The comfort of the shuffle.. or not?

[BengiBaalSapiens]

Hi all!
When playing Hold'em it can be frustrating to see your laid-down power draw click in on the turn.

If you play BM the deck is fixed after the shuffle, but online the deck is constantly shuffling until the last player has made his decision.

So to my question:
does this mean that it is highly unlikely that the same cards would show if you had called or is the probability exactly the same?

[KampfHase]

All I can say to it is: It doesn't matter, does it. It's over and done.

Apart from that: if the deck is constantly shuffling then the actual card that comes might be different from the one that would come if you played that same scenario once again, that's for sure. Yet, as you said, the probability would be exactly the same because the deck has no memory (at least, it shouldn't have...). Why should the probability for one card X to come out of 52 in take one be different from the probabilty of one card X to come out of 52 in take two. Well, at least my mathematical sense tells me this... in case I actually have a mathematical sense at all.

[Kal With A K]

It's unimportant. It's impossible to test.

[LadyWrestler]

"So to my question:
does this mean that it is highly unlikely that the same cards would show if you had called or is the probability exactly the same?"
---
I choose to believe the cards would not have been the same if I had remained in the hand. That works for me! [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

As far as I know, only 'Tilt uses continuous shuffle. 'Stars does not.

[7n7]

[ QUOTE ]
"So to my question:
does this mean that it is highly unlikely that the same cards would show if you had called


[/ QUOTE ]

Fyi, I asked Richard Brodie on FullTilt this very question. Basically, I wondered this after seeing my gutshot hit in 7-stud after I correctly (good 'ol pot odds) folded and then saw my card dealt on 6th to the opponent still in the hand behind me.

Richard stated that b/c the RNG is constantly running, that that card wasn't necessarily the one I would have been given had I stayed in.

And yes, FullTilt uses a constant shuffle. Stars does not and is more like a live casino in that the cards are the same throughout...therefore, that card would have been the one you received had you stayed in.

[joeblack]

[ QUOTE ]
It's unimportant. It's impossible to test.

[/ QUOTE ]

[DeadLily]

If you have no realistic way of affecting which card is dealt next (and I emphasize the word "realistic"), why even worry about it? It's supposed to be a random card, and that's what you get in either scenario. Theoretically, a live dealer could deal cards out of the middle of the deck, and the game would still play the same.

[7n7]

Some people do ask these questions out of sheer curiosity ya' know.

Hopefully folks already understand that from a decision-making standpoint, it should be a non-factor, though I know some don't.

Ironically, I just got back from a trip to MN where I spoke with a gentleman at the Canterbury Center card room who spent about 30 minutes trying to convince the table that a person's thoughts could influence random number generators. I didn't say a word, but just listened. Interesting to say the least. I don't buy it, but interesting still.

[BengiBaalSapiens]

[ QUOTE ]
Some people do ask these questions out of sheer curiosity ya' know.

Hopefully folks already understand that from a decision-making standpoint, it should be a non-factor, though I know some don't.

Ironically, I just got back from a trip to MN where I spoke with a gentleman at the Canterbury Center card room who spent about 30 minutes trying to convince the table that a person's thoughts could influence random number generators. I didn't say a word, but just listened. Interesting to say the least. I don't buy it, but interesting still.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for the reply: asked & answered.