What are the circumstances when inclusion-exclusion can't be routinely applied, and some adjustments have to be made ?
This question arises from a problem of finding the probability of getting a bridge hand void in exactly one suit, ie consisting of exactly 3 suits ?
Leaving aside the denominator of C(52,13) for the nonce, one would have thought that the # of favorable ways = C(4,1)*C(39,13) - C(4,2)*C(26,13) + C(4,3)*C(13,13)
but instead it is C(4,1)*C(39,13) - 2*C(4,2)*C(26,13) + 3*C(4,3)*C(13,13).
The original q, A bridge hand void in one suit led to the predictable (incorrect) answer, w/o resolution of the issue.
Addendum:
Since there is some skepticism about the "non-routine" formula, i have worked out a solution by another (rather laborious method)
suitwise cards # of ways
11-1-1-0 ..... 158184
10-2-1-0 .... 6960096
9-3-1-0 .... 63800880
9-2-2-0 .... 52200720
8-4-1-0 ... 287103960
8-3-2-0 ... 689049504
7-5-1-0 ... 689049504
7-4-2-0 .. 2296831680
7-3-3-0 .. 1684343232
6-6-1-0 ... 459366336
6-5-2-0 .. 4134297024
6-4-3-0 .. 8421716160
5-5-3-0 .. 5684658408
5-4-4-0 .. 7895358900
......... 32364894588
This tallies exactly with the "non-routine" application of inclusion-exclusion, whereas the "routine" application yields a figure of 32427298180.
Maybe someone can help....