What is Random and How to Shuffle, or Why You Shouldn't Declump

[Raen]

I have seen a LOT of misinformation making the rounds around here about what actually constitutes randomness in Pokemon, specifically related to (im)proper shuffling and declumping. I feel like it is VERY important for people to know what random actually is, and why they shouldn't declump.

What is Random?
Here is a great description of randomness, taken from Wikipedia (yes, yes, not a good source, whatever):

The Oxford English Dictionary defines "random" as "Having no definite aim or purpose; not sent or guided in a particular direction; made, done, occurring, etc., without method or conscious choice; haphazard." This concept of randomness suggests a non-order or non-coherence in a sequence of symbols or steps, such that there is no intelligible pattern or combination.

Basically, when something is random there is NO intelligible pattern.

Now, of course, this definition isn't really useful without some context. So let's put things in perspective within the Pokemon TCG.

Randomness pops up in a couple of instances in the Pokemon TCG. The most obvious is in coin flips. You have a random chance to get a head or a tails. You can't predict a pattern, you can't know what you will flip. This is random. Most people would agree that you can't (or shouldn't) control, or even TRY to control the outcome of a coin flip. That would obviously be cheating, right?

The other major area of the TCG where randomness pops up is in deck shuffling. Card order is, of course, supposed to be random. According to the Pokemon TCG tournaments rules:

Each player’s deck is expected to be fully randomized at the start of each game and during the game, as
card effects require.

So we can all agree that our decks should be random, right? Well, the problems comes when we start asking the question "When is my deck random?". That's not a super easy question to answer, but I'll try to.

A deck is random when, according to the definition of randomness, there is NO intelligible pattern to a deck. Obviously, expecting PERFECT randomness all the time is impractical. It's an impossible thing to measure, and due to the imperfect nature of shuffling techniques, we can't expect PERFECT randomness.

However, we can expect a reasonably close impersonation of randomness, and thanks to the wonders of math, we have a good idea of what kind of shuffling is necessary for a deck to be considered random. Again, quoting from Wikipedia:

leading figure in the mathematics of shuffling is mathematician and magician Persi Diaconis, who began studying the question around 1970,[2] and has authored many papers in the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s on the subject with numerous co-authors. Most famous is (Bayer & Diaconis 1992), co-authored with mathematician Dave Bayer, which concluded that the deck did not start to become random until five good riffle shuffles, and was truly random after seven, in the precise sense of variation distance described in Markov chain mixing time; of course, you would need more shuffles if your shuffling technique is poor.

So, basically, you have to do 7 good riffle shuffles for your deck to be "truly" random, or at least, as close to truly random as we can get. That's pretty easy to understand, I hope.

Now that I have those baseline's down, we need to get to the real core of the issue here, at least for me: Declumping. Declumping is an attempt to create an even distribution of cards within your deck so that you do not draw "clumps" of cards. When described that way, it should be VERY obvious why declumping is cheating; it is an attempt to stop clumps of card from appearing in a "random" deck, or in other words, it's an attempt to remove randomness. Now, if a player shuffles properly after a declump, that attempt to cheat is removed. Still the intent is there, and it's a real, real problem.

I really wanted to write more and articulate my point better, but I'm finding myself at a loss for words to elaborate here. I feel like this is simple; if something is random, any given card is a equally likely to be at any point in a deck as any other card. You can't have a predictable pattern, and as such, CLUMPS WILL EXISTS IN YOUR DECK, based purely on odds. If you have clump, you either 1) cheated, or 2) got very, very lucky (or unlucky). The odds are very low of no clumps existing in a deck.

So please, stop with this "my deck isn't random enough because I have clumps". That is difinitively not true at all. Random is random, you can't control it, and you shouldn't even attempt to.

 

[Bilbo Baggins]

TLR Don't declump/stack deck before shuffling (useless), Don't look through your deck at all mid shuffle (defeats purpose of shuffling), 7 riffles or more is when it's random, and make sure to shuffle opponents decks if you think/see something fishy. That's the best (only) way to get random/well shuffled decks.


I admit I pile shuffle , but I don't look at my deck before doing so (if I do, I riffle shuffle 3-4 times). After pile, I riffle few more times and then present. I don't mind also if people ask to shuffle or what not ,specially at fast pace tournaments where shuffling tends to happen before sitting down. (I shuffle at the table still, but since I didn't 'pile shuffle' in front of people, they get paranoid but I respect and encourage that)

 

[NoPoke]

If you read Prof Diaconis's work you will find out that seven riffles is not enough.

The cards we use are not identical to each other. We have bending foils and sticky sleeves to deal with.

De-clumping remains a smokescreen. The requirement is for sufficient randomisation.

It would be nice to adopt Magic the gathering's approach where players are expected to understand how to randomise but their target audience is a lot older than pokemon's

So what is required of randomisation? Information destruction should be the goal. The question should always be what do I know after I perform a given process? Do I still know something I should not? If yes then I should shuffle more.


Worst "shuffle" I can think of is the hand over hand shuffle that only rotates the order of the cards. Lots of players do this especially among the youingest

 

[vaporeon]

If you read Prof Diaconis's work you will find out that seven riffles is not enough.

The cards we use are not identical to each other. We have bending foils and sticky sleeves to deal with.

De-clumping remains a smokescreen. The requirement is for sufficient randomisation.

It would be nice to adopt Magic the gathering's approach where players are expected to understand how to randomise but their target audience is a lot older than pokemon's

So what is required of randomisation? Information destruction should be the goal. The question should always be what do I know after I perform a given process? Do I still know something I should not? If yes then I should shuffle more.


Worst "shuffle" I can think of is the hand over hand shuffle that only rotates the order of the cards. Lots of players do this especially among the youingest

I agree with this post. Shuffling is done to destroy any information gained after the search. Sufficient when it comes to random and shuffling is subjective. As long as both players agree the deck is "random" then its fine. If a player chooses to declump their cards then they should be allowed to. I expect all players to shuffle their decks after a search and you all as players have the right to shuffle your opponents deck and or cut it. That really should be the end of it.

Pokemon TCG is not a game like Poker where you shuffle the deck once and deal out cards. In the game of Pokemon, you have many forces that change the order of cards just about every turn . As long as the order of the known cards have been changed during the shuffle then the shuffle is legal, no matter what order of cards were changed during the searching of the deck. You can do what ever you want during your deck search so long as the shuffle is good enough to where both players accept it.

As much as I'm concerned, as long as the order of the cards are not known, then its random enough.

 

[NoPoke]

No it is not enough for players to agree.

No it is not enough to rearrange the known cards.

No you can not just do whatever you want during your search. (You are supposed to be searching)

Not knowing the top card of your deck is a start but it is not enough. What you are trying to achieve is that after seeing the top card you have no more information about the next card than offered by random chance. For example if you know or expect that there are no adjacent pairs of cards in your deck then you have not shuffled sufficiently.

Pile shuffling to spread out cards that will naturally be together at the end of a game as a part of the randomisation process is a good thing because your goal is to spread the cards out as quickly as possible without producing a pattern. If you start by ordering the cards first into pokemon- trainers-energy and then pile shuffle then you are deliberately creating information about the order of cards within the deck. Whenever you have knowledge about the order of the deck you have to take steps to destroy that knowledge.

---------- Post added 06/28/2013 at 10:31 AM ----------

And since this thread is likely to get cluttered with opinion rather than data here is some data from a simulation I ran some time ago. NOTE that i call a clump three or more cards. Such clumps are uncommon in real decks. I do not call a pair a clump because pairs are common in real decks. For real decks the absence of a pair is unusual.


===== Analysis of 40,000 high quality shuffles =====

Data from the simulations I ran. In each case the first entry in the array is the number of times that the shuffle produced zero counts of the searched for pattern (pairs,triples,quads). There was no double counting so the sequence "XXX" is a triple but not a pair.

10,000 shuffles deck has 15 quads
pairs[505,1659,2416,2414,1608,878,365,119,28,7,3]
triples[9053,901,45,1]
quads[9986,14]

Clumps occur about 1 in 10 complete shuffles for this very odd deck

--

10,000 shuffles deck has 9 quads and 5 triples
pairs[916,2270,2820,2137,1125,513,165,47,5,2]
triples[9349,623,28]
quads[9990,10]

Clumps occur about 1 in 15 complete shuffle of this unusual deck.

--

10,000 shuffles deck has 5 quads and 9 triples
pairs[1242,2767,2868,1884,858,283,68,25,5]
triples[9509,483,8]
quads[9996,4]


10,000 shuffles deck has 7 quads and 3 triples
pairs[1274,2826,2892,1768,848,288,82,20,1,1]
triples[9541,439,19,1]
quads[9988,12]

Clumps occur around in approximately 1 in 20 complete shuffles of these more likely decks.
One or more pairs occur in around 7 out of 8 complete shuffles.

 

[Swordfish1989]

I agree with this post. Shuffling is done to destroy any information gained after the search. Sufficient when it comes to random and shuffling is subjective. As long as both players agree the deck is "random" then its fine. If a player chooses to declump their cards then they should be allowed to. I expect all players to shuffle their decks after a search and you all as players have the right to shuffle your opponents deck and or cut it. That really should be the end of it.

Pokemon TCG is not a game like Poker where you shuffle the deck once and deal out cards. In the game of Pokemon, you have many forces that change the order of cards just about every turn . As long as the order of the known cards have been changed during the shuffle then the shuffle is legal, no matter what order of cards were changed during the searching of the deck. You can do what ever you want during your deck search so long as the shuffle is good enough to where both players accept it.

As much as I'm concerned, as long as the order of the cards are not known, then its random enough.

Oh really? If I sit down in front of you for a tournament, organizr my cards still pokemon, energy, trainer, and use the double nickel procedure so that the card distribution in my deck is nearly perfect, youd be ok with that? After all, I don't know the order of my deck....

 

[Otaku]

Basically, when something is random there is NO intelligible pattern.

This is incorrect, but easily fixed:

Basically, when something is random there is no intentional pattern.

Most simple patterns are incredibly rare, but it is possible (for example) for someone to fully randomize his or her deck but as we draw card after card, realize the deck is in Pokémon-Trainer-Energy order. When patterns show up, they should be unintentional and occur after sufficient shuffling, making them highly improbable (just not impossible).

Every result may not be a pattern, but it could be an intentional, intelligible arrangement; a deck of all singles (while rarely competitive) could be in several intentional orders but appear random, and sometimes Pokémon-Trainer-Trainer-Pokémon-Trainer-Energy is not a repeated pattern, but an intentional order (like Basic, draw card, Rare Candy, Stage 2, Pokémon Tool, Energy card).

TL;DR: Shuffling in the TCG is done to generate randomization, and randomization is done in part to destroy information in the deck.

 

[vaporeon]

Oh really? If I sit down in front of you for a tournament, organizr my cards still pokemon, energy, trainer, and use the double nickel procedure so that the card distribution in my deck is nearly perfect, youd be ok with that? After all, I don't know the order of my deck....

You can order your cards in anyway you like so long that the deck is shuffled fully so that no order or information you had before to the shuffle is destroyed. To me it seems you use the words double nickel in terms of cheating. If you did that in front of me, would your intention had been to cheat? Thats how it seems to me with you asking that. With you doing that, it would seem you know some order of the deck and it would be cheating.

The biggest difference there is you would present the deck to me to shuffle and or cut. I would then take the time to shuffle your deck according to what I consider to me "random" and offer the deck to you to cut if you choose to do so. Not everyones intention is to cheat and if they intend to cheat, based on the action would would have done against me with the example you gave me, I would shuffle the deck. You also have the right to shuffle your opponents deck if they think there is or would be any foal play. Its pretty simple really.

 

[Pikabruce]

...Not everyones intention is to cheat...

You seem to be saying that it all is based on whether or not the player intends to cheat, and if you don't believe it's cheating then it's not cheating. Some players obviously feel that distributing the cards in the deck so that they are not clumped together is just fine and is not cheating; if half their opponents fail to obstruct them by thoroughly shuffling then that's the opponent's fault and the judges should not get involved. Is that what you're saying?

Because if so, that is totally 100% wrong.

 

[vaporeon]

You seem to be saying that it all is based on whether or not the player intends to cheat, and if you don't believe it's cheating then it's not cheating. Some players obviously feel that distributing the cards in the deck so that they are not clumped together is just fine and is not cheating; if half their opponents fail to obstruct them by thoroughly shuffling then that's the opponent's fault and the judges should not get involved. Is that what you're saying?

Because if so, that is totally 100% wrong.

Each player is required to completely shuffle their deck after a search. If a player fails to do that then that players opponent has the right to shuffle and or cut their deck. if that player refuses to shuffle their deck, has a inability to shuffle well or refuses to offer their deck to you to shuffle and or cut, then you call a judge.

While a player is searching their deck, they have a right to move their cards around in any order they see fit, whether or not they are declumping or moving choices in the deck to front of the deck to pick from while resolving the searching effect. They must then shuffle the deck to the best of their ability and present it to their opponent each time so they can shuffle and or cut or you call a judge over if they refuse and then the judge shuffles or do what they do.

The issue here is players just assume everyone is cheating when thats not the case.

 

[signofzeta]

I think achieving true randomness is impossible. The only reason why I shuffle is to make it impossible for me to guess a pattern in my deck, and know what my next 20 cards in the deck are.

I only "declump" or move my cards around if my deck order is like this, you know, when you open a brand new pre-summer 2010 theme deck:

POKEMON
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
ENERGY
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
TRAINER
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON
POKEMON

In the case of shuffling after searches, I think it is just a waste of time to move cards around anyway, considering that I don't want to know where each card in my deck might end up.

 

[Swordfish1989]

You can order your cards in anyway you like so long that the deck is shuffled fully so that no order or information you had before to the shuffle is destroyed. To me it seems you use the words double nickel in terms of cheating. If you did that in front of me, would your intention had been to cheat? Thats how it seems to me with you asking that. With you doing that, it would seem you know some order of the deck and it would be cheating.

The biggest difference there is you would present the deck to me to shuffle and or cut. I would then take the time to shuffle your deck according to what I consider to me "random" and offer the deck to you to cut if you choose to do so. Not everyones intention is to cheat and if they intend to cheat, based on the action would would have done against me with the example you gave me, I would shuffle the deck. You also have the right to shuffle your opponents deck if they think there is or would be any foal play. Its pretty simple really.

If I double nickle, I don't know the order of my deck. What I DO know is that I just shuffled my deck in a way where the distribution is perfect. My opening hand will likely have 2 Pokemon, 2 Energy, and 3 T/S/S. No clumps of any kinds. That's cheating because I altered the distribution of the deck to favor me, making it not truly random.

By declumping, you're doing the exact same thing. You're taking clumps, separating, and creating a favorable distribution. Most people after declumping do a poor shuffle to boot. And if you're going to do a full shuffle after declumping, there's no point in declumping in the first place. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[vaporeon]

If I double nickle, I don't know the order of my deck. What I DO know is that I just shuffled my deck in a way where the distribution is perfect. My opening hand will likely have 2 Pokemon, 2 Energy, and 3 T/S/S. No clumps of any kinds. That's cheating because I altered the distribution of the deck to favor me, making it not truly random.

By declumping, you're doing the exact same thing. You're taking clumps, separating, and creating a favorable distribution. Most people after declumping do a poor shuffle to boot. And if you're going to do a full shuffle after declumping, there's no point in declumping in the first place. It just doesn't make sense.

There is a huge difference there. In your Double Nickle, you still maintain some knowledge of order of the deck. You know you will get X-X-X type of card in a certain order and I will agree that is cheating, as you are willing trying to gain a advantage. Declumping is just moving clumps you happen to see to one part of the deck to another, not caring where it goes. You then shuffle the deck not knowing where the card is.

Most people, including me are OCD when it comes to see same name cards together. Is there a point to it, maybe not but the same can be said about good luck charms being placed on the table during a game or people who have in irrational fears or superstitions, faith, etc. It does not have to make sense, just people do it.

If you feel your opponent is doing a poor job shuffling, then help them out and shuffle their deck or call over a judge to do it. I've also seen people in matches recorded by the Top Cut where players shuffling methods were very questionable. Everyone has different shuffling styles and some are bound to conflict with something. Just ask your opponent if you can shuffle their deck. Its not a big issue that players cant fix themselves.

 

[NoPoke]

If you are not regularlyseeing pairs of cards with the same name together when you search then that indicates that you are not randomising your deck as well as you should be.

Clumps of three or more cards of the same name are uncommon and as such you should not see those often but they do still occur.

 

[Mekkah]

Each player is required to completely shuffle their deck after a search. If a player fails to do that then that players opponent has the right to shuffle and or cut their deck.

This is not how it works. If you fail to shuffle properly (or ask the judge to shuffle properly) you are breaking the rules. You are responsible for properly randomizing your deck.

 

[vaporeon]

This is not how it works. If you fail to shuffle properly (or ask the judge to shuffle properly) you are breaking the rules. You are responsible for properly randomizing your deck.

That is how it works. Both players involved in the game are responsible to make sure each player shuffles their decks correctly. If a player fails to do that or cant, then you can either do nothing, shuffle their deck after the search or call a judge to shuffle for them. These guideline are in place for that reason. If you dont use them, then its your fault.

 

[NoPoke]

That is how it works. Both players involved in the game are responsible to make sure each player shuffles their decks correctly. If a player fails to do that or cant, then you can either do nothing, shuffle their deck after the search or call a judge to shuffle for them. These guideline are in place for that reason. If you dont use them, then its your fault.

No that isn't how it works. It is not the victim's fault when the opponent presents a stacked deck.

This

Shuffling your opponent's deck might stop their cheating from working . . . but they still cheated. What's more they haven't lost anything by trying - the worst that happens is they get a fair game

is how it works.

This

Shuffling your opponent's deck might stop their cheating from working . . . but they still cheated. What's more they haven't lost anything by trying - the worst that happens is they get a fair game

is why it is a problem.

This

Shuffling your opponent's deck might stop their cheating from working . . . but they still cheated. What's more they haven't lost anything by trying - the worst that happens is they get a fair game

is why it has to stop.

 

[ultimatedra]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2l1lfHNyKc - Canadian National Championship 2013 Controversy

I am just going to stick this video here as it pertains to the subject at hand. I know it is posted on another thread but it could give some reference to why this discussion started.

 

[Otaku]

Most people, including me are OCD when it comes to see same name cards together. Is there a point to it, maybe not but the same can be said about good luck charms being placed on the table during a game or people who have in irrational fears or superstitions, faith, etc. It does not have to make sense, just people do it.

You know, a faith in something doesn't have to be irrational. Plenty of people have faith in something like a parachute to function, for example. This area of "belief" also goes with "intent"; should we allow someone to carry out a little "ritual" they believe will alter the outcomes? Is it possible one has to way the time required, discomfort other players may feel, and likelihood of success and not make the mistake of treating all such things the same, because sometimes "fair" isn't "equal"?

 

[signofzeta]

If you think about the order of which your cards will end up, you are probably cheating. Unfortunately, not every judge is a psychic.