Free throws in basketball game about probabilityFree throw ProbabilityFree Throw Probability and Expected Number of PointsProbability that out of their next 100 free throws, they will make between $75$ and $80$, inclusive in basketball game.2 out of 3 or 4 out of 6 free-throw problem - how does it mathematically make sense?Conditional probability - Basketball playerBinomial Distribution word problem (basketball)Probability and Basketballdice probability and correct statement to express the unsuccessA probablility puzzle of winning or losing a basketball free throw game.Conditional Probability going wrong

Why are the 737's rear doors unusable in a water landing?

Should I tell management that I intend to leave due to bad software development practices?

Intersection Puzzle

What is the most common color to indicate the input-field is disabled?

Can we compute the area of a quadrilateral with one right angle when we only know the lengths of any three sides?

What does the expression "A Mann!" means

Ambiguity in the definition of entropy

What do you call someone who asks many questions?

Zip/Tar file compressed to larger size?

Personal Teleportation: From Rags to Riches

Is it acceptable for a professor to tell male students to not think that they are smarter than female students?

How would I stat a creature to be immune to everything but the Magic Missile spell? (just for fun)

GFCI outlets - can they be repaired? Are they really needed at the end of a circuit?

Examples of smooth manifolds admitting inbetween one and a continuum of complex structures

How dangerous is XSS?

iPad being using in wall mount battery swollen

Little known, relatively unlikely, but scientifically plausible, apocalyptic (or near apocalyptic) events

In 'Revenger,' what does 'cove' come from?

How did the Super Star Destroyer Executor get destroyed exactly?

Is there a hemisphere-neutral way of specifying a season?

Why no variance term in Bayesian logistic regression?

Why is this clock signal connected to a capacitor to gnd?

Is it possible to create a QR code using text?

Forgetting the musical notes while performing in concert



Free throws in basketball game about probability


Free throw ProbabilityFree Throw Probability and Expected Number of PointsProbability that out of their next 100 free throws, they will make between $75$ and $80$, inclusive in basketball game.2 out of 3 or 4 out of 6 free-throw problem - how does it mathematically make sense?Conditional probability - Basketball playerBinomial Distribution word problem (basketball)Probability and Basketballdice probability and correct statement to express the unsuccessA probablility puzzle of winning or losing a basketball free throw game.Conditional Probability going wrong













3












$begingroup$


Someone shoots free throws. He/She made the first one and missed the second one. From the third shot, the probability of hitting the ball equals to the free throw percentage he/she made before it. For example, if the made 87 out of 100 tries. Then the probability of making the next one is 87/100.



What is the probability of the person making the n th? Does it matter whether he makes the n-1 th free throws?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 21:57











  • $begingroup$
    Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 22:44











  • $begingroup$
    @YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
    $endgroup$
    – antkam
    Mar 29 at 20:21











  • $begingroup$
    I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:29










  • $begingroup$
    My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:34
















3












$begingroup$


Someone shoots free throws. He/She made the first one and missed the second one. From the third shot, the probability of hitting the ball equals to the free throw percentage he/she made before it. For example, if the made 87 out of 100 tries. Then the probability of making the next one is 87/100.



What is the probability of the person making the n th? Does it matter whether he makes the n-1 th free throws?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 21:57











  • $begingroup$
    Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 22:44











  • $begingroup$
    @YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
    $endgroup$
    – antkam
    Mar 29 at 20:21











  • $begingroup$
    I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:29










  • $begingroup$
    My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:34














3












3








3


3



$begingroup$


Someone shoots free throws. He/She made the first one and missed the second one. From the third shot, the probability of hitting the ball equals to the free throw percentage he/she made before it. For example, if the made 87 out of 100 tries. Then the probability of making the next one is 87/100.



What is the probability of the person making the n th? Does it matter whether he makes the n-1 th free throws?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Someone shoots free throws. He/She made the first one and missed the second one. From the third shot, the probability of hitting the ball equals to the free throw percentage he/she made before it. For example, if the made 87 out of 100 tries. Then the probability of making the next one is 87/100.



What is the probability of the person making the n th? Does it matter whether he makes the n-1 th free throws?







probability






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Mar 28 at 21:53







YellowRiver

















asked Mar 28 at 21:27









YellowRiverYellowRiver

227




227







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 21:57











  • $begingroup$
    Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 22:44











  • $begingroup$
    @YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
    $endgroup$
    – antkam
    Mar 29 at 20:21











  • $begingroup$
    I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:29










  • $begingroup$
    My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:34













  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 21:57











  • $begingroup$
    Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 28 at 22:44











  • $begingroup$
    @YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
    $endgroup$
    – antkam
    Mar 29 at 20:21











  • $begingroup$
    I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:29










  • $begingroup$
    My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 22:34








1




1




$begingroup$
I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 28 at 21:57





$begingroup$
I'm thinking that the question is symmetric, so the probability will be $1/2$.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 28 at 21:57













$begingroup$
Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 28 at 22:44





$begingroup$
Oh, so you are looking for a conditional probability $P(X_n=1 mid X_n-1=1)$? I'll have to think about it...
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 28 at 22:44













$begingroup$
@YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
$endgroup$
– antkam
Mar 29 at 20:21





$begingroup$
@YellowRiver - how did you come up with the formula for $P(H_5 | H_4)$? I did some messy back-of-envelop calculations and came up with $2/3$... In any case, it surely isn't $1/2$ just by the "runaway" nature of the problem.
$endgroup$
– antkam
Mar 29 at 20:21













$begingroup$
I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 22:29




$begingroup$
I modelled the system with a matrix, and found two things: The number of hits after $n$ throws is always uniformly distributed! (I tested up to $n=9$). This implies that $P(H_n|H_n-1) = 2/3$ for all $n$. (This I tested up to $n=11$). I'm sure there are nice simple arguments for these claims.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 22:29












$begingroup$
My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 22:34





$begingroup$
My calculation goes like this for $n=5$: $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5 cap H_4) / P(H_4)$. $P(H_4) = 1/2$ (by symmetry) and $P(H_5 cap H_4) = frac12cdot frac23cdot frac34 + frac12cdotfrac13cdotfrac24 = 1/3$. So $P(H_5|H_4) = 2/3$. Do you guys agree?
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 22:34











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

I will work out the probability of making the $(n+1)$'th throw, given that they made the $n$'th thow. Let $H_n$ be the event that they hit on the $n$'th shot, and let $K_n$ be the total number of hits after $n$ shots.



I will first prove by induction, that after $n$ throws there is an equal probability of having any number of hits. I.e., we have $P(K_n=k) = frac1n-1$ for all $1le k le n-1$.



The case $n=2$ is trivial. Assume $nge3$. We can get $K_n+1=k$ in two ways: Hitting after $k-1$ hits, or missing after $k$ hits. This means:
$$
P(K_n+1=k)
= frac1n-1 cdot frack-1n
+ frac1n-1 cdot fracn-kn
= frac1n
$$



Note that this works even for the edge cases $k=1$ and $k=n$. Now we come back to the original problem. We want to work out:
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = fracP(H_n+1 cap H_n)P(H_n)
$$



for $nge 3$. By the symmetry of the setup, we have simply $P(H_n)=1/2$. We can calculate $P(H_n+1 cap H_n)$ by splitting up in the cases for $K_n-1$:
$$ beginsplit
P(H_n+1 cap H_n)
&= sum_k=1^n-2 frac1n-2 cdot frackn-1cdotfrack+1n
= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) left(sum_k=1^n-2 k(k+1)right) \
&= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) cdot fracn(n-1)(n-2)3
= frac13
endsplit
$$



So in the end we get
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = frac1/31/2
= frac23
$$



Note that the result is independent of $n$!



Edit:



On antkam's suggestion, I'll prove my observation in the comments. I claim that all sequences of $n$ shots that have the same number of hits are equally likely. (This can actually be proven from the property I proved inductively above, but I'll do it the other way round). For example $P(HHMM) = P(HMMH) = P(MHMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is a hit and $M$ is a miss. Since the first two shots are fixed, the sequences begin at the third shot. This is interesting, because while there are less ways to get a very high or low number of hits, each of those sequences are more likely because of the setup. These tendencies exactly cancel out to give the uniform distribution of $K_n$.



My precise claim is this:
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!
$$

for any $n+1 ge 3$, where $S_i$ is the outcome of the $i$'th shot (hit or miss), and $k$ is the total number hits.



Let $p_n = P(S_n = H)$ and $q_n = P(S_n = M)$. Note that we can write
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1)
= prod_S_i=Hp_i cdot prod_S_i=Mq_i
$$

We have $p_i=fracK_ii-1$ and $q_i=fraci-1-K_ii-1$. Since the sequence goes from the third to the $(n+1)$'th shot, we get a denominator of $n!$ when we multiply all the probabilities.



Let's consider the numerator. If we hit on the $i$'th shot ($S_i = H$), then
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_i+1i, quad q_i+1=fraci-(K_i+1)i
$$



and if $S_i = M$:
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_ii, quad q_i+1=fraci-K_ii
$$



We see that when we hit, the numerator of $p$ goes up by 1, and when we miss, the numerator of $q$ goes up by 1. Meanwhile the other numerators are unchanged.
Note that $p_3 = q_3 = 1/2$, so they both start with a numerator of 1. Thus, multiplying all the numerators together, we get $k!(n-k-1)!$, which proves the claim.



So how does this get us the uniform distribution of $K_n$? If $K_n+1 = k$, then the sequence of $n-1$ shots will have $k$ hits. There are $binomn-1k$ such sequences, all equally likely, so we rediscover the result that:
$$
P(K_n+1=k) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!cdot binomn-1k
= frack!(n-k-1)!n! cdot frac(n-1)!k!(n-k-1)!
= frac1n
$$






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 23:49











  • $begingroup$
    I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 30 at 0:51







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 30 at 1:04







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    (You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago


















0












$begingroup$

Technically if he made the first one, he could not fail the next one since he did 1 out 1 and this success probability was $100%$.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The rule starts from the third shot.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 28 at 21:51











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3166442%2ffree-throws-in-basketball-game-about-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3












$begingroup$

I will work out the probability of making the $(n+1)$'th throw, given that they made the $n$'th thow. Let $H_n$ be the event that they hit on the $n$'th shot, and let $K_n$ be the total number of hits after $n$ shots.



I will first prove by induction, that after $n$ throws there is an equal probability of having any number of hits. I.e., we have $P(K_n=k) = frac1n-1$ for all $1le k le n-1$.



The case $n=2$ is trivial. Assume $nge3$. We can get $K_n+1=k$ in two ways: Hitting after $k-1$ hits, or missing after $k$ hits. This means:
$$
P(K_n+1=k)
= frac1n-1 cdot frack-1n
+ frac1n-1 cdot fracn-kn
= frac1n
$$



Note that this works even for the edge cases $k=1$ and $k=n$. Now we come back to the original problem. We want to work out:
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = fracP(H_n+1 cap H_n)P(H_n)
$$



for $nge 3$. By the symmetry of the setup, we have simply $P(H_n)=1/2$. We can calculate $P(H_n+1 cap H_n)$ by splitting up in the cases for $K_n-1$:
$$ beginsplit
P(H_n+1 cap H_n)
&= sum_k=1^n-2 frac1n-2 cdot frackn-1cdotfrack+1n
= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) left(sum_k=1^n-2 k(k+1)right) \
&= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) cdot fracn(n-1)(n-2)3
= frac13
endsplit
$$



So in the end we get
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = frac1/31/2
= frac23
$$



Note that the result is independent of $n$!



Edit:



On antkam's suggestion, I'll prove my observation in the comments. I claim that all sequences of $n$ shots that have the same number of hits are equally likely. (This can actually be proven from the property I proved inductively above, but I'll do it the other way round). For example $P(HHMM) = P(HMMH) = P(MHMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is a hit and $M$ is a miss. Since the first two shots are fixed, the sequences begin at the third shot. This is interesting, because while there are less ways to get a very high or low number of hits, each of those sequences are more likely because of the setup. These tendencies exactly cancel out to give the uniform distribution of $K_n$.



My precise claim is this:
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!
$$

for any $n+1 ge 3$, where $S_i$ is the outcome of the $i$'th shot (hit or miss), and $k$ is the total number hits.



Let $p_n = P(S_n = H)$ and $q_n = P(S_n = M)$. Note that we can write
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1)
= prod_S_i=Hp_i cdot prod_S_i=Mq_i
$$

We have $p_i=fracK_ii-1$ and $q_i=fraci-1-K_ii-1$. Since the sequence goes from the third to the $(n+1)$'th shot, we get a denominator of $n!$ when we multiply all the probabilities.



Let's consider the numerator. If we hit on the $i$'th shot ($S_i = H$), then
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_i+1i, quad q_i+1=fraci-(K_i+1)i
$$



and if $S_i = M$:
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_ii, quad q_i+1=fraci-K_ii
$$



We see that when we hit, the numerator of $p$ goes up by 1, and when we miss, the numerator of $q$ goes up by 1. Meanwhile the other numerators are unchanged.
Note that $p_3 = q_3 = 1/2$, so they both start with a numerator of 1. Thus, multiplying all the numerators together, we get $k!(n-k-1)!$, which proves the claim.



So how does this get us the uniform distribution of $K_n$? If $K_n+1 = k$, then the sequence of $n-1$ shots will have $k$ hits. There are $binomn-1k$ such sequences, all equally likely, so we rediscover the result that:
$$
P(K_n+1=k) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!cdot binomn-1k
= frack!(n-k-1)!n! cdot frac(n-1)!k!(n-k-1)!
= frac1n
$$






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 23:49











  • $begingroup$
    I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 30 at 0:51







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 30 at 1:04







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    (You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago















3












$begingroup$

I will work out the probability of making the $(n+1)$'th throw, given that they made the $n$'th thow. Let $H_n$ be the event that they hit on the $n$'th shot, and let $K_n$ be the total number of hits after $n$ shots.



I will first prove by induction, that after $n$ throws there is an equal probability of having any number of hits. I.e., we have $P(K_n=k) = frac1n-1$ for all $1le k le n-1$.



The case $n=2$ is trivial. Assume $nge3$. We can get $K_n+1=k$ in two ways: Hitting after $k-1$ hits, or missing after $k$ hits. This means:
$$
P(K_n+1=k)
= frac1n-1 cdot frack-1n
+ frac1n-1 cdot fracn-kn
= frac1n
$$



Note that this works even for the edge cases $k=1$ and $k=n$. Now we come back to the original problem. We want to work out:
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = fracP(H_n+1 cap H_n)P(H_n)
$$



for $nge 3$. By the symmetry of the setup, we have simply $P(H_n)=1/2$. We can calculate $P(H_n+1 cap H_n)$ by splitting up in the cases for $K_n-1$:
$$ beginsplit
P(H_n+1 cap H_n)
&= sum_k=1^n-2 frac1n-2 cdot frackn-1cdotfrack+1n
= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) left(sum_k=1^n-2 k(k+1)right) \
&= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) cdot fracn(n-1)(n-2)3
= frac13
endsplit
$$



So in the end we get
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = frac1/31/2
= frac23
$$



Note that the result is independent of $n$!



Edit:



On antkam's suggestion, I'll prove my observation in the comments. I claim that all sequences of $n$ shots that have the same number of hits are equally likely. (This can actually be proven from the property I proved inductively above, but I'll do it the other way round). For example $P(HHMM) = P(HMMH) = P(MHMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is a hit and $M$ is a miss. Since the first two shots are fixed, the sequences begin at the third shot. This is interesting, because while there are less ways to get a very high or low number of hits, each of those sequences are more likely because of the setup. These tendencies exactly cancel out to give the uniform distribution of $K_n$.



My precise claim is this:
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!
$$

for any $n+1 ge 3$, where $S_i$ is the outcome of the $i$'th shot (hit or miss), and $k$ is the total number hits.



Let $p_n = P(S_n = H)$ and $q_n = P(S_n = M)$. Note that we can write
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1)
= prod_S_i=Hp_i cdot prod_S_i=Mq_i
$$

We have $p_i=fracK_ii-1$ and $q_i=fraci-1-K_ii-1$. Since the sequence goes from the third to the $(n+1)$'th shot, we get a denominator of $n!$ when we multiply all the probabilities.



Let's consider the numerator. If we hit on the $i$'th shot ($S_i = H$), then
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_i+1i, quad q_i+1=fraci-(K_i+1)i
$$



and if $S_i = M$:
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_ii, quad q_i+1=fraci-K_ii
$$



We see that when we hit, the numerator of $p$ goes up by 1, and when we miss, the numerator of $q$ goes up by 1. Meanwhile the other numerators are unchanged.
Note that $p_3 = q_3 = 1/2$, so they both start with a numerator of 1. Thus, multiplying all the numerators together, we get $k!(n-k-1)!$, which proves the claim.



So how does this get us the uniform distribution of $K_n$? If $K_n+1 = k$, then the sequence of $n-1$ shots will have $k$ hits. There are $binomn-1k$ such sequences, all equally likely, so we rediscover the result that:
$$
P(K_n+1=k) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!cdot binomn-1k
= frack!(n-k-1)!n! cdot frac(n-1)!k!(n-k-1)!
= frac1n
$$






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 23:49











  • $begingroup$
    I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 30 at 0:51







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 30 at 1:04







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    (You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$

I will work out the probability of making the $(n+1)$'th throw, given that they made the $n$'th thow. Let $H_n$ be the event that they hit on the $n$'th shot, and let $K_n$ be the total number of hits after $n$ shots.



I will first prove by induction, that after $n$ throws there is an equal probability of having any number of hits. I.e., we have $P(K_n=k) = frac1n-1$ for all $1le k le n-1$.



The case $n=2$ is trivial. Assume $nge3$. We can get $K_n+1=k$ in two ways: Hitting after $k-1$ hits, or missing after $k$ hits. This means:
$$
P(K_n+1=k)
= frac1n-1 cdot frack-1n
+ frac1n-1 cdot fracn-kn
= frac1n
$$



Note that this works even for the edge cases $k=1$ and $k=n$. Now we come back to the original problem. We want to work out:
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = fracP(H_n+1 cap H_n)P(H_n)
$$



for $nge 3$. By the symmetry of the setup, we have simply $P(H_n)=1/2$. We can calculate $P(H_n+1 cap H_n)$ by splitting up in the cases for $K_n-1$:
$$ beginsplit
P(H_n+1 cap H_n)
&= sum_k=1^n-2 frac1n-2 cdot frackn-1cdotfrack+1n
= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) left(sum_k=1^n-2 k(k+1)right) \
&= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) cdot fracn(n-1)(n-2)3
= frac13
endsplit
$$



So in the end we get
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = frac1/31/2
= frac23
$$



Note that the result is independent of $n$!



Edit:



On antkam's suggestion, I'll prove my observation in the comments. I claim that all sequences of $n$ shots that have the same number of hits are equally likely. (This can actually be proven from the property I proved inductively above, but I'll do it the other way round). For example $P(HHMM) = P(HMMH) = P(MHMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is a hit and $M$ is a miss. Since the first two shots are fixed, the sequences begin at the third shot. This is interesting, because while there are less ways to get a very high or low number of hits, each of those sequences are more likely because of the setup. These tendencies exactly cancel out to give the uniform distribution of $K_n$.



My precise claim is this:
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!
$$

for any $n+1 ge 3$, where $S_i$ is the outcome of the $i$'th shot (hit or miss), and $k$ is the total number hits.



Let $p_n = P(S_n = H)$ and $q_n = P(S_n = M)$. Note that we can write
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1)
= prod_S_i=Hp_i cdot prod_S_i=Mq_i
$$

We have $p_i=fracK_ii-1$ and $q_i=fraci-1-K_ii-1$. Since the sequence goes from the third to the $(n+1)$'th shot, we get a denominator of $n!$ when we multiply all the probabilities.



Let's consider the numerator. If we hit on the $i$'th shot ($S_i = H$), then
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_i+1i, quad q_i+1=fraci-(K_i+1)i
$$



and if $S_i = M$:
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_ii, quad q_i+1=fraci-K_ii
$$



We see that when we hit, the numerator of $p$ goes up by 1, and when we miss, the numerator of $q$ goes up by 1. Meanwhile the other numerators are unchanged.
Note that $p_3 = q_3 = 1/2$, so they both start with a numerator of 1. Thus, multiplying all the numerators together, we get $k!(n-k-1)!$, which proves the claim.



So how does this get us the uniform distribution of $K_n$? If $K_n+1 = k$, then the sequence of $n-1$ shots will have $k$ hits. There are $binomn-1k$ such sequences, all equally likely, so we rediscover the result that:
$$
P(K_n+1=k) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!cdot binomn-1k
= frack!(n-k-1)!n! cdot frac(n-1)!k!(n-k-1)!
= frac1n
$$






share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



I will work out the probability of making the $(n+1)$'th throw, given that they made the $n$'th thow. Let $H_n$ be the event that they hit on the $n$'th shot, and let $K_n$ be the total number of hits after $n$ shots.



I will first prove by induction, that after $n$ throws there is an equal probability of having any number of hits. I.e., we have $P(K_n=k) = frac1n-1$ for all $1le k le n-1$.



The case $n=2$ is trivial. Assume $nge3$. We can get $K_n+1=k$ in two ways: Hitting after $k-1$ hits, or missing after $k$ hits. This means:
$$
P(K_n+1=k)
= frac1n-1 cdot frack-1n
+ frac1n-1 cdot fracn-kn
= frac1n
$$



Note that this works even for the edge cases $k=1$ and $k=n$. Now we come back to the original problem. We want to work out:
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = fracP(H_n+1 cap H_n)P(H_n)
$$



for $nge 3$. By the symmetry of the setup, we have simply $P(H_n)=1/2$. We can calculate $P(H_n+1 cap H_n)$ by splitting up in the cases for $K_n-1$:
$$ beginsplit
P(H_n+1 cap H_n)
&= sum_k=1^n-2 frac1n-2 cdot frackn-1cdotfrack+1n
= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) left(sum_k=1^n-2 k(k+1)right) \
&= frac1n(n-1)(n-2) cdot fracn(n-1)(n-2)3
= frac13
endsplit
$$



So in the end we get
$$
P(H_n+1|H_n) = frac1/31/2
= frac23
$$



Note that the result is independent of $n$!



Edit:



On antkam's suggestion, I'll prove my observation in the comments. I claim that all sequences of $n$ shots that have the same number of hits are equally likely. (This can actually be proven from the property I proved inductively above, but I'll do it the other way round). For example $P(HHMM) = P(HMMH) = P(MHMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is a hit and $M$ is a miss. Since the first two shots are fixed, the sequences begin at the third shot. This is interesting, because while there are less ways to get a very high or low number of hits, each of those sequences are more likely because of the setup. These tendencies exactly cancel out to give the uniform distribution of $K_n$.



My precise claim is this:
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!
$$

for any $n+1 ge 3$, where $S_i$ is the outcome of the $i$'th shot (hit or miss), and $k$ is the total number hits.



Let $p_n = P(S_n = H)$ and $q_n = P(S_n = M)$. Note that we can write
$$
P(S_3S_4cdots S_n+1)
= prod_S_i=Hp_i cdot prod_S_i=Mq_i
$$

We have $p_i=fracK_ii-1$ and $q_i=fraci-1-K_ii-1$. Since the sequence goes from the third to the $(n+1)$'th shot, we get a denominator of $n!$ when we multiply all the probabilities.



Let's consider the numerator. If we hit on the $i$'th shot ($S_i = H$), then
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_i+1i, quad q_i+1=fraci-(K_i+1)i
$$



and if $S_i = M$:
$$
p_i+1 = fracK_ii, quad q_i+1=fraci-K_ii
$$



We see that when we hit, the numerator of $p$ goes up by 1, and when we miss, the numerator of $q$ goes up by 1. Meanwhile the other numerators are unchanged.
Note that $p_3 = q_3 = 1/2$, so they both start with a numerator of 1. Thus, multiplying all the numerators together, we get $k!(n-k-1)!$, which proves the claim.



So how does this get us the uniform distribution of $K_n$? If $K_n+1 = k$, then the sequence of $n-1$ shots will have $k$ hits. There are $binomn-1k$ such sequences, all equally likely, so we rediscover the result that:
$$
P(K_n+1=k) = frack!(n-k-1)!n!cdot binomn-1k
= frack!(n-k-1)!n! cdot frac(n-1)!k!(n-k-1)!
= frac1n
$$







share|cite|improve this answer










New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 2 days ago





















New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered Mar 29 at 23:42









MiltenMilten

3746




3746




New contributor




Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Milten is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 23:49











  • $begingroup$
    I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 30 at 0:51







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 30 at 1:04







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    (You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 29 at 23:49











  • $begingroup$
    I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 30 at 0:51







  • 2




    $begingroup$
    Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    Mar 30 at 1:04







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    (You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
    $endgroup$
    – Milten
    2 days ago















$begingroup$
Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 23:49





$begingroup$
Although it is interesting to see the uniform distribution of $K_n$, I would love to see an answer that doesn't calculate those probabilities. I will add that I came across even more symmetry while thinking about the problem: It seems that any way to get $k$ hits after $n$ throws is equally likely. E.g. we have $P(HMMHH) = P(HHHMM) = P(MHMMH) = ldots$, where $H$ is hit and $M$ is miss. I haven't proven this.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 29 at 23:49













$begingroup$
I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
$endgroup$
– YellowRiver
Mar 30 at 0:51





$begingroup$
I don't think they are equally likely. The denominator of the probability is always n! and different consequences of hitting the ball($HHHMM$ or $MHMMH$) clearly lead to different results in the numerator.
$endgroup$
– YellowRiver
Mar 30 at 0:51





2




2




$begingroup$
Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 30 at 1:04





$begingroup$
Oops, that was a typo - there has to be the same number of $H$'s. I believe the probability will always be $k!(n-k)!/(n+1)!$. This cancels out nicely with a binomial coefficient counting the number of ways to get exactly $k$ hits after $n$ shots.
$endgroup$
– Milten
Mar 30 at 1:04





1




1




$begingroup$
I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
$endgroup$
– Milten
2 days ago





$begingroup$
I initially got the same answer as you actually, until I turned to the definition of conditional probability. Your method looks like the law of total probability, but the law looks different with conditional probabilities. We actually have $P(H_5|H_4) = P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=1)P(K_3=1|H_4)$ $ + P(H_5|H_4cap K_3=2)P(K_3=2|H_4)$. Now $P(K_3=k|H_4)$ can be worked out with Baye's rule to be $k/3$. So if you replace the two $(1/2)$'s in your expression with $1/3$ and $2/3$, then you get the correct answer of $2/3$.
$endgroup$
– Milten
2 days ago





1




1




$begingroup$
(You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
$endgroup$
– Milten
2 days ago




$begingroup$
(You can find the formula on the wiki page for Law of Total Probability). I think what is wrong with your way intuitively, is that when we now $X_4 = H$, it changes not only the probabilities after, but also before the fourth throw: If we hit on $n$, it is more likely that we had a high number of hits just before.
$endgroup$
– Milten
2 days ago











0












$begingroup$

Technically if he made the first one, he could not fail the next one since he did 1 out 1 and this success probability was $100%$.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The rule starts from the third shot.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 28 at 21:51















0












$begingroup$

Technically if he made the first one, he could not fail the next one since he did 1 out 1 and this success probability was $100%$.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The rule starts from the third shot.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 28 at 21:51













0












0








0





$begingroup$

Technically if he made the first one, he could not fail the next one since he did 1 out 1 and this success probability was $100%$.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



Technically if he made the first one, he could not fail the next one since he did 1 out 1 and this success probability was $100%$.







share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer






New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered Mar 28 at 21:47









EurekaEureka

679113




679113




New contributor




Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Eureka is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    The rule starts from the third shot.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 28 at 21:51
















  • $begingroup$
    The rule starts from the third shot.
    $endgroup$
    – YellowRiver
    Mar 28 at 21:51















$begingroup$
The rule starts from the third shot.
$endgroup$
– YellowRiver
Mar 28 at 21:51




$begingroup$
The rule starts from the third shot.
$endgroup$
– YellowRiver
Mar 28 at 21:51

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3166442%2ffree-throws-in-basketball-game-about-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Boston (Lincolnshire) Stedsbyld | Berne yn Boston | NavigaasjemenuBoston Borough CouncilBoston, Lincolnshire

Ballerup Komuun Stääden an saarpen | Futnuuten | Luke uk diar | Nawigatsjuunwww.ballerup.dkwww.statistikbanken.dk: Tabelle BEF44 (Folketal pr. 1. januar fordelt på byer)Commonskategorii: Ballerup Komuun55° 44′ N, 12° 22′ O

Serbia Índice Etimología Historia Geografía Entorno natural División administrativa Política Demografía Economía Cultura Deportes Véase también Notas Referencias Bibliografía Enlaces externos Menú de navegación44°49′00″N 20°28′00″E / 44.816666666667, 20.46666666666744°49′00″N 20°28′00″E / 44.816666666667, 20.466666666667U.S. Department of Commerce (2015)«Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano 2018»Kosovo-Metohija.Neutralna Srbija u NATO okruzenju.The SerbsTheories on the Origin of the Serbs.Serbia.Earls: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases.Egeo y Balcanes.Kalemegdan.Southern Pannonia during the age of the Great Migrations.Culture in Serbia.History.The Serbian Origin of the Montenegrins.Nemanjics' period (1186-1353).Stefan Uros (1355-1371).Serbian medieval history.Habsburg–Ottoman Wars (1525–1718).The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922.The First Serbian Uprising.Miloš, prince of Serbia.3. Bosnia-Hercegovina and the Congress of Berlin.The Balkan Wars and the Partition of Macedonia.The Falcon and the Eagle: Montenegro and Austria-Hungary, 1908-1914.Typhus fever on the eastern front in World War I.Anniversary of WWI battle marked in Serbia.La derrota austriaca en los Balcanes. Fin del Imperio Austro-Húngaro.Imperio austriaco y Reino de Hungría.Los tiempos modernos: del capitalismo a la globalización, siglos XVII al XXI.The period of Croatia within ex-Yugoslavia.Yugoslavia: Much in a Name.Las dictaduras europeas.Croacia: mito y realidad."Crods ask arms".Prólogo a la invasión.La campaña de los Balcanes.La resistencia en Yugoslavia.Jasenovac Research Institute.Día en memoria de las víctimas del genocidio en la Segunda Guerra Mundial.El infierno estuvo en Jasenovac.Croacia empieza a «desenterrar» a sus muertos de Jasenovac.World fascism: a historical encyclopedia, Volumen 1.Tito. Josip Broz.El nuevo orden y la resistencia.La conquista del poder.Algunos aspectos de la economía yugoslava a mediados de 1962.Albania-Kosovo crisis.De Kosovo a Kosova: una visión demográfica.La crisis de la economía yugoslava y la política de "estabilización".Milosevic: el poder de un absolutista."Serbia under Milošević: politics in the 1990s"Milosevic cavó en Kosovo la tumba de la antigua Yugoslavia.La ONU exculpa a Serbia de genocidio en la guerra de Bosnia.Slobodan Milosevic, el burócrata que supo usar el odio.Es la fuerza contra el sufrimiento de muchos inocentes.Matanza de civiles al bombardear la OTAN un puente mientras pasaba un tren.Las consecuencias negativas de los bombardeos de Yugoslavia se sentirán aún durante largo tiempo.Kostunica advierte que la misión de Europa en Kosovo es ilegal.Las 24 horas más largas en la vida de Slobodan Milosevic.Serbia declara la guerra a la mafia por matar a Djindjic.Tadic presentará "quizás en diciembre" la solicitud de entrada en la UE.Montenegro declara su independencia de Serbia.Serbia se declara estado soberano tras separación de Montenegro.«Accordance with International Law of the Unilateral Declaration of Independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo (Request for Advisory Opinion)»Mladic pasa por el médico antes de la audiencia para extraditarloDatos de Serbia y Kosovo.The Carpathian Mountains.Position, Relief, Climate.Transport.Finding birds in Serbia.U Srbiji do 2010. godine 10% teritorije nacionalni parkovi.Geography.Serbia: Climate.Variability of Climate In Serbia In The Second Half of The 20thc Entury.BASIC CLIMATE CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE TERRITORY OF SERBIA.Fauna y flora: Serbia.Serbia and Montenegro.Información general sobre Serbia.Republic of Serbia Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA).Serbia recycling 15% of waste.Reform process of the Serbian energy sector.20-MW Wind Project Being Developed in Serbia.Las Naciones Unidas. Paz para Kosovo.Aniversario sin fiesta.Population by national or ethnic groups by Census 2002.Article 7. Coat of arms, flag and national anthem.Serbia, flag of.Historia.«Serbia and Montenegro in Pictures»Serbia.Serbia aprueba su nueva Constitución con un apoyo de más del 50%.Serbia. Population.«El nacionalista Nikolic gana las elecciones presidenciales en Serbia»El europeísta Borís Tadic gana la segunda vuelta de las presidenciales serbias.Aleksandar Vucic, de ultranacionalista serbio a fervoroso europeístaKostunica condena la declaración del "falso estado" de Kosovo.Comienza el debate sobre la independencia de Kosovo en el TIJ.La Corte Internacional de Justicia dice que Kosovo no violó el derecho internacional al declarar su independenciaKosovo: Enviado de la ONU advierte tensiones y fragilidad.«Bruselas recomienda negociar la adhesión de Serbia tras el acuerdo sobre Kosovo»Monografía de Serbia.Bez smanjivanja Vojske Srbije.Military statistics Serbia and Montenegro.Šutanovac: Vojni budžet za 2009. godinu 70 milijardi dinara.Serbia-Montenegro shortens obligatory military service to six months.No hay justicia para las víctimas de los bombardeos de la OTAN.Zapatero reitera la negativa de España a reconocer la independencia de Kosovo.Anniversary of the signing of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement.Detenido en Serbia Radovan Karadzic, el criminal de guerra más buscado de Europa."Serbia presentará su candidatura de acceso a la UE antes de fin de año".Serbia solicita la adhesión a la UE.Detenido el exgeneral serbobosnio Ratko Mladic, principal acusado del genocidio en los Balcanes«Lista de todos los Estados Miembros de las Naciones Unidas que son parte o signatarios en los diversos instrumentos de derechos humanos de las Naciones Unidas»versión pdfProtocolo Facultativo de la Convención sobre la Eliminación de todas las Formas de Discriminación contra la MujerConvención contra la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantesversión pdfProtocolo Facultativo de la Convención sobre los Derechos de las Personas con DiscapacidadEl ACNUR recibe con beneplácito el envío de tropas de la OTAN a Kosovo y se prepara ante una posible llegada de refugiados a Serbia.Kosovo.- El jefe de la Minuk denuncia que los serbios boicotearon las legislativas por 'presiones'.Bosnia and Herzegovina. Population.Datos básicos de Montenegro, historia y evolución política.Serbia y Montenegro. Indicador: Tasa global de fecundidad (por 1000 habitantes).Serbia y Montenegro. Indicador: Tasa bruta de mortalidad (por 1000 habitantes).Population.Falleció el patriarca de la Iglesia Ortodoxa serbia.Atacan en Kosovo autobuses con peregrinos tras la investidura del patriarca serbio IrinejSerbian in Hungary.Tasas de cambio."Kosovo es de todos sus ciudadanos".Report for Serbia.Country groups by income.GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA 1997–2007.Economic Trends in the Republic of Serbia 2006.National Accounts Statitics.Саопштења за јавност.GDP per inhabitant varied by one to six across the EU27 Member States.Un pacto de estabilidad para Serbia.Unemployment rate rises in Serbia.Serbia, Belarus agree free trade to woo investors.Serbia, Turkey call investors to Serbia.Success Stories.U.S. Private Investment in Serbia and Montenegro.Positive trend.Banks in Serbia.La Cámara de Comercio acompaña a empresas madrileñas a Serbia y Croacia.Serbia Industries.Energy and mining.Agriculture.Late crops, fruit and grapes output, 2008.Rebranding Serbia: A Hobby Shortly to Become a Full-Time Job.Final data on livestock statistics, 2008.Serbian cell-phone users.U Srbiji sve više računara.Телекомуникације.U Srbiji 27 odsto gradjana koristi Internet.Serbia and Montenegro.Тренд гледаности програма РТС-а у 2008. и 2009.години.Serbian railways.General Terms.El mercado del transporte aéreo en Serbia.Statistics.Vehículos de motor registrados.Planes ambiciosos para el transporte fluvial.Turismo.Turistički promet u Republici Srbiji u periodu januar-novembar 2007. godine.Your Guide to Culture.Novi Sad - city of culture.Nis - european crossroads.Serbia. Properties inscribed on the World Heritage List .Stari Ras and Sopoćani.Studenica Monastery.Medieval Monuments in Kosovo.Gamzigrad-Romuliana, Palace of Galerius.Skiing and snowboarding in Kopaonik.Tara.New7Wonders of Nature Finalists.Pilgrimage of Saint Sava.Exit Festival: Best european festival.Banje u Srbiji.«The Encyclopedia of world history»Culture.Centenario del arte serbio.«Djordje Andrejevic Kun: el único pintor de los brigadistas yugoslavos de la guerra civil española»About the museum.The collections.Miroslav Gospel – Manuscript from 1180.Historicity in the Serbo-Croatian Heroic Epic.Culture and Sport.Conversación con el rector del Seminario San Sava.'Reina Margot' funde drama, historia y gesto con música de Goran Bregovic.Serbia gana Eurovisión y España decepciona de nuevo con un vigésimo puesto.Home.Story.Emir Kusturica.Tercer oro para Paskaljevic.Nikola Tesla Year.Home.Tesla, un genio tomado por loco.Aniversario de la muerte de Nikola Tesla.El Museo Nikola Tesla en Belgrado.El inventor del mundo actual.República de Serbia.University of Belgrade official statistics.University of Novi Sad.University of Kragujevac.University of Nis.Comida. Cocina serbia.Cooking.Montenegro se convertirá en el miembro 204 del movimiento olímpico.España, campeona de Europa de baloncesto.El Partizan de Belgrado se corona campeón por octava vez consecutiva.Serbia se clasifica para el Mundial de 2010 de Sudáfrica.Serbia Name Squad For Northern Ireland And South Korea Tests.Fútbol.- El Partizán de Belgrado se proclama campeón de la Liga serbia.Clasificacion final Mundial de balonmano Croacia 2009.Serbia vence a España y se consagra campeón mundial de waterpolo.Novak Djokovic no convence pero gana en Australia.Gana Ana Ivanovic el Roland Garros.Serena Williams gana el US Open por tercera vez.Biography.Bradt Travel Guide SerbiaThe Encyclopedia of World War IGobierno de SerbiaPortal del Gobierno de SerbiaPresidencia de SerbiaAsamblea Nacional SerbiaMinisterio de Asuntos exteriores de SerbiaBanco Nacional de SerbiaAgencia Serbia para la Promoción de la Inversión y la ExportaciónOficina de Estadísticas de SerbiaCIA. Factbook 2008Organización nacional de turismo de SerbiaDiscover SerbiaConoce SerbiaNoticias de SerbiaSerbiaWorldCat1512028760000 0000 9526 67094054598-2n8519591900570825ge1309191004530741010url17413117006669D055771Serbia