Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 6877216" data-attributes="member: 6795602">you do realize that removing low sets from the new subset does actually increase the probability that any given combination of higher stats will see play.A simple example. Let's take the equal distribution of 1,2,3. If I discard the initial result of one then my chance of ultimately ending up with a 2 increases to 50% instead of 33.3333%. Same for a 3.&nbsp; It's imperative that you admit that discarding certain results and rerolling them increases the probability that The non discarded is ultimately selected.In this equal distribution it's easy to calculate.&nbsp; The chance of getting a 2 plus the chance of getting a 1 times the chances of getting a 2 + the chance of getting a 1 squared times the chance of getting a 2, etc...&nbsp; This is the geometric series with r = 1/3 and constant 1/3. Which is 1/3 * 3/2 = 1/2. There. A provable example that shows you are incorrect.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 6877216, member: 6795602"] you do realize that removing low sets from the new subset does actually increase the probability that any given combination of higher stats will see play. A simple example. Let's take the equal distribution of 1,2,3. If I discard the initial result of one then my chance of ultimately ending up with a 2 increases to 50% instead of 33.3333%. Same for a 3. It's imperative that you admit that discarding certain results and rerolling them increases the probability that The non discarded is ultimately selected. In this equal distribution it's easy to calculate. The chance of getting a 2 plus the chance of getting a 1 times the chances of getting a 2 + the chance of getting a 1 squared times the chance of getting a 2, etc... This is the geometric series with r = 1/3 and constant 1/3. Which is 1/3 * 3/2 = 1/2. There. A provable example that shows you are incorrect. [/QUOTE]

Verification