Ok, then please convince me otherwise. If you have a shuffle server that ''spits'' out decks into a queue , how has this not unintentionally created an array of the queued decks?


Each value in the deck is an independent coding in a partition space?

a/kx = 1/52

a/ky = ? /52 where k is space.

It doesn't matter. In the single deck case 1/52 is the unconditional probability. In the multi-deck case 1/52 is the sum of the conditional probabilities. It's still exactly the same. The math has been shown to you. I don't know if there are any ways to explain this to you that have not been tried yet.

OMG, this still lives?

I thought we established that pkdk's issue was how Stars picks which deck goes to the next table. And that because it is a random choice along an array, it affects the balance of the universe.

WHY does it even matter....but more importantly......

(<----see undertitle)

Playing live poker, after 52 hands, would you agree that the cards could be arranged in a 52 by 52 array? In the first hand, what is the probability that the first card is the ace of diamonds? Across all of the 52 decks, what is the probability that one of the first cards is the ace of diamonds?

Explain how this 52 by 52 array is different from a virtual 52 by 52 array?

PKDK doesn't know how fractions, decimals and percentages work and convert among one another. He thinks that 50%, 1/2 and 4/8, as examples, are not all the same thing. It is going to be impossible to have a discussion regarding these probability calculations until he goes and picks up a 4th grade (or somewhere around there) math textbook and goes through it enough to obtain a proper understanding of fractions, decimals and percentages and how to convert among them.


He also thinks that the denominator in the fraction describing the probability of picking a particular card from a pile of cards has to be equal to the number of cards in the pile and the numerator has to be equal to the number of such particular cards in such pile. This is why in the x-y array he comes up with ?/x. The denominator has to be the total number of cards in the pile and the numerator has to be the number of cards of the desired value, which number is not known to a certainty in the examples, hence he arrives at "The answer cannot be found," which he writes as "?". This is evident from the fact that when someone says 1/52 he sometimes says there is no 52, there are 30 (or w/e) cards in the pile.


Math is building blocks. You can't do algebra if you can't add, subtract, multiply and divide. You can't calculate probabilities of events if you think 1/2 and 4/8 and 50% are different and/or if you think you need to know with certainty how many of each value is in the pile from which you are choosing and/or that the denominator of the probability fraction has to be equal to the number of choices.





I posted a weather forecast example about the numerator/denominator issue a while back, but I don't think it got any responses:


1 out of 5 chance of rain. 4 out of 5 chance of no rain.








Welp .... good luck PKDK. I don't like your chances of finding someone who agrees with you on this. But best of luck to you. Don't let it take over and ruin your life. At the end of it all, it really is just dealing out a card game.

What is cliffs on what pkdk is saying and how it relates to rigged pokes?

Sent from my BBB100-1 using Tapatalk

But he is wrong. The chance of receiving each unique card is still 1/52 so long as all values are unknown.

Makes sense lol what is there to debate?

Sent from my BBB100-1 using Tapatalk

Guys, I have already said to your math results are ostensible. None of you seem to be able to switch in your minds x to y. You keep giving the results to x.



For the last time I will try this.



You have 52 boxes, if you pick one of the boxes , the chance you will get a stripper jump out is ?

Each value in each deck is independent and the deck is a self contained object.

The code to create a deck of cards shuffled would be along these lines:

public IEnumerator<int> GetShuffledDeck(){
int[52] cardList = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2 0,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36, 37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52);

int[52] shuffledDeck;
for(i=0;i<52;i++){
int nextCardIndex = SuperRandomNumberGenerator(52-i);
shuffledDeck[i] = cardList[i];
cardList.RemoveAtPosition(i);
}

return shuffledDeck.GetEnumerator();
}

The above pseudo code shows a very crude method of creating an array of 52 values that is completely isolated all by itself. A new empty array is also created. Based on the number of cards left, the super magic shuffler which uses all kinds of crazy logic to be 100% random (including current wind speed and velocity in a random airport picked differently each time) a NEW array is built until all 52 slots are filled. Each picked value is taken out of the source array as it's put into the target array.

An enumerator (that is - a device for going thru a list of elements) is created for that array and given back to the table which asked for a deck.

Next table coming along will create brand new arrays, using different memory spaces, allocated by the operating system, which has no link to the prior created arrays.

In short - it works exactly like having a crate of 1 billion decks of cards sitting behind the table. Each deal means you take a brand new deck with exactly 52 values that are uniquely owned by THAT DECK, shuffling them, giving you a unique instance of 52 randomly sorted values, and then dealing.

There is no interaction between the decks. There is no quantum interference. There is no magic array across the decks.

There is no need to pre-shuffle the decks - the deck is shuffled only upon request.

a crate of 1 billion decks sitting behind the table in not pkdk's "problem"

How the "dealer" chooses the next deck is his problem.

He believes that this choice is not random.

....and not seeing that it doesn't matter if the deck choice is random or not.

EVERY new deck from this crate has a randomized 52 cards.

....yet pkdk believes this choice of deck (1/1B) is the broken part of online poker

Well, some people have great interest in watering down any discussion related to rigged poker; all kind of fillers that make it difficult to find posts really related to rigged poker serve the purpose; perhaps they can release the name of their employers to entertain the crowd?

No, you seem to be unable to comprehend that there's no "switching" of x and y. Random is random.
Why are all riggies borderline illiterate? Anyway, even this dumb "theory" has been disproven. The people "watering down any discussion" are the ones that keep this thread around. When we leave it to riggies, it goes literally weeks between posts.

Yes, if you believe the software uses the entire random deck throughout the entire hand. Has anyone seen the software which they claim do so? I have not, and will never do; trade secret, right? I would rather see that deck shuffled and used right in front of my eyes; I can also spot a false shuffle from a real one if I see it on the table (in case the dealer is "rigged")

You would have loved Real Deal Poker (discussed in this thread years ago). They built a machine that YOU could watch shuffle the cards! Riggies said it was the new age of internet poker! It closed within a week and riggies were claiming it was rigged.


Perhaps that is why the mods get annoyed when I post the riggie list where ?/2 riggies are highlighted!

Anyway, you will be happy to know that riggies exist in all forms and you can read about them as you like with the help of the list at the following:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...h#post53299504

Hopefully that will help you with your filtering issues.

All the best.

If you are somewhat literate, you would know it is not that difficult. Not complex at all - just assign a function to each mark based on size, frequency, date of deposit; perhaps, some other factors, and use the value of this functions to develop the hand, so that it benefits a site associated account, the ones that drain the cash from the network. Simple network theory in play: There are sources (the marks) and sinks (the site associated accounts). But I guess even if you work for the rigged site they do not go that far to explain all the details. Obviously you do not work for a non-rigged site; they do not need sinks. IMO, such sites do not exist anymore...

Some probability is involved; mostly to make it less obvious, but it is still obvious enough, still stinks.

Everything pkdk says here presupposes that there is some interaction between the multiple decks. There is no reason to think that. There is never more than 1 deck per hand, period. Each hand starts with a fresh deck and ends with the same deck. If there were any 'coincidences' between one deck and the next, it's entirely due to randomization. And again - if the deck is truly shuffled, it has just as much probability of ending in the exact same order that it started in. It's an incredibly small probability, but it's the same probability of ending in literally any other order.

What is the supposed mechanism of interactions between multiple decks (the 'array')?

As long as you are only using one deck at a time, and each deck is truly randomized, then there is literally no difference between using 1 deck or a billion.

pkdk's basic argument is that preshuffling decks causes them to be used out of the order they were generated in, which causes them be less random. No matter how many people tell him that makes no sense and he's wrong, he just circles back with another terrible word problem to try to get us to understand that everything's ostensible, which he insists on using as a noun.

And I finally get an answer! As I thought you might, you believe it's just a coincidence that the probabilities work out. So, let's try another example, in a moment.

Um, what? That's EXACTLY what I did.

See those pairs I bolded above? Exactly the same pairs you just listed in your post.

So, since you are unconvinced this is not a coincidence, let's play again.

Now let's play with 3 pairs of boxes:

AB
AB
AB

Once again, we shuffle each pair, and end up with, as you like to display it:

??
??
??

Now, what could be behind those question marks? If I have you choose from what you call the y values:

?
?
?

you would suggest that the odds of drawing an A are ?/3, when in fact they are once again 50%, or 1/2. "OMG, not possible - can't have a 1/2 when there are 3 boxes!?!?!?: Yes, pk, you can.

So, here are the possible outcomes, all equally likely:

AB
AB
AB

AB
AB
BA

AB
BA
AB

AB
BA
BA

BA
AB
AB

BA
AB
BA

BA
BA
AB

BA
BA
BA

8 distinct possibilities. Now, so we don't have any confusion again with you suggesting that I'm mixing my x probabilities with my y probabilities, I'll strip out the first column for you:

A
A
A

A
A
B

A
B
A

A
B
B

B
A
A

B
A
B

B
B
A

B
B
B

So, we have: 1 set with 3 A's, 3 sets with 2 A's, 3 sets with 1 A, and 1 set with 0 A's. Odds of getting an A in each set: 100% (1 time), 66.67% (3 times), 33.33% (3 times), 0% (1 time). (Note of course I've rounded to two decimal points here.) What is the average? Yes, it's 50%. Or an even easier way to do this - there are 12 As and 12 Bs in the 8 sets combined.

So once again, the odds are the expected 50%. I won't bother telling you what fractions that can be represented as, so as to avoid getting you off track.

No, the crate of decks is the problem.

I know , that is the problem.

1 billion top cards aligned to the sb on any table. How many top cards are aces?


?/billion aces as top cards

Of course. Who has that much storage space. I'm surprised the clouds haven't come crashing down.

Can you explain why the crate is the problem without using your fuzzy math? No numbers, no arrow, no AK, AK sets....just plain eEnglish?

and please, no ostensible. You haven't shown the ability to use the word correctly.

You got that bit right.

Nope, probability math still a weak point for you. The correct answer is a KNOWN probability. GASP.

I will try , if you have a crate with lets say 100 decks in it, there is 100 top cards, if you are on the small blind, obviously you are getting the top card.


If you have a choice of the 100 decks , before you make the actual choice , all 100 decks are dependent to your choice, by being offered any deck.

All 100 top cards are dependent to your choice,


You have a 1/52 chance of any of the top cards being any specific value.


But you also have an additional chance , a second set of odds, because the 100 top cards have repeat values. i.e ?/100


You could have lets say a 10/100 chance of Ad because 10 of the 100 top cards are Ad,