In my city, there's about 0.758 women that would be an acceptable match. That's actually good news. Considering about 1 out of every 208 million women in the US will be a good match for me, the fact that she's missing a major body part is an advantage.

A woman with a missing leg will be easier to spot in a crowd.

(Plus, I'll bet she'll be really good at speaking in pirate talk, ya know. Yaargh!)

They did a bit like this on the "The Big Bang Theory". It involved applying the Wolowitz Coefficient (neediness times dress size squared).
Here is a You tube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4CYSHV84jY"

At the rate of .0000034% chance per night, it would take 559 years to raise his chances of meeting the girl to 50%, 1100 years to raise it to 75%, and 3711 years to raise it to 99%.

Yet...he got a girl friend within a short period of time. If he got a girl friend within one year, that means he beat a 99.88% chance of failure. Either his math is off, or he's incredibly lucky...

I could use that equation to find out what the chances are of me finding something I want to eat when I walk in my kitchen.
The chances would be almost zero. As I continue looking, my standards get lower and lower and my chances of finding something I want to eat increases. If it's bad enough, my changes of finding something to eat will end up being 100% and have me eating one of those giant shredded wheat biscuits with some slimfast powder for flavor. Which I've done.

So his chances may be low at first, but the longer he stays single, the parameters he inputted into the equation gradually change.