Quote:
Originally Posted by George Rice
This is all well and fine, and somewhat interesting. But let's not lose sight of the fact that we're talking about poker. Measure theory doesn't apply. Basic probability and game theory is all that's required. Post graduate math courses are overkill. Mason commented on Negreanu's lack of understanding of basic statistics and probability required to understand poker, in his opinion. He may not have been accurate in the universe as a whole with respect to 0 and 1 probabilities, but was accurate for the universe that is poker. Is "almost surely" even mentioned in undergraduate probability courses? Statistics being Mason's area of expertise, statistically speaking, aren't "almost surely" and "surely" equivalent (keep in mind, one of you math guys claimed .999... and 1 were equivalent).
Hi George:
My degrees are in math even though I took extra statistics courses and have always worked in the area of mathematical statistics. However, when in graduate school, I did take a course in measure theory, school year 1974 - 1975, but remember very little from it.
However, I do remember a little, and to give someone reading here an idea of what it does, the (Lebesgue) measure of all the rational numbers from 0 to 1 would be zero and the (Lebesgue) measure of the irrational numbers from 0 to 1 would be 1. And what this means is that using these methods intergration can be done where the standard Riemann integration is not applicable.
However, in poker, and all the other stuff we deal with on a day to day basis, none of this applies.
Best wishes,
Mason