$n$ players are each dealt two cards — what's the probability that $k$ of them have a pair?












4












$begingroup$


Each of $nleq26$ players is dealt $2$ cards from a standard $52$-card poker deck. What is $textrm{P}left(n,kright)$, the probability that exactly $k$ of the $n$ players have a pair?



(A pair is a hand like $8 clubsuit, 8 heartsuit$ or $K clubsuit, K diamondsuit$.)





This question was previously asked at Poker.SE without a satisfactory answer: https://poker.stackexchange.com/questions/4087/probability-of-x-pocket-pairs-at-a-table-of-n-people-nlhe










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:03










  • $begingroup$
    So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:05










  • $begingroup$
    @Haran: Affirmative.
    $endgroup$
    – user1180576
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:10










  • $begingroup$
    Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
    $endgroup$
    – drhab
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:27


















4












$begingroup$


Each of $nleq26$ players is dealt $2$ cards from a standard $52$-card poker deck. What is $textrm{P}left(n,kright)$, the probability that exactly $k$ of the $n$ players have a pair?



(A pair is a hand like $8 clubsuit, 8 heartsuit$ or $K clubsuit, K diamondsuit$.)





This question was previously asked at Poker.SE without a satisfactory answer: https://poker.stackexchange.com/questions/4087/probability-of-x-pocket-pairs-at-a-table-of-n-people-nlhe










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    What is a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:03










  • $begingroup$
    So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:05










  • $begingroup$
    @Haran: Affirmative.
    $endgroup$
    – user1180576
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:10










  • $begingroup$
    Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
    $endgroup$
    – drhab
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:27
















4












4








4


1



$begingroup$


Each of $nleq26$ players is dealt $2$ cards from a standard $52$-card poker deck. What is $textrm{P}left(n,kright)$, the probability that exactly $k$ of the $n$ players have a pair?



(A pair is a hand like $8 clubsuit, 8 heartsuit$ or $K clubsuit, K diamondsuit$.)





This question was previously asked at Poker.SE without a satisfactory answer: https://poker.stackexchange.com/questions/4087/probability-of-x-pocket-pairs-at-a-table-of-n-people-nlhe










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Each of $nleq26$ players is dealt $2$ cards from a standard $52$-card poker deck. What is $textrm{P}left(n,kright)$, the probability that exactly $k$ of the $n$ players have a pair?



(A pair is a hand like $8 clubsuit, 8 heartsuit$ or $K clubsuit, K diamondsuit$.)





This question was previously asked at Poker.SE without a satisfactory answer: https://poker.stackexchange.com/questions/4087/probability-of-x-pocket-pairs-at-a-table-of-n-people-nlhe







probability combinatorics






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 27 '18 at 9:06







user1180576

















asked Dec 27 '18 at 8:58









user1180576user1180576

264




264












  • $begingroup$
    What is a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:03










  • $begingroup$
    So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:05










  • $begingroup$
    @Haran: Affirmative.
    $endgroup$
    – user1180576
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:10










  • $begingroup$
    Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
    $endgroup$
    – drhab
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:27




















  • $begingroup$
    What is a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:03










  • $begingroup$
    So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
    $endgroup$
    – Haran
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:05










  • $begingroup$
    @Haran: Affirmative.
    $endgroup$
    – user1180576
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:10










  • $begingroup$
    Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
    $endgroup$
    – drhab
    Dec 27 '18 at 9:27


















$begingroup$
What is a pair?
$endgroup$
– Haran
Dec 27 '18 at 9:03




$begingroup$
What is a pair?
$endgroup$
– Haran
Dec 27 '18 at 9:03












$begingroup$
So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
$endgroup$
– Haran
Dec 27 '18 at 9:05




$begingroup$
So any $2$ of the cards in all the $4$ cards of ace for example are a pair?
$endgroup$
– Haran
Dec 27 '18 at 9:05












$begingroup$
@Haran: Affirmative.
$endgroup$
– user1180576
Dec 27 '18 at 9:10




$begingroup$
@Haran: Affirmative.
$endgroup$
– user1180576
Dec 27 '18 at 9:10












$begingroup$
Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Dec 27 '18 at 9:27






$begingroup$
Right now I do not believe in the existence of an elegant solution and a closed formula. It has happpened before though that I was wrong in a sortlike disbelief.
$endgroup$
– drhab
Dec 27 '18 at 9:27












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

First, let us compute $f(m)$, the number of ways to deal two cards to each of $m$ people which are all pairs. We can do this using a computer as follows. If we further let $f(m,r)$ be the probability that all $m$ people have pairs when dealt from a deck of $4r$ cards, then
$$
f(m,r) = rbinom42big(f(m-1,r-1)+(m-1)f(m-2,r-1)big)
$$

The first summand accounts for ways where the first player gets a pair that no one else has, and the second accounts for ways where some other player also gets that pair. The above recursive equation allows you to compute $f(m)=f(m,13)$ quickly using dynamic programming.



Next, use the generalized principle of inclusion exclusion. Letting $E_i$ be the event that the $i^{th}$ player has a pair, then
begin{align}
P(n,k)
&=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}mathbb P(E_1cap E_2cap dots cap E_i)\
&=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}frac{f(i)}{frac{52!}{2^i(52-2i)!}}
end{align}



You can see this in action here, just click the run button at the top and enter your desired value of $n$.





Also, there is the following "closed form" for $P(n,k)$:



$$
boxed{P(n,k) = binom{n}{k}sum_{i=k}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{n-k}{i-k}frac{2^i(52-2i)!}{52!}cdot i!cdot [x^i](1+6x+3x^2)^{13}}
$$

Here, the notation $[x^i]f(x)$ means the coefficient of $x^i$ in the polynomial $f(x)$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    The probability that a particular player is dealt a pair is $frac{4-1}{52-1}=frac{1}{17}$ so the expected number of pairs is $frac{n}{17}$



    I suspect the distribution is not going to be far away from Binomial with parameters $n$ and $p=frac{1}{17}$. This is not quite correct (for example when $n=26$ the probability of exactly $25$ pairs is $0$ rather than $4.24times 10^{−30}$) but I would be surprised if it were substantially misleading



    As an example, here are a couple of simulations of $100000$ million deals to $6$ players



    Pairs                    0        1         2         3         4         5         6 
    Simulation 1 69459 26065 4094 367 13 2 0
    Simulation 2 69675 25918 4063 329 15 0 0
    Binomial probability 0.695066 0.260650 0.040727 0.003394 0.000159 0.0000040 0.00000004


    and, given the uncertainty of simulation, these do not look noticeably different. The five pocket pairs out of six seen at the link in your link was indeed unlikely






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053726%2fn-players-are-each-dealt-two-cards-whats-the-probability-that-k-of-them-h%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes








      2 Answers
      2






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      1












      $begingroup$

      First, let us compute $f(m)$, the number of ways to deal two cards to each of $m$ people which are all pairs. We can do this using a computer as follows. If we further let $f(m,r)$ be the probability that all $m$ people have pairs when dealt from a deck of $4r$ cards, then
      $$
      f(m,r) = rbinom42big(f(m-1,r-1)+(m-1)f(m-2,r-1)big)
      $$

      The first summand accounts for ways where the first player gets a pair that no one else has, and the second accounts for ways where some other player also gets that pair. The above recursive equation allows you to compute $f(m)=f(m,13)$ quickly using dynamic programming.



      Next, use the generalized principle of inclusion exclusion. Letting $E_i$ be the event that the $i^{th}$ player has a pair, then
      begin{align}
      P(n,k)
      &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}mathbb P(E_1cap E_2cap dots cap E_i)\
      &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}frac{f(i)}{frac{52!}{2^i(52-2i)!}}
      end{align}



      You can see this in action here, just click the run button at the top and enter your desired value of $n$.





      Also, there is the following "closed form" for $P(n,k)$:



      $$
      boxed{P(n,k) = binom{n}{k}sum_{i=k}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{n-k}{i-k}frac{2^i(52-2i)!}{52!}cdot i!cdot [x^i](1+6x+3x^2)^{13}}
      $$

      Here, the notation $[x^i]f(x)$ means the coefficient of $x^i$ in the polynomial $f(x)$.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$


















        1












        $begingroup$

        First, let us compute $f(m)$, the number of ways to deal two cards to each of $m$ people which are all pairs. We can do this using a computer as follows. If we further let $f(m,r)$ be the probability that all $m$ people have pairs when dealt from a deck of $4r$ cards, then
        $$
        f(m,r) = rbinom42big(f(m-1,r-1)+(m-1)f(m-2,r-1)big)
        $$

        The first summand accounts for ways where the first player gets a pair that no one else has, and the second accounts for ways where some other player also gets that pair. The above recursive equation allows you to compute $f(m)=f(m,13)$ quickly using dynamic programming.



        Next, use the generalized principle of inclusion exclusion. Letting $E_i$ be the event that the $i^{th}$ player has a pair, then
        begin{align}
        P(n,k)
        &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}mathbb P(E_1cap E_2cap dots cap E_i)\
        &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}frac{f(i)}{frac{52!}{2^i(52-2i)!}}
        end{align}



        You can see this in action here, just click the run button at the top and enter your desired value of $n$.





        Also, there is the following "closed form" for $P(n,k)$:



        $$
        boxed{P(n,k) = binom{n}{k}sum_{i=k}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{n-k}{i-k}frac{2^i(52-2i)!}{52!}cdot i!cdot [x^i](1+6x+3x^2)^{13}}
        $$

        Here, the notation $[x^i]f(x)$ means the coefficient of $x^i$ in the polynomial $f(x)$.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$
















          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          First, let us compute $f(m)$, the number of ways to deal two cards to each of $m$ people which are all pairs. We can do this using a computer as follows. If we further let $f(m,r)$ be the probability that all $m$ people have pairs when dealt from a deck of $4r$ cards, then
          $$
          f(m,r) = rbinom42big(f(m-1,r-1)+(m-1)f(m-2,r-1)big)
          $$

          The first summand accounts for ways where the first player gets a pair that no one else has, and the second accounts for ways where some other player also gets that pair. The above recursive equation allows you to compute $f(m)=f(m,13)$ quickly using dynamic programming.



          Next, use the generalized principle of inclusion exclusion. Letting $E_i$ be the event that the $i^{th}$ player has a pair, then
          begin{align}
          P(n,k)
          &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}mathbb P(E_1cap E_2cap dots cap E_i)\
          &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}frac{f(i)}{frac{52!}{2^i(52-2i)!}}
          end{align}



          You can see this in action here, just click the run button at the top and enter your desired value of $n$.





          Also, there is the following "closed form" for $P(n,k)$:



          $$
          boxed{P(n,k) = binom{n}{k}sum_{i=k}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{n-k}{i-k}frac{2^i(52-2i)!}{52!}cdot i!cdot [x^i](1+6x+3x^2)^{13}}
          $$

          Here, the notation $[x^i]f(x)$ means the coefficient of $x^i$ in the polynomial $f(x)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          First, let us compute $f(m)$, the number of ways to deal two cards to each of $m$ people which are all pairs. We can do this using a computer as follows. If we further let $f(m,r)$ be the probability that all $m$ people have pairs when dealt from a deck of $4r$ cards, then
          $$
          f(m,r) = rbinom42big(f(m-1,r-1)+(m-1)f(m-2,r-1)big)
          $$

          The first summand accounts for ways where the first player gets a pair that no one else has, and the second accounts for ways where some other player also gets that pair. The above recursive equation allows you to compute $f(m)=f(m,13)$ quickly using dynamic programming.



          Next, use the generalized principle of inclusion exclusion. Letting $E_i$ be the event that the $i^{th}$ player has a pair, then
          begin{align}
          P(n,k)
          &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}mathbb P(E_1cap E_2cap dots cap E_i)\
          &=sum_{i=0}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{i}{k}binom{n}{i}frac{f(i)}{frac{52!}{2^i(52-2i)!}}
          end{align}



          You can see this in action here, just click the run button at the top and enter your desired value of $n$.





          Also, there is the following "closed form" for $P(n,k)$:



          $$
          boxed{P(n,k) = binom{n}{k}sum_{i=k}^n(-1)^{i-k}binom{n-k}{i-k}frac{2^i(52-2i)!}{52!}cdot i!cdot [x^i](1+6x+3x^2)^{13}}
          $$

          Here, the notation $[x^i]f(x)$ means the coefficient of $x^i$ in the polynomial $f(x)$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Dec 29 '18 at 22:43

























          answered Dec 28 '18 at 14:33









          Mike EarnestMike Earnest

          23.2k12051




          23.2k12051























              0












              $begingroup$

              The probability that a particular player is dealt a pair is $frac{4-1}{52-1}=frac{1}{17}$ so the expected number of pairs is $frac{n}{17}$



              I suspect the distribution is not going to be far away from Binomial with parameters $n$ and $p=frac{1}{17}$. This is not quite correct (for example when $n=26$ the probability of exactly $25$ pairs is $0$ rather than $4.24times 10^{−30}$) but I would be surprised if it were substantially misleading



              As an example, here are a couple of simulations of $100000$ million deals to $6$ players



              Pairs                    0        1         2         3         4         5         6 
              Simulation 1 69459 26065 4094 367 13 2 0
              Simulation 2 69675 25918 4063 329 15 0 0
              Binomial probability 0.695066 0.260650 0.040727 0.003394 0.000159 0.0000040 0.00000004


              and, given the uncertainty of simulation, these do not look noticeably different. The five pocket pairs out of six seen at the link in your link was indeed unlikely






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$


















                0












                $begingroup$

                The probability that a particular player is dealt a pair is $frac{4-1}{52-1}=frac{1}{17}$ so the expected number of pairs is $frac{n}{17}$



                I suspect the distribution is not going to be far away from Binomial with parameters $n$ and $p=frac{1}{17}$. This is not quite correct (for example when $n=26$ the probability of exactly $25$ pairs is $0$ rather than $4.24times 10^{−30}$) but I would be surprised if it were substantially misleading



                As an example, here are a couple of simulations of $100000$ million deals to $6$ players



                Pairs                    0        1         2         3         4         5         6 
                Simulation 1 69459 26065 4094 367 13 2 0
                Simulation 2 69675 25918 4063 329 15 0 0
                Binomial probability 0.695066 0.260650 0.040727 0.003394 0.000159 0.0000040 0.00000004


                and, given the uncertainty of simulation, these do not look noticeably different. The five pocket pairs out of six seen at the link in your link was indeed unlikely






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$
















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  The probability that a particular player is dealt a pair is $frac{4-1}{52-1}=frac{1}{17}$ so the expected number of pairs is $frac{n}{17}$



                  I suspect the distribution is not going to be far away from Binomial with parameters $n$ and $p=frac{1}{17}$. This is not quite correct (for example when $n=26$ the probability of exactly $25$ pairs is $0$ rather than $4.24times 10^{−30}$) but I would be surprised if it were substantially misleading



                  As an example, here are a couple of simulations of $100000$ million deals to $6$ players



                  Pairs                    0        1         2         3         4         5         6 
                  Simulation 1 69459 26065 4094 367 13 2 0
                  Simulation 2 69675 25918 4063 329 15 0 0
                  Binomial probability 0.695066 0.260650 0.040727 0.003394 0.000159 0.0000040 0.00000004


                  and, given the uncertainty of simulation, these do not look noticeably different. The five pocket pairs out of six seen at the link in your link was indeed unlikely






                  share|cite|improve this answer











                  $endgroup$



                  The probability that a particular player is dealt a pair is $frac{4-1}{52-1}=frac{1}{17}$ so the expected number of pairs is $frac{n}{17}$



                  I suspect the distribution is not going to be far away from Binomial with parameters $n$ and $p=frac{1}{17}$. This is not quite correct (for example when $n=26$ the probability of exactly $25$ pairs is $0$ rather than $4.24times 10^{−30}$) but I would be surprised if it were substantially misleading



                  As an example, here are a couple of simulations of $100000$ million deals to $6$ players



                  Pairs                    0        1         2         3         4         5         6 
                  Simulation 1 69459 26065 4094 367 13 2 0
                  Simulation 2 69675 25918 4063 329 15 0 0
                  Binomial probability 0.695066 0.260650 0.040727 0.003394 0.000159 0.0000040 0.00000004


                  and, given the uncertainty of simulation, these do not look noticeably different. The five pocket pairs out of six seen at the link in your link was indeed unlikely







                  share|cite|improve this answer














                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer








                  edited Dec 27 '18 at 10:53

























                  answered Dec 27 '18 at 10:24









                  HenryHenry

                  100k480166




                  100k480166






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053726%2fn-players-are-each-dealt-two-cards-whats-the-probability-that-k-of-them-h%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Bressuire

                      Cabo Verde

                      Gyllenstierna