4

A bridge hand consists of 13 cards from a standard deck of 52 cards.

What is the probability of getting a hand that is void in exactly one suit, ie consisting of exactly 3 suits ?

2 Answers2

12

Corrected: Thanks to the OP for querying my previous answer, and to joriki for pointing out that I was counting the wrong thing.

There are $\binom{52}{13}$ ways of choosing $13$ cards, all equally likely. We will be finished if we count the number of hands that have exactly one void. This number is $4$ times the number of hands void in $\spadesuit$ only.We now proceed to count these.

The number of hands void in $\spadesuit$ is $\binom{39}{13}$. This overcounts the hands void in $\spadesuit$ alone. To adjust, we use the
Inclusion-Exclusion Principle.

How many hands are void in both $\spadesuit$ and $\heartsuit$? Clearly $\binom{26}{13}$. The same is true for $\spadesuit$ and $\diamondsuit$, and for $\spadesuit$ and $\clubsuit$. So from our first estimate of $\binom{39}{13}$ we subtract $3\binom{26}{13}$.

But we have subtracted too much. We need to add back the number of hands that are void in all but one of $\heartsuit$, $\diamondsuit$, or $\clubsuit$. There are $3$ of these. Thus the number of hands with exactly one void is $$4\left(\binom{39}{13}-3\binom{26}{13}+3\right).$$

Comment: From the "practical" point of view, we could have stopped with the first term, since in a well-shuffled deck multiple voids have negligibly small probability compared to single voids.

Nate Eldredge
  • 97,710
André Nicolas
  • 507,029
  • If you write out those terms explicitly, you get $32489701776 - 62403600 + 4$, confirming the Comment. – Michael Lugo Jan 12 '12 at 06:02
  • Andre, this is what i thought the # of favorable ways would be initially, but there is an unexpected twist ! And, of course, we are seking the exact figure. – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 06:27
  • @Andre Nicolas: More careful analysis reveals that the # of ways should be C(4,1)C(39,13) - 2C(4,2)C(26,13) + 3C(4,3)*C(13,13) – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 07:32
  • @Andre Nicolas: Well, take some time. And while at it, can you (or anyone else who sees it) give some guidance as to cases where adjustments need to be made while applying inclusion-exclusion, which is why i posted the question ! – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 08:12
  • @Andre Nicolas: I have added certain calculations in http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/98671/non-routine-application-of-inclusion-exclusion . You might like to have a look at it. – true blue anil Jan 13 '12 at 10:00
  • @André: You've counted the number of hands void in at least one suit, since you only subtracted the overcount of the multiply void ones, whereas to get the number with exactly one suit you'd have to subtract the entire count of the multiply void ones. – joriki Jan 13 '12 at 11:33
  • @joriki: Thanks, I had lost track of what was being counted. – André Nicolas Jan 13 '12 at 16:00
  • @true blue anil: Thank you for your persistence. Inclusion-Exclusion worked just fine, with no adjustment. But it was being used correctly to count the wrong thing. – André Nicolas Jan 13 '12 at 16:05
1

Here, I use another way (differing from 1 and 2) for getting the answer. The solution method can be simply used to answer similar questions. I also compare the problem with other related problems.

For each $i=1,2,3,4$, let $A_i$ be the event of that a specific hand has no card of the $i\text{th}$ suit (i.e., one of $\spadesuit$, $\diamondsuit$, $\clubsuit$, and $\heartsuit$).

Then, the probability that one hand is void in exactly one hand is 4 times of the following:

$$ P\left (A_1\cap A'_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right )= P(A_1)-P\left (A_1\cap(A_2\cup A_3 \cup A_4) \right )=P(A_1)-{3 \choose 1}P(A_1\cap A_2)-{3 \choose 2}P(A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3)+{3\choose 3} P(A_1\cap A_2 \cap A_3\cap A_4) . $$

This follows from the relation $P(CD')=P(C)-P(CD)$, the De Morgan's law, and the inclusion-exclusion principle.

The probabilities can be computed as follows:

$$ P(A_1)= \dfrac{ \binom{39}{13}\binom{39}{13,13,13} }{ \binom{52}{13,13,13,13} }= \dfrac{ \binom{39}{13}}{ \binom{52}{13} } $$

$$P(A_1\cap A_2)=\dfrac{ \binom{26}{13}\binom{39}{13,13,13} }{ \binom{52}{13,13,13,13} }= \dfrac{ \binom{26}{13}}{ \binom{52}{13} }$$

$$P(A_1\cap A_2 \cap A_3)=\dfrac{ \binom{13}{13}\binom{39}{13,13,13} }{ \binom{52}{13,13,13,13} }= \dfrac{ 1}{ \binom{52}{13} }$$

$$P(A_1\cap A_2 \cap A_3\cap A_4)=\dfrac{ 0}{ \binom{52}{13} }.$$

Hence, the final answer is

$$\binom{4}{1}\times P\left (A_1\cap A'_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right )=4\frac{\binom{39}{13}-3\binom{26}{13}+3}{\binom{52}{13}}=0.05096725.$$

This solution method can be simply used to answer similar questions, e.g., a specific hand is void in exactly $k$ suits. For $k=2$, we have

$$\binom{4}{2}\times P\left (A_1\cap A_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right)$$

where

$$ P\left (A_1\cap A_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right )= P(A_1\cap A_2)-{2 \choose 1}P(A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3)+{2 \choose 2}P(A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3\cap A_4). $$

For a better comparison with other variants of this problem, also consider the related probability that a specific hand is void in at least one suit, computed below:

$$ P\left ( \cup_{i=1}^4A_i \right )={4 \choose 1}P(A_1)-{4 \choose 2}P(A_1\cap A_2)+{4\choose 3} P(A_1\cap A_2 \cap A_3)-{4\choose 4} P(A_1\cap A_2 \cap A_3\cap A_4)=0.051065521. $$

The answer of this problem is the sum of the answers to the previous problem where $k$ is 1, 2, or 3.

$$\binom{4}{1} P\left (A_1\cap A'_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right)+\binom{4}{2} P\left (A_1\cap A_2\cap A'_3\cap A'_4 \right)+\binom{4}{3} P\left (A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3\cap A'_4 \right)$$

Note that the void probability given in Wikipedia 3, i.e. 0.0512, is not accurate.

Another related and challenging probability that at least one hand is void in at least one suit is studied here 4, which is 0.18376632718730682.

Amir
  • 4,305
  • Good show. The MSE community started thinking of generalisation of the inclusion-exclusion principle after this question. – true blue anil Nov 12 '23 at 06:00
  • @true blue anil Thanks for your 60-year services to our community! I just improved the answer and showed how the method can be used to solve other variants of the problem. You may also see a related problem https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/919589/probability-that-at-least-one-of-four-hands-missing-at-least-one-suit/4786416#4786416 – Amir Nov 12 '23 at 10:02