Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

A bridge hand consists of 13 cards from a standard deck of 52 cards.

What is the probability of getting a hand that is void in exactly one suit, ie consisting of exactly 3 suits ?

share|cite|improve this question

Corrected: Thanks to the OP for querying my previous answer, and to joriki for pointing out that I was counting the wrong thing.

There are $\binom{52}{13}$ ways of choosing $13$ cards, all equally likely. We will be finished if we count the number of hands that have exactly one void. This number is $4$ times the number of hands void in $\spadesuit$ only.We now proceed to count these.

The number of hands void in $\spadesuit$ is $\binom{39}{13}$. This overcounts the hands void in $\spadesuit$ alone. To adjust, we use the
Inclusion-Exclusion Principle.

How many hands are void in both $\spadesuit$ and $\heartsuit$? Clearly $\binom{26}{13}$. The same is true for $\spadesuit$ and $\diamondsuit$, and for $\spadesuit$ and $\clubsuit$. So from our first estimate of $\binom{39}{13}$ we subtract $3\binom{26}{13}$.

But we have subtracted too much. We need to add back the number of hands that are void in all but one of $\heartsuit$, $\diamondsuit$, or $\clubsuit$. There are $3$ of these. Thus the number of hands with exactly one void is $$4\left(\binom{39}{13}-3\binom{26}{13}+3\right).$$

Comment: From the "practical" point of view, we could have stopped with the first term, since in a well-shuffled deck multiple voids have negligibly small probability compared to single voids.

share|cite|improve this answer
If you write out those terms explicitly, you get $32489701776 - 62403600 + 4$, confirming the Comment. – Michael Lugo Jan 12 '12 at 6:02
Andre, this is what i thought the # of favorable ways would be initially, but there is an unexpected twist ! And, of course, we are seking the exact figure. – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 6:27
@Andre Nicolas: More careful analysis reveals that the # of ways should be C(4,1)*C(39,13) - 2*C(4,2)*C(26,13) + 3*C(4,3)*C(13,13) – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 7:32
@Andre Nicolas: Well, take some time. And while at it, can you (or anyone else who sees it) give some guidance as to cases where adjustments need to be made while applying inclusion-exclusion, which is why i posted the question ! – true blue anil Jan 12 '12 at 8:12
@Andre Nicolas: I have added certain calculations in… . You might like to have a look at it. – true blue anil Jan 13 '12 at 10:00

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.