James Bond is the kind of man who gets shot at an awful lot. In fact, he's lucky to even be alive because, during his 22-film Hollywood career, the fictional secret agent has managed to dodge a total of 4,662 bullets says *New Scientist*.

In New Scientist, some context is added to that number by working out the probability of all those shots missing him:

"A static well-aimed shot would almost certainly have proved lethal, but assuming all 4662 were "on the run", the probability of a single fatal shot is about 5 per cent. That is, the chance of a single shot missing is 0.95, and hence the probability of all shots missing is 0.954662 or 1.4 × 10-104, which is as close to zero as makes no difference."

Along the way, Bond's also managed to dispatch 198 villains. This is just data from the Hollywood films of course; include the books, and those figures look even more ridiculous. [New Scientist]

*Image by Gl0ck/Shutterstock*

## Comments

Haven't I seen numerous statistics indicating thousands of combat rounds get fired for each casualty? So that would be a chance of being hit on the order of 0.0002 at best, rather than 0.05.

Yeah, I think I recall that over the course of the several wars in the Middle East, statistics put it at that several tons of ammunition were fired for every insurgent killed.

What you need to consider though, is that a good majority of those shots fired are for fire superiority and covering fire purposes. A good amount of those total shots are just fired in the general direction without specific care for individual accuracy. Such is the case in firefights. In Bonds case, he's usually on his own, and/or just running around barely firing back if at all. Sure a moving target is hard to hit, even a static one, but given the general proximity of those bad guys and the number of them all firing at once, Bond should be dead by now. That's not to say he couldn't just be that lucky.

Oh, I considered it. However estimating a 1 in 20 chance of a fatal hit for a moving shooter firing from the hip at a moving target is wildly optimistic.

“A static well-aimed shot would almost certainly have proved lethal, but assuming all 4662 were “on the run”, the probability of a single fatal shot is about 5 per cent. That is, the chance of a single shot missing is 0.95, and hence the probability of all shots missing is 0.954662 or 1.4 × 10-104, which is as close to zero as makes no difference.”

Is it just me or does that make absolutely no sense at all...?

Yes, the formatting has been messed up. Should be 0.95^4662 not 0.954662

God yes, after reading all those mathematical equations and statistical approximations, it's clear - it's just you.

Failure at math = fail.

TFA essentially indicates that, based on trying to shoot at a moving target, there's only a slight chance at hitting it. But if you count up the number of attempts, he must have been hit at least once by now (fatally).

That he hasn't is simply because we, the global audience, wish it so.

Denial = Reality.

## Join the discussion!

## Comment Voting

## Up Votes

## Down Votes

## Only logged in users may vote for comments!

Please log in or register to gain access to this feature.

## Get Permalink