I understand what is being said. I understand that is a somewhat false way of looking at it. But, what's to say the flop would've been different? It could've been the same if he played the hand too. It also could've been 44x.
It's silly to bring up the idea of a continuous shuffle causing a different flop without knowing what the other flop would've been. Because you can't prove it would've been a different flop. You can talk of the odds of a random shuffle of a deck causing a different flop that the one previous...but that's not stone cold proof.
Like I said, it's silly to what if yourself to death. (which means it's silly from both sides of looking at this flop)
__________________
"And that's how you play aces."
Yeah, you make kings run in to them.
|