Bayes with a frequency table
Derive a posterior by counting state-and-action cases before using a compact formula.
11 minutes · intermediate · Original Poker4Quant lessonWhat you will learn
Construct a complete two-state table and normalize the observed column.
Prerequisites: Base rates
Fill both states and both actions
Let the prior strength probability be p. If the bet likelihood when strong is a and when weak is b, the four joint probabilities are pa, p(1−a), (1−p)b and (1−p)(1−b). They cover strong/weak crossed with bet/check.
The probability of a bet is pa+(1−p)b. Conditioning on that column gives P(S|B)=pa/[pa+(1−p)b]. A frequency table makes it easier to audit that every observed case appears once.
The evidence denominator must be possible
If both states assign zero probability to the observed action, the model says it cannot happen. Dividing zero by zero does not produce a meaningful posterior. The observation then challenges the model rather than licensing an arbitrary answer.
Frequency examples may use a convenient hypothetical population to make the counts integers. Those counts explain the model; they are not claimed empirical observations of an opponent. Distinguish an illustrative table from data collected in a real study.
Worked example
Use 200 modeled hands with 40% strong, P(bet|strong)=75% and P(bet|weak)=25%.
- There are 80 strong hands: 60 bet and 20 check.
- There are 120 weak hands: 30 bet and 90 check.
- The bet column has 90 cases, 60 strong and 30 weak.
- The check column has 110 cases, 20 strong and 90 weak.
P(strong|bet)=60/90=2/3. P(strong|check)=20/110=2/11. Both columns come from the same coherent table.
Common mistakes
- Normalizing by only one state’s contribution to the evidence.
- Leaving checks out and accidentally treating bets as the whole experiment.
- Assigning a posterior to a zero-probability conditioning event.
Keep these ideas
- Build joint state/action cells.
- Add the full observed column for the denominator.
- Impossible evidence requires revisiting the model.