It is. Think of rolling a dice twice. The chances of getting the same number the second time as the first are 1 in 6. This is because it doesn't matter what the first number is. If you roll a 5 first, you have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling a 5 second. Its similar to the odds of being dealt a pair in holdem, where your first card doesn't matter - its the second one that is important.

Now, if you specify the flop you want to see (say AdAcAh) BEFORE you look for pairs of identical flops - then you have the probability you suggest - but you aren't, you are looking for any identical flop.

[x] Can't believe I'm posting in this thread.

I think you just proved my point, there are 4 out comes to flipping the coin twice, so if its HH thats one in 4, or 25% not 50/50. My question realates to back to back occurances, not one occuance then another.

If its rigged its by a very small %.

I'm ITM ~25% every month so atleast its consistent with obvious downswings and upswings throught. But you need enough volume for that.

The standard deviation is small too.

When I see the complete losers stats, they are just consistently bad, so the sites can't be "helping" them that much.

This makes a little more sense, however I'm not quite there. Thanks Pyro for the input.

Ignoring the order of the cards we only have 132600/6 = 22100 possible flops.

The chance that 10 observed flops are different is:

[(22099 * 22098 * ..... 22091)/22100^9]
= 0.99796558132

Chance of a set of 10 hands containing a duplicated flop is 1 in 491.5

Chance of 600 sets of 10 hands not containing a duplicated flop is 490.5/491.5^600 = 30% (not incredibly unlikely as I posted above but fairly unlikely).

See my post from before - "...why was my post moved to the Rigged debate? There is a difference between murder and manslaughter, there is also a difference between rigged and flawed. I never said Pokerstars was rigged."

Yes - unless you set conditions for the first flop a priori.

It's the difference between "hey, I just got AA twice in a row, what are the odds on that?" and "what are the odds I'll get AA on my next two hands?"

Pyro, order is the key component here, if it wasn't I wouldn't have posted.

You are still not thinking about it quite correctly.

The chances of observing HH or TT is 25% + 25% = 50%, and both of these are 'back to back'.

On second thoughts we can probably ignore this factor, as the poster only mentioned that he had a database of 6000 hands, not 6000 hands that saw the flop... roughly the two factors may counteract each other.

The first number in my post of around 18% is probably not too bad a guess, it may even be a bit less, say 15%.

Yep then see my first post, 18.5% is a good estimate of the likelihood of what you saw... nothing special I'm afraid

Its only 50% after the first flip, I talking about it before the flip.

before
HH is 25%
TT is 25%
TH is 25%
HT is 25%

after
H = 50%
T = 50%

please remove the word proof from your title and then hit yourself with something hard

Right, so the chance of seeing *either* HH *or* TT is 25%+25% = 50%.
If you see one of these two combinations you flipped the same side 'back to back'.
If you still don't get it then sorry there's nothing else I can really say

what about TH or HT, those are also 50%?

The chance of observing either TH or HT is 50% yep. Those are the results that we're not interested in as they are not 'back to back' identical flips.

We might not be intersted in them but they are possabilities which are in the mix to screw up are back to back occurances. So we have to include them. Also its not either or (HH or TT) its specificlly HH.

This is like saying you would only have posted if you observed JQTddd twice in ten hands, and that you wouldn't have posted if you observed, say, 567ccc twice in ten hands. There is nothing special about what the hand was, only the fact that you saw it twice.

Same thing here, HH or TT are both the 'same side of the coin twice'. What's so special about Heads?

Pyro is right. Look at it this way: if you throw a die twice, you will have 36 possible outcomes, of which 6 (1-1, 2-2, 3-3 etc) are back to back occurrences. 6/36 = 1/6. I.e. there is a 1/6 chance something happens that will make you go "omg that result just happened back to back, what are the odds...?? I'll go post in the 'craps is rigged' thread!", not 1/36.

Don't mean to appear stubborn but its like saying JQTddd is HH and 567ccc is TT, so thats why is specificlly has to be HH. I did not observe 567ccc, I only observed JQTddd.

I'm starting to think I'm being levelled but let's give this one last go.

Would you have posted a similar thread to the one you did post if you had observed 567ccc being flopped twice in quick succession? How about if you had observed Ah7c2s being dealt twice in succession?

If no, then fair enough, but I don't see why you think JQTddd is so special.

If yes, then what the flop actually was is irrelevant, only the fact that it was repeated matters.

It's because they correlate with one another that makes them unique. Here is my thought process, as messed up as it might be.

If I witnessed in the dice example, say 4 4, I would ask what are the odds of rolling 4 4 in a row, not what are the odds of rolling either 1 1 in a row, or 2 2 in a row, or 3 3 in a row etc.. etc.., so what if I asked what are the odds of rolling 1 1 in a row, before the roll came out? It should still be the same odds as if rolling 4 4 in a row, before the roll came out.

This thread is so lol I can't stop coming back for a laugh!

Anyone else notice that the average rigtard post:

1) Is filled with incorrect grammar and spelling
2) Is poorly structured
3) Contains epic fail in logic and critical thinking skills
4) Always says something like I won at X site, but can't win at Y site?

#4 is especially hilarious b/c I've played at probably 5-10 different sites, and there's always some moron saying "this site rewards bad play f u (insert site name here)" at every single site!

It's amazing that some of you idiots still think UB and AP rigged their RNG when the scandal was player cheating.

Equally amazing is how some of you idiots think the RNG is rigged, but can't specify how exactly it's being rigged! If I play 1000 hands and profit $500 or play 1000 hands and lose $500, the site still makes the same amount of money off me in either scenario!

obv you haven't been following the math, nor have you read the previous posts "...why was my post moved to the Rigged debate? There is a difference between murder and manslaughter, there is also a difference between rigged and flawed. I never said it was rigged."

I don't want to be unkind but you can't 'follow the math' either, as you fail to understand probability that would be taught to GCSE students (14-16 year olds).

Also, there is no difference between flawed and rigged as per the standard usage of those words. 'rigged' is anything that is not indistinguishable from purely random dealing. What is 'flawed' if not that?