Discrete Lucky and High Stakes Lesbians
(from the Irrational Monkey)
I was just musing about luck, and whether I had it, specifically as evidenced by single high stakes poker hand.
Getting dealt AA is very unlikely, about a .5% chance on a given hand I believe. I got AA as my first hand when I sat down!! That was very lucky!
Now the guy next to me had KK. That was lucky for him. But for him to have KK and me to have AA was very very improbable and so very very unlucky for him!
Once we were all-in the chance that KK defeats AA is about 10%. So the flop was pretty unlucky for me.
But the scale of my pre-flop luckiness dwarfs my flop unluckiness (ie I was extremely lucky at one juncture, and then fairly unlucky at the next). And conversely, my opponents bad luck was much greater in scale than his subsequent good luck. On the other hand, when you get lucky/unlucky in that order in Poker like I did, it has the side effect of causing you to loose all your money, even if you were more lucky than unlucky.
Then the question comes up, do you have to view the set of events in terms of wholistic luck and ultimate outcome of all involved events? In that case I would be unlucky, because the turn of sequence was unlucky for someone trying to preserve his stack over a full hand.
It seems clear that dealing the hand, and flipping the communal cards must be viewed as separate discrete statsitical events. Indeed, that's how we view odds when we play. On the other hand, it is all predetermined once the cards are shuffled, so maybe it is possible for a wider view of luck that includes related outcomes. However, the game choices are not determine by the cards. I think it stands that the concept of luck can only tractably relate to the pure discrete card probababilities.
THEREFORE, overall when it came to the cards, I had really good net-positive luck! Going broke was a mere contingent irony.
************
As you know from playing poker with me, I embrace such things as randomness and irrationality with a monkey-like fervor. It is nice to know that randomness loves me back. She's a fickle lover, to be sure. But then, so am I.
I don't know why luck has to be a lady. That made the last paragraph have undertones of lesbian action. Maybe even lesbian monkeys. Oh why whyyy whyyyy? Delete image!!
Speaking of stuff like that, but different in several imoprtant ways, let's assume that a group of lesbian _humans_ play intense highly-skilled poker and then it devloves into a make-out fest. And yah they are super hot. How much would you all pay for that porno flick? You are basicically a focus group for all the men on party poker, so I think it is safe to say I can add that to my list of million dollar ideas.
This train of thought has officially veered off the tracks and crashed.
I was just musing about luck, and whether I had it, specifically as evidenced by single high stakes poker hand.
Getting dealt AA is very unlikely, about a .5% chance on a given hand I believe. I got AA as my first hand when I sat down!! That was very lucky!
Now the guy next to me had KK. That was lucky for him. But for him to have KK and me to have AA was very very improbable and so very very unlucky for him!
Once we were all-in the chance that KK defeats AA is about 10%. So the flop was pretty unlucky for me.
But the scale of my pre-flop luckiness dwarfs my flop unluckiness (ie I was extremely lucky at one juncture, and then fairly unlucky at the next). And conversely, my opponents bad luck was much greater in scale than his subsequent good luck. On the other hand, when you get lucky/unlucky in that order in Poker like I did, it has the side effect of causing you to loose all your money, even if you were more lucky than unlucky.
Then the question comes up, do you have to view the set of events in terms of wholistic luck and ultimate outcome of all involved events? In that case I would be unlucky, because the turn of sequence was unlucky for someone trying to preserve his stack over a full hand.
It seems clear that dealing the hand, and flipping the communal cards must be viewed as separate discrete statsitical events. Indeed, that's how we view odds when we play. On the other hand, it is all predetermined once the cards are shuffled, so maybe it is possible for a wider view of luck that includes related outcomes. However, the game choices are not determine by the cards. I think it stands that the concept of luck can only tractably relate to the pure discrete card probababilities.
THEREFORE, overall when it came to the cards, I had really good net-positive luck! Going broke was a mere contingent irony.
************
As you know from playing poker with me, I embrace such things as randomness and irrationality with a monkey-like fervor. It is nice to know that randomness loves me back. She's a fickle lover, to be sure. But then, so am I.
I don't know why luck has to be a lady. That made the last paragraph have undertones of lesbian action. Maybe even lesbian monkeys. Oh why whyyy whyyyy? Delete image!!
Speaking of stuff like that, but different in several imoprtant ways, let's assume that a group of lesbian _humans_ play intense highly-skilled poker and then it devloves into a make-out fest. And yah they are super hot. How much would you all pay for that porno flick? You are basicically a focus group for all the men on party poker, so I think it is safe to say I can add that to my list of million dollar ideas.
This train of thought has officially veered off the tracks and crashed.
posted by Four Hands at 6:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home