Independent statistics: Basketball?

AI Thread Summary
A basketball player misses 30% of his free throws, leading to a "one and one" scenario where he can shoot two penalty shots if he makes the first. The expected number of points from this situation is calculated using probabilities: if he misses the first shot (30% chance), he scores 0 points; if he makes it (70% chance), he then has a 30% chance of missing the second shot (1 point) and a 70% chance of making it (2 points). The calculations yield an expected score of 1.19 points from the "one and one" opportunity. The problem was resolved after some contemplation, demonstrating the application of expected value in sports statistics.
evildaemonlad
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm a bit stuck on this problem

A basketball player misses 30% of his free throws. He ends up in a situation where he has the potential to shoot two penalty shots if and only if he lands the first shot (called a one and one, I believe). The outcome of the 2nd shot is independent of the first.

> Find the expected number of points resulting from the "one and one"

Here I'm assuming expected number equates to expected value -> E(x) = S x P(x) (S = sigma)

I've set up a table thusly so that I might take the sum of the 3rd column (x denotes successful shots):
x____P(x)____xP(x)
0...?...0
1.....
2.....

The issue that I am having is how to express the dependence of even taking a second shot upon this first. My gut is telling me that the first entry under P(x) ought to be .3 but after that I'm lost. Any pointers would be appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Then, 30% of the "one and one" , he misses the first shot, and gets 0 points (prob 30%).
And he lands 70% of the first shot.
Then, he misses the second throw, getting only 1 point (prob 0.7 * 0.3 = 21%).
But he lands 70% of the 2nd throw, getting 2 points (prob 0.7 * 0.7 = 49%).

So, the expected number of points is 1*0.21 + 2*.49 = 1.19 .
 
Thanks much, I actually managed to figure it out while taking a dinner break from problem sets - you beat me back it seems!
 
I was reading a Bachelor thesis on Peano Arithmetic (PA). PA has the following axioms (not including the induction schema): $$\begin{align} & (A1) ~~~~ \forall x \neg (x + 1 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A2) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + 1 =y + 1 \to x = y) \nonumber \\ & (A3) ~~~~ \forall x (x + 0 = x) \nonumber \\ & (A4) ~~~~ \forall xy (x + (y +1) = (x + y ) + 1) \nonumber \\ & (A5) ~~~~ \forall x (x \cdot 0 = 0) \nonumber \\ & (A6) ~~~~ \forall xy (x \cdot (y + 1) = (x \cdot y) + x) \nonumber...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top