Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[tikay]

Ahh, I see.


Sample calculationsp n n↓ p(n↓) n↑ p(n↑)
0.01 0.14178√365 = 2.70864 2 0.00274 3 0.00820
0.05 0.32029√365 = 6.11916 6 0.04046 7 0.05624
0.1 0.45904√365 = 8.77002 8 0.07434 9 0.09462
0.2 0.66805√365 = 12.76302 12 0.16702 13 0.19441
0.3 0.84460√365 = 16.13607 16 0.28360 17 0.31501
0.5 1.17741√365 = 22.49439 22 0.47570 23 0.50730
0.7 1.55176√365 = 29.64625 29 0.68097 30 0.70632
0.8 1.79412√365 = 34.27666 34 0.79532 35 0.81438
0.9 2.14597√365 = 40.99862 40 0.89123 41 0.90315
0.95 2.44775√365 = 46.76414 46 0.94825 47 0.95477
0.99 3.03485√365 = 57.98081 57 0.99012 58 0.99166

[boldie]

Ahh, I see.


Sample calculationsp n n↓ p(n↓) n↑ p(n↑)
0.01 0.14178√365 = 2.70864 2 0.00274 3 0.00820
0.05 0.32029√365 = 6.11916 6 0.04046 7 0.05624
0.1 0.45904√365 = 8.77002 8 0.07434 9 0.09462
0.2 0.66805√365 = 12.76302 12 0.16702 13 0.19441
0.3 0.84460√365 = 16.13607 16 0.28360 17 0.31501
0.5 1.17741√365 = 22.49439 22 0.47570 23 0.50730
0.7 1.55176√365 = 29.64625 29 0.68097 30 0.70632
0.8 1.79412√365 = 34.27666 34 0.79532 35 0.81438
0.9 2.14597√365 = 40.99862 40 0.89123 41 0.90315
0.95 2.44775√365 = 46.76414 46 0.94825 47 0.95477
0.99 3.03485√365 = 57.98081 57 0.99012 58 0.99166

Exactly, see once you type it out for yourself it al makes sense.

[tikay]

Sorry, but it still makes no sense to me.

"The chances of 2 peeps sharing a Birthday are 100% if 367 peeps are in the room".

Yup, got that.

" 99% probability is reached with just 57 people, and 50% probability with 23 people."

I'll never be able to grasp that.

[TightEnd]

the fascination in it is as follows


I walk up to someone on the Luton omnibus and say

"What is the likelihood that two random people in that group over there have the same birthday?"

Say the group is 20 people

Almost anyone would say the likelihood is low, right?

Well mathematics suggests the reverse of one's intuition, which is always interesting to see

[TightEnd]

Sorry, but it still makes no sense to me.

"The chances of 2 peeps sharing a Birthday are 100% if 367 peeps are in the room".

Yup, got that.

" 99% probability is reached with just 57 people, and 50% probability with 23 people."

I'll never be able to grasp that.

Probabilities are not evenly shaped. Bell curves/normal distributions are the norm

[Claw75]

Sorry, but it still makes no sense to me.

"The chances of 2 peeps sharing a Birthday are 100% if 367 peeps are in the room".

Yup, got that.

" 99% probability is reached with just 57 people, and 50% probability with 23 people."

I'll never be able to grasp that.

Probabilities are not evenly shaped. Bell curves/normal distributions are the norm

a bit like women, then?

[MereNovice]

I was first introduced to the problem at junior school when a teacher asked how many pupils would need to be in the class before it is more likely than not that two pupils share the same birthday.

[nirvana]

I was first introduced to the problem at junior school when a teacher asked how many pupils would need to be in the class before it is more likely than not that two pupils share the same birthday.

Is it 427 ?

[gatso]

think it was amarillo slim who used to make money using the birthday thing. he'd bet at stupid odds that 2 people from a group of 23 or whatever would share the same birthday knowing it was an even money shot. then to keep it fair/random 23 cabs would be ordered and they'd check the drivers' birtdates from their id badges

[MereNovice]

I was first introduced to the problem at junior school when a teacher asked how many pupils would need to be in the class before it is more likely than not that two pupils share the same birthday.

Is it 427 ?

Ooooooooooh, soooooooooo close.

That's current class sizes for you. In my day, classes were so much smaller.

[tikay]

My good friend Des Duffy left Sky Poker this week.

No fallout, nothing sinister, he's just taking a sabbatical, & I hope he enjoys every single moment of it.

I wish I'd done that, though in a way, I suppose I did, when I retired, & then returned to work 4 or 5 years later, all revved up & full of zing.

I knew him long before Sky Poker. He chased me for over a year to become involved in APAT, & I eventually gave in, & agreed to help. Sometimes I regretted becoming involved, it took so much time in the early days, & I was always between loving him & hating him for ensnaring me.

But when I look back on it, it's near the top of my Poker CV, immensely satisfying to have helped create something which has been so good, for so many, & changed the face of Live Poker for regular players. They'd never been near 10k stacks or Added-Value until APAT arrived, & even now, very few Organisers or Events can match our record of not charging Reg Fees for Added-Value events. We make the Sponsors foot that bill, & quite right too. I'll get lambasted for saying it, but I'm incredibly proud of what we in APAT achieved. Latterly, of course, Tighty & Leigh, & others, do all the hard work. To them should go the credit, too. It kinda disappoints me when they give out Poker Awards for this that & the other, "Casino Staff Person" or whatever, good luck to them, but APAT's Staff like Tighty never gets a mention, when it's positively impacted tens of thousands of regular players.

Later, & quite by chance, we both ended up at Sky Poker, an amazing coincidence, but it was exactly that. Des had been with Kingfisher & Argos, I think, then went to Sky (not Sky Poker) on the Commercial side, & few peeps can cut a deal as cute as he can.

I was at Sky Poker before he was. He eventually came in as Head of Poker, & we thought alike on many, many, things. I'm pretty sure he was instrumental in me getting along so well here by larging me up when he could. For that, my thanks. I repaid his trust, I like to think, & have done a decent job for Sky Poker, or I think I have. Then again, I suppose I would say that.

In about 6 or 7 years, we only ever had one fallout, & that was a pretty tricky spot for both of us, one of those stories I doubt I'll ever be able to tell, but if I could, it would be a jaw-dropper. We never agreed on it, but we just set it to one side & things carried on as before, great workmates, & friends.

I wish him nothing but the happiness he deserves, & when he returns to the workplace, buy some Shares in whoever he goes to work for, because he'll do a grand job for them, & end up ruunning the place. He's good. Very good.

The end of an era for me, & I'll miss him very much, but life will go on.

[tikay]

think it was amarillo slim who used to make money using the birthday thing. he'd bet at stupid odds that 2 people from a group of 23 or whatever would share the same birthday knowing it was an even money shot. then to keep it fair/random 23 cabs would be ordered and they'd check the drivers' birtdates from their id badges

Great story!

Mr Slim's later life became mired in dreadful controversy, but his earlier books about his life were a terififc read.

I believe that after his "kiddy" story broke, he & Camel ended up (or almost so?) in a passenger lift in Vegas one day, & Camel never knew what to say. Or perhaps that was just a hypothetical question someone posed. Probably the latter.

A good question, too. I bet there'd be a range of answers to that......

[the sicilian]

Talking of Sky poker... are there any more spt  sats... someone told me there might be some live ones at luton?    not happy bubbling to celtic ...really fancied this as always a good tourney

[tikay]

Talking of Sky poker... are there any more spt  sats... someone told me there might be some live ones at luton?    not happy bubbling to celtic ...really fancied this as always a good tourney

Yup, there will be a Live Super Sat at Luton, they have been allocated 5 seats. It's up to them when they run the Super-Sat, have a word with George.

Did you not try & qualify Online? Several blondes did, iirc.

[TightEnd]

Talking of Sky poker... are there any more spt  sats... someone told me there might be some live ones at luton?    not happy bubbling to celtic ...really fancied this as always a good tourney

there is a live sat, 5 seats avaialble. either on Sun 28 feb or Sun 6 March. £20 rebuy

Waiting for George to confirm the date