In probability theory, the craps principle is a theorem about event probabilities under repeated iid trials. Let
and
denote two mutually exclusive events which might occur on a given trial. Then the probability that
occurs before
equals the conditional probability that
occurs given that
or
occur on the next trial, which is
![{\displaystyle \operatorname {P} [E_{1}\,\,{\text{before}}\,\,E_{2}]=\operatorname {P} \left[E_{1}\mid E_{1}\cup E_{2}\right]={\frac {\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]}{\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]+\operatorname {P} [E_{2}]}}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/f1d14b0659b5e40d8140821e6f70f50a03e91326)
The events
and
need not be collectively exhaustive (if they are, the result is trivial).[1][2]
Let
be the event that
occurs before
. Let
be the event that neither
nor
occurs on a given trial. Since
,
and
are mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive for the first trial, we have
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e166/7e166c1c46c93313fe50b69730f6489bac8e676e" alt="{\displaystyle \operatorname {P} (A)=\operatorname {P} (E_{1})\operatorname {P} (A\mid E_{1})+\operatorname {P} (E_{2})\operatorname {P} (A\mid E_{2})+\operatorname {P} (B)\operatorname {P} (A\mid B)=\operatorname {P} (E_{1})+\operatorname {P} (B)\operatorname {P} (A\mid B)}"
and
.
Since the trials are i.i.d., we have
. Using
and solving the displayed equation for
gives the formula
.
If the trials are repetitions of a game between two players, and the events are
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ee915/ee915bec25730ec7f4a00b915e783bdfd556b71a" alt="{\displaystyle E_{1}:\mathrm {player\ 1\ wins} }"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/62bc5/62bc56508f25d37f161eaff95894e6d2e65cf244" alt="{\displaystyle E_{2}:\mathrm {player\ 2\ wins} }"
then the craps principle gives the respective conditional probabilities of each player winning a certain repetition, given that someone wins (i.e., given that a draw does not occur). In fact, the result is only affected by the relative marginal probabilities of winning
and
; in particular, the probability of a draw is irrelevant.
If the game is played repeatedly until someone wins, then the conditional probability above is the probability that the player wins the game. This is illustrated below for the original game of craps, using an alternative proof.
If the game being played is craps, then this principle can greatly simplify the computation of the probability of winning in a certain scenario. Specifically, if the first roll is a 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, or 10, then the dice are repeatedly re-rolled until one of two events occurs:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4eb93/4eb934a7969aabff15c0858fe41ba9d353f20df0" alt="{\displaystyle E_{1}:{\text{ the original roll (called ‘the point’) is rolled (a win) }}}"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4107/d4107f4e2622d406ac55e59cbb2cd415a0964d0e" alt="{\displaystyle E_{2}:{\text{ a 7 is rolled (a loss) }}}"
Since
and
are mutually exclusive, the craps principle applies. For example, if the original roll was a 4, then the probability of winning is
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa9b1/aa9b18ea24975fc3c558915a6b87769c51d79870" alt="{\displaystyle {\frac {3/36}{3/36+6/36}}={\frac {1}{3}}}"
This avoids having to sum the infinite series corresponding to all the possible outcomes:
![{\displaystyle \sum _{i=0}^{\infty }\operatorname {P} [{\text{first i rolls are ties,}}(i+1)^{\text{th}}{\text{roll is ‘the point’}}]}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/9b170fffff7bb5cbb70e848929819ffd3981f264)
Mathematically, we can express the probability of rolling
ties followed by rolling the point:
![{\displaystyle \operatorname {P} [{\text{first i rolls are ties, }}(i+1)^{\text{th}}{\text{roll is ‘the point’}}]=(1-\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]-\operatorname {P} [E_{2}])^{i}\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/91bb8df9e26ceef647e2bf56d276538478f55da3)
The summation becomes an infinite geometric series:
![{\displaystyle \sum _{i=0}^{\infty }(1-\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]-\operatorname {P} [E_{2}])^{i}\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]=\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]\sum _{i=0}^{\infty }(1-\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]-\operatorname {P} [E_{2}])^{i}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/de18c4e37872e615126870dcf99e7c0a5e6f8abd)
![{\displaystyle ={\frac {\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]}{1-(1-\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]-\operatorname {P} [E_{2}])}}={\frac {\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]}{\operatorname {P} [E_{1}]+\operatorname {P} [E_{2}]}}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/315e0def4b28d13ddba887bc2a9a44e0b4a13069)
which agrees with the earlier result.