Set over Set

What are the odds?...

I have been playing on UB for over a year, and I have never seen a situation like this:

Over the course of 18 hands on a $3/$6 table (10 seated), there were 20 total pocket pairs dealt that were shown down (so, not including any that were folded during the course of the hands). Isn't that excessive?

Also, I would like to know the following if anyone knows:
1) What are the odds of exactly 2 players (out of 10) being dealt pocket pairs on a given hand?
and
2) What are the odds of those SAME 2 players then hitting sets on the flop?

I know someone out there will know the answers...

[m1illion]

how about set - set - set on the flop. just had this yesterday. betting was a free for all.

[LetYouDown]

Assuming two players with a different pocket pair see a flop, the probability that they'll both hit sets (including quads):

[C(2,1) * C(2,1) * C(46,1)]/C(46,3) = 1.21% = 81.6 to 1

For set over set over set with three separate pairs:

[C(2,1) * C(2,1) * C(2,1)]/C(44,3) = .06% = ~1666 to 1

[Stephen Gray]

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming two players with a different pocket pair see a flop, the probability that they'll both hit sets (including quads):

[C(2,1) * C(2,1) * C(46,1)]/C(46,3) = 1.21% = 81.6 to 1

For set over set over set with three separate pairs:

[C(2,1) * C(2,1) * C(2,1)]/C(44,3) = .06% = ~1666 to 1

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure your calculation is correct, but I was just wondering why in the first combination the last combination on the top isn't C(48, 1) and the bottom combination isn't C(48, 3). Please correct my thinking.

Thanks,
Stephen

[LetYouDown]

Because I'm wrong? =)

It's early! The top one should be correct and the bottom one should be C(48,3).

Corrected, I hope:

[C(2,1) * C(2,1) * C(46,1)]/C(48,3) = 1.06% = 93 to 1

[amulet]

it is 7.5 to 1 against. you are delt a pp one every 16 hands. in % that means you hot a set 13.33% and set over set would be 1.77%. however, the set over set is actually less, because if you hit your card, they only have 2 cards left to hit their set. so we need to

[Stephen Gray]

Yeah, I now see that the top line is correct. thanks

[Indiana]

Its a long shot and thats all you need to know. Worrying about set over set will make you gunshy and tryin to sneak out of it will cost you over the long run. Just know that you're gonna lose here and there.

Indy

[BarronVangorToth]

[ QUOTE ]
how about set - set - set on the flop. just had this yesterday. betting was a free for all.

[/ QUOTE ]

About a year ago at a live game (for all of you online-poker-is-rigged-maniacs) we had three people flop a set, a fourth turn the highest set, and one of the four of them made quads on the river.

Insanity.

Another time I flopped quads, another turned quads, and a third guy rivered a royal.

More insanity.

But it happens - everything does, if you play enough poker.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

[PauliF]

i am afraid i dont understand that formula at all
please could some one explain