[PrayingMantis]

After the short discussion with Gonzoman (above), I would like to restate what I said in the original post, and clarify it. This has to do with psychology and probability alike.

The situation is: Player A holds AA, Player B holds 22, they are both all-in PF. (I'm discounting redraws and other draws).

Player B has 2/48 (0.04166) prob. to hit his set on the first card.

If he *did not* hit it, he will have now a 2/47 (0.04255) probablity to hit on the 2nd card. *In his view*, and rightly so, this is a greater probablity than he had to hit it on the first card, *alone*.

If he does not hit it on th 2nd, he *now* has 2/46 (0.0435) prob. to do it on the 3rd card and so on.

When he'll be facing the river card (if he didn't make he's set until then), he'll have a specific 2/44 (0.04545) probability of hitting the set NOW. This is a greater *specific* probability to hit his set than on any other specific street.


We are very used to see these problems, in a way, from an "objective" point of view. In this view, as Gonzoman stated, the chances to hit the set are getting *smaller* as more cards fall. But this is an "external" view of probability. It is improtant to notice, IMO, that from an "internal" view, things can look quite different (if not opposite).

I find this concept of "internal probabilty" (that's the best name I can think of it now), very intriguing, since it has much to do with how we deal with chance in general. It is obviously very relevant to poker.

I believe that behaviours like the "river card syndrom" (I apologize for this fancy title, but can't think of any better option), can be explained very thoroughly with such a tool.

Any more thoughts will be greatly appriciated.