..make a thread "i am insecure and want to show off".
you can also say thatyou looked at the roulette board and saw the last 24 spins listed....and the chance of those exact same 24 numbers occuring in that orderwas a large number. You witnessed it....its and its an incrediblly large number .......so what...big deal.
Quote: endermikeGeoff, your answer is that of a smart aleck student who wants to slip in a small, obscure fact in to a lecture to make himself feel important. Larry's first post had events well outside of 5000:1. If you are simply trolling, go ahead. However as LarryS stated:
I think that the key point is that observing an event that is well outside 5000:1 is no big deal. Especially for people who gamble all the time. I once got a dealt royal flush, which is 650,000 to 1. So what? There are people (who play lots of video poker) who probably average several of these a year.
I think that the point of the shuffled deck is that every event that we see is unlikely, even if it's not notable. When I play a video poker hand and I get the 3s4d8h9cKs before the draw, that is an extremely unlikely event. The dealt royal is only special because it pays more (ie, it's more notable, but not more unlikely)
Quote: LarrySyes .other people are as socially backward as you..stop throwing them under the bus.
exclaiming that you are just like others who dont know better is not really a great argument.
you can claim that others pick their noses in public like you....but that doesnt mean its acceptable.
its not that I dont like your answer..its that your answer is immaterial. If you did find 2 sets of 52 cards that were shuffled into the same order...then that would be a great storey.
But what are the chances of another BJ table in the world having the exact same scratch on the wooden frame. The exact depth , length,....its incredible how idiotic we can get with nonsense like you bring up.
Thankfully the majority of the folk have the ability to understand the question and answer it without trying to say "look at me look at me..i am so so smart" If you are insecure and want to show off..make a thread "i am insecure and want to show off".
you can also say thatyou looked at the roulette board and saw the last 24 spins listed....and the chance of those exact same 24 numbers occuring in that orderwas a large number. You witnessed it....its and its an incrediblly large number .......so what...big deal.
You're correct I am insecure and want to show off.
I understand that you don't like what I added to the thread, but please don't insult me and the others who posted in here relating to what I posted. Somehow I have greatly offended you and I don't know why you are taking it personally, but you don't have to insult people in order to get your point across.
Quote: geoffYou're correct I am insecure and want to show off.
I understand that you don't like what I added to the thread, but please don't insult me and the others who posted in here relating to what I posted. Somehow I have greatly offended you and I don't know why you are taking it personally, but you don't have to insult people in order to get your point across.
you are insecure and now want to play the victim
I wont bite.
too easy.
