Two days ago my wife was dealt four of a RF, in diamonds, needing a
10. She got the 10. Yeasterday I was dealt four of a RF, in diamonds,
needing a 10. I got the 10.
At first I thought the odds must be very high for that to happen. But
I think not ... only 1 in 20 that successive RF's will be the same
suit, and needing the same card to complete. Am I right?
It may be the answer depends on how the problem is defined.
only 1 in 20 that successive RF's will be the same
suit, and needing the same card to complete. Am I right?
I think it is only 1 in 20 if the second Royal also happens to come
after being dealt 4 to a Royal.
So the first question should be how often do you get two Royals in a
row that only required a 1 card draw? I don't know the answer to that
one but my personal experience has been that only about half my Royals
have come from drawing 1 card.
Slowpoke
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "brumar_lv" <brumar_lv@...> wrote:
Two days ago my wife was dealt four of a RF, in diamonds, needing a
10. She got the 10. Yeasterday I was dealt four of a RF, in
diamonds,
needing a 10. I got the 10.
Speaking of odds ...
Interesting, today I was dealt 4RF in diamonds needing only the ten to
complete ... I got the 5 of clubs 
... however, I was also dealt 4 RF
twice in hearts needing the queen to complete both times. Both times I
drew the jack of spades. Fortunately I was playing OEJs.
Also, reminds of an event last summer. First, I was dealt 4RF needing
the jack of diamonds, I drew the ten of clubs. Moments later I was
again dealt 4RF, this time in clubs (you guessed it, I needed the ten)
I drew the jack of diamonds.
Later this summer I ended a string of over 200 failed attempts at
drawing to 4RF by finally hitting one. The very next time I was dealt
4RF (about 2 hours later) I also hit that one.
Of course, these are minor-league unusual events that we all see over
time. Then there's the time my wife was dealt 7 straight blackjacks
(this one really is unusual).
Dick
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "brumar_lv" <brumar_lv@...> wrote: