Tips for Winning the Lottery from a 7 Time Winner! Reaction?
7-time lottery winner gives tips on how to increase your odds
He gives some good tips like setting a budget, not using grocery or other living related expenses to buy lottery tickets.
He gives an example as having a budget of $100:
That means you divide your budget by 10 and by ten of that denomination. In this example you would buy ten $10 tickets.
Buy 10 tickets in a row of the same game.
"Almost every single time you do that, you're going to find a winning ticket in there. Most of the times, even two winning tickets...
Second tip: DO NOT buy quick picks. He says you can't increase your chances by buying a random lottery ticket? WTF? Is this guy high? How does using your own numbers make your chances higher than a random number set. What a crack pot. He describes using quick picks as taking a loaded gun, putting on a blindfold, and trying to hit a target "It's not going to happen" he says. WTF?
What do you guys think? Can anyone with some math confirm that using your own numbers and using a random quick gives you the same exact chances?
If I ever played the lottery, I would use a quick pick to lower my chances of matching another winning ticket. Although my chances of winning wouldn't be higher, the probability of a larger prize would increase. The problem with picking your own numbers is that many people pick birthdays or patterns on the ticket. For instance, if you picked 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 with a power ball of 1, and you won, you would probably split that prize with 25 people.
As for the 10 ticket at a time thing, I think it's baloney. Sure, you have a good chance of getting a winning ticket, but that ticket will probably be a push. But, I've wondered about the randomness of the printing process.
Cracking the Scratch Lottery Code
Short version: a statistician figured out a way to determine whether a certain kind of match-the-tic-tac-toe scratch-off lottery ticket was a winner by looking at the patterns on the visible tic-tac-toe boards.
Quote: CrystalMathAs for the 10 ticket at a time thing, I think it's baloney. Sure, you have a good chance of getting a winning ticket, but that ticket will probably be a push. But, I've wondered about the randomness of the printing process.
The idea is you're more likely to win anything if you stick to one game, all other things being equal (ie no info on whether the big prizes have been collected yet). So buying ten tickets for game A is better than buying one ticket each of games A through J. I see nothing wrong with that advice. At worst it makes no difference.
The nonsense about quick picks is just nonsense. When I played lotto every week, I would buy the same numbers every time and some quick picks. I pooled with other epople. At the high, or low, point we were about 7 people and we bought, I think, 40 tickets per drawing. About 30 were the same numbers every week and the rest quick picks.
Overall we won some 3rd prizes three times. Once with a quick pick. So there :P
But the best move I ever made in lotto was to quit playing it.
Quote: Nareed
But the best move I ever made in lotto was to quit playing it.
Definitely, although I will admit when the Mega Millions jackpot goes over $300 million, I buy one or two tickets for fun. Good donation to the children if anything.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Definitely, although I will admit when the Mega Millions jackpot goes over $300 million, I buy one or two tickets for fun. Good donation to the children if anything.
Oh, I buy a ticket or two when the local lotto jackpot gets high, too. And I play the weekly NFL lotto (look it up, I explained it somewhere on the board) during football season just for fun. It's a harmless passtime.
Quote: AcesAndEightsA bit off-topic, but I wonder if this guy's story has been discussed on these boards before? I just joined a couple of months ago, but this story is about a year old.
Cracking the Scratch Lottery Code
Short version: a statistician figured out a way to determine whether a certain kind of match-the-tic-tac-toe scratch-off lottery ticket was a winner by looking at the patterns on the visible tic-tac-toe boards.
Very interesting read. Thanks!
Hmmm, that sounds odd...."Every set has an equal chance of hitting". (LMAO)
He did his research/put a ton of time into it and its paying off, God bless him. If I had to guess, probably more than 9 hours of research I might add.
All smaller wins ($5, $10 whatever) goes right back into his pool of lotto money. He keeps all losing tickets for tax reasons. There are a couple other items in the book I won't discuss but he TAUGHT his daughter some of his tactics and she also won a large amount. Lets also not forget the profits from his book sales. I find something kind of funny on this board.....if people do WELL, they get insulted and their world gets rocked. I would trade 20 of the top 'pros' (cough) on this board for one Richard Lustig.
Ken
I'd wager that the ideal lottery numbers are an arbitrarily selected set of numbers over 31, and you'd need to select your own numbers to guarantee the issuance of those numbers.
Luck? Maybe, maybe not. http://www.lotterypost.com/news/231364
Ken
Quote: mrjjjdifferent series of numbers to make sure they have NEVER hit in the past and plays MANY series per week, always sticking with the SAME set of numbers. He NEVER misses a day of playing, very *CONSISTENT*.
Without getting off topic. Mathematically, why would it matter if a series of numbers never hit in the past or not?? I can see why playing a larger amount of varied numbers could help, but without trying to sound too redundant here, past numbers don't influence future numbers, even in the lottery.
Quote:if people do WELL, they get insulted and their world gets rocked.
Absolutely not true. I don't think this guy is stupid or an idiot or anything. I find the story extremely interesting. I would question his quotation that picking one series of numbers over another series is MORE likely to hit. Please don't make this thread into some weird defensive insult rant. I'm not insulting this guy, I'm just questioning why one series is more favorable over another. But we've had this conversation before........
Quote: rdw4potusIt's absolutely true that smartly picking your own numbers increases your EV in a lottery game. You're no more likely to win, but you're likely to win more than you would playing quick picks. Random quick picks can easily match the selected numbers of fools (1-2-3-4-5, the numbers from Lost, etc) and easily result in shared jackpots.
So by doing quick picks you increase your chance of picking the same numbers as everyone else?
Isn't this true if you pick your own numbers. Couldn't someone else be picking the same numbers?
If someone could explain this with math, I would be very grateful.
“My husband and I used Richard Lustig’s lotto method and within months of starting the method we hit a Mega Money jackpot for 2 million dollars! It was really easy to follow. You only play what you can and you can still win! Shaun and I will only play lotto from now on using these strategies.”
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Without getting off topic. Mathematically, why would it matter if a series of numbers never hit in the past or not?? I can see why playing a larger amount of varied numbers could help, but without trying to sound too redundant here, past numbers don't influence future numbers, even in the lottery.
Absolutely not true. I don't think this guy is stupid or an idiot or anything. I find the story extremely interesting. I would question his quotation that picking one series of numbers over another series is MORE likely to hit. Please don't make this thread into some weird defensive insult rant. I'm not insulting this guy, I'm just questioning why one series is more favorable over another. But we've had this conversation before........
For starters, I was referring to ANY person that does well, not just him.
There is some kind of stat (dont quote me, I cant find it at this time)......there has NEVER been a repeating set of winning numbers in any large lotto game, I believe thats only PART of his decision making. As far as the definition of a lotto? I dont know, I think he is referring to the larger ones, not some goofy pick 3.
Right, wrong, I dont really care, I'm killing some time posting. Have a good night agreeing with each other, I'm off to the casino (again), later peeps.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj
There is some kind of stat (dont quote me, I cant find it at this time)......there has NEVER been a repeating set of winning numbers in any large lotto game, I believe thats only PART of his decision making. As far as the definition of a lotto? I dont know, I think he is referring to the larger ones, not some goofy pick 3.
Interesting. But even if the numbers have never repeated, isn't it still possible that they will?
Good luck at the casino tonight!
Quote: mrjjj
There is some kind of stat (dont quote me, I cant find it at this time)......there has NEVER been a repeating set of winning numbers in any large lotto game
I've heard this too. Might be true. But it's also by far the most likely outcome. Powerball is a 25 year old game that draws 2 times per week. 25*52*2=2600 drawings in the history of Powerball. The odds of winning the powerball are 1:175,000,000. It would be an incredible long shot to have two out of 2,600 Powerball drawings have the same winning numbers.
Quote: rdw4potusIt's absolutely true that smartly picking your own numbers increases your EV in a lottery game. You're no more likely to win, but you're likely to win more than you would playing quick picks. Random quick picks can easily match the selected numbers of fools (1-2-3-4-5, the numbers from Lost, etc) and easily result in shared jackpots.
I'd wager that the ideal lottery numbers are an arbitrarily selected set of numbers over 31, and you'd need to select your own numbers to guarantee the issuance of those numbers.
I would argue that my odds of matching the lost numbers, or "fools" number isn't something that happens "easily"..
In fact, I would say the odds are probably close to..I dunno, winning the lottery...
I would say that this guy 1. Got lucky then proceded to invest his earnings into different lottery methods. He now supplements his "winning methods" in the form of interviews and book sales...
1) Having random number's picked or picking your own doesn't really keep you from picking duplicate numbers, your pattern could just as easily be matched as the quick pick.
2) Past results have absolutely no bearing on future results. Just as in Roulette, 10 blacks in a row doesn't increase the chances of red hitting.
3) The only viable method to adhere to is not to buy scratch off tickets where the major jackpots have already been hit. For instance, if a particular type of $5 ticket has a single $1 million jackpot, and that ticket has been purchased and redeemed (as noted on the big sign at your gas station, or websites, or word of mouth etc) don't buy that particular ticket as EV plummets way down. Similar to playing the $1 side bet at Caribbean Stud after the progressive has been hit and reset.
4) Someone already mentioned this, but buying 10 of the same type of tickets doesn't gauranty a win, and if one or two tickets hit, they will very easily result in a push.
Play for fun if you want, and only if you can afford it, but there are no advantage lottery players.
The state lotteries are truly a tax on the poor. Poor people play, poor people win, and then the poor winners are rich for a few months until they pump it all right back into the economy and become poor yet again. Hence, a tax on the poor. Forgive me for the stereotype.
Quote: awakefield1983Play for fun if you want, and only if you can afford it, but there are no advantage lottery players.
In general I agree, but on this specific point I have to mention that certain state lotteries in the past have been known to go +EV with their jackpots, where the price of buying every number combination possible was less than the top jackpot prize. This was a couple years ago and hopefully they have some mathemeticians on board now...but there were people hiring other people to go to gas stations and buy huge blocks of tickets...
But like I said in general I agree with you and it's a fool's errand, above is just an edge case.
Quote: awakefield1983Can't believe people are giving legitimacy to these theories...
There are a lot of foolish gamblers on this forum...
Quote: AcesAndEightsIn general I agree, but on this specific point I have to mention that certain state lotteries in the past have been known to go +EV with their jackpots, where the price of buying every number combination possible was less than the top jackpot prize. This was a couple years ago and hopefully they have some mathemeticians on board now...but there were people hiring other people to go to gas stations and buy huge blocks of tickets...
But like I said in general I agree with you and it's a fool's errand, above is just an edge case.
Assuming that no one else did the same thing and you had to split the prize...
Quote: AcesAndEights... certain state lotteries in the past have been known to go +EV with their jackpots, where the price of buying every number combination possible was less than the top jackpot prize. ...but there were people hiring other people to go to gas stations and buy huge blocks of tickets...
I think that's more of an urban legend and the plot of a couple of TV comedy episodes. Unless the lottery corporation were helping you, I think it would be nigh to impossible for any manageable-size group of collaborators to pencil in lottery forms and make all the purchases to have every possible number combination covered. Then, even if you did, some half dozen other ticket holders might share the jackpot with you so that you still lose a bundle of money.
The fun is in the "what would we do if we won" musings. But we can do that without buying tickets.
Quote: WongBoIf someone had a system to beat the lottery why would he have won only seven times?
Because in his new tax bracket, he has me buying tickets and cashing them for him.
Quote: MoscaThe problem with the lottery is that it isn't any fun. Honest to god, even when the damn thing goes to $300M and Mrs insists I get $5 worth of tickets, we almost never check them. And when we do, sometimes we match a number or two.
The fun is in the "what would we do if we won" musings. But we can do that without buying tickets.
Tell that to the winner.
People do win the damned thing.
But I agree for most it is a waste of time and money
Quote: awakefield1983The state lotteries are truly a tax on the poor.
A tax is coercive. The lottery isn't. The poor could easily escape the lottery by choosing not to play it.
Quote: awakefield1983Can't believe people are giving legitimacy to these theories...
1) Having random number's picked or picking your own doesn't really keep you from picking duplicate numbers, your pattern could just as easily be matched as the quick pick.
I agree with every point you made but this one. I can guarantee that 1-2-3-4-5 is covered proactively by at least one person in just about every 5byX lottery in the country. The quick pick can also produce a 1-2-3-4-5 ticket. Same with 1-2-3-5-9, same with 1-2-3-5-7, 5-7-10-11-17 (11/10/1775). My manual picks won't cover those guaranteed-to-be-taken combination of numbers. Except in cases where every single possible combination is taken, my manual pick is slightly less likely to be matched than a quick pick because my pick is guaranteed to miss those common numbers.
Quote: DocI think that's more of an urban legend and the plot of a couple of TV comedy episodes. Unless the lottery corporation were helping you, I think it would be nigh to impossible for any manageable-size group of collaborators to pencil in lottery forms and make all the purchases to have every possible number combination covered. Then, even if you did, some half dozen other ticket holders might share the jackpot with you so that you still lose a bundle of money.
Here is one documented case of it happening. This isn't the one of which I was thinking when I posted; I'm pretty sure there's at least one documented case of it happening in the US in an east-coast state somewhere. If I find the article I'll post it.
True, the labor and capital involved in buying all of the tickets would probably offset most of the winnings. As is the case for most advantage plays :).
;)
Quote: rdw4potusI agree with every point you made but this one. I can guarantee that 1-2-3-4-5 is covered proactively by at least one person in just about every 5byX lottery in the country. The quick pick can also produce a 1-2-3-4-5 ticket. Same with 1-2-3-5-9, same with 1-2-3-5-7, 5-7-10-11-17 (11/10/1775). My manual picks won't cover those guaranteed-to-be-taken combination of numbers. Except in cases where every single possible combination is taken, my manual pick is slightly less likely to be matched than a quick pick because my pick is guaranteed to miss those common numbers.
You picked 5 out of 180 million different combinations.
Seriously, I trust my quick pick will never pick the lost numbers, 1,2,3,4,5.. or whatever you consider "common" combinations. And I will again retort with the fact that the chances of it happening are like winning the lottery...
Also, the majority of powerball winners used the quick-pick option. So by that logic, using quick pick should increase my chances of winning (when in reality, it's because the majority of tickets sold are quick picks)...
Quote: TriplellYou picked 5 out of 180 million different combinations.
That's all that's required. I don't have to prove that it's a *lot* better. Just that it's better...
Quote: AcesAndEightsHere is one documented case of it happening. This isn't the one of which I was thinking when I posted; I'm pretty sure there's at least one documented case of it happening in the US in an east-coast state somewhere. If I find the article I'll post it.
I remember one such case. It was on TV and the papers. I think it was in one of the Carolinas, and the syndicate failed to obtain every combo in time. I do remember there was talk of an investigation in the matter after it was known.
I've also posted about the logistics of it, either elsewhere on the board or in another board. I forget which. It would be flat out impossible for a single person or even a small group of people to acquire even a few hundred thousand tickets, much less the millions required.
Ok, it's here:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/2145-a-good-lotto-bet-really/#post18290
Yes, I've noted some whooping errors now that I re-read it.
Quote: ncfatcatWell of course since the numbers are drawn from a drum with actual physical balls doesn't that lead to the question of "Are there dead or active balls that are more likely/not likely to be popped into the exit?" Since this is not a pure mathematical event but involves physics if the lotteries use the same balls over and over there should be some significant variations.
The balls are replaced regularly. There have been incidences of tampering where balls have been injected with a liquid to alter the physics of the game. Same methodology used to scam some larger Indian Bingo games.
Quote: DocI think that's more of an urban legend and the plot of a couple of TV comedy episodes. Unless the lottery corporation were helping you, I think it would be nigh to impossible for any manageable-size group of collaborators to pencil in lottery forms and make all the purchases to have every possible number combination covered. Then, even if you did, some half dozen other ticket holders might share the jackpot with you so that you still lose a bundle of money.
At one time it was possible to buy large blocks of tickets to capitalize on +EV lottery situtations. Here is a story of an older couple who each bought 150,000 tickets at $2 each, over the course of three days in order to profit from a loophole in the Massachusetts lottery. They supposedly doubled their money on the lottery winnings.
It is unclear if they bought quick picks or used prefilled entry slips. I understand Massachusetts changed the rules of the game, limiting the number of tickets that could be sold to an individual each day, after this story broke last year.
I dont know if this is his method, im just guessing.
If not, and it's almost certainly not, then the Expected Utility or EU is not there. And if you're going to buy a lot of tickets, we're talking 1,000s at least, the lost utility is very significant. So you're not getting the proper odds.
This concept often comes in play in tournaments. There are situations where you would call all-in with 83-off, and situations where you would fold AA preflop, because the worth of your chips is so non-linear.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Who is really going to fold AA?
Watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHiEkikhDGU
Quote: AyecarumbaAt one time it was possible to buy large blocks of tickets to capitalize on +EV lottery situtations. Here is a story of an older couple who each bought 150,000 tickets at $2 each, over the course of three days in order to profit from a loophole in the Massachusetts lottery. They supposedly doubled their money on the lottery winnings.
It is unclear if they bought quick picks or used prefilled entry slips. I understand Massachusetts changed the rules of the game, limiting the number of tickets that could be sold to an individual each day, after this story broke last year.
This is the story I was looking for. Thanks!
Quote: edwardApart from the first prize there are also the smaller win cathegories and if you buy lets say 10 quick pick tickets your chances do not increase linearly.
But they do increase linearly. The problem is that one ticket or 10 tickets do not make much of a dent when there are 176 million+ possible combinations. Your odds of winning with 10 tickets are 10x better than your odds with only one. Your odds with 100 are 100x better than only one, etc. Unfortunately, sinking $100 for 100 tickets means your odds have only increased to 100 in 176 million.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Yeah, So looking back it was a good call. But the math everytime says AA is your best shot pre flop. Please explain it isn't. (I'm not a poker pro)
It's simple. Aces are a favorite - but in a 4-way pot, only a 64% favorite.
Suppose now it's the bubble, you have a good stack on the button, but not the big stack. UTG is in the red and shoves all in, the big stack of your table raises, a medium stack calls, you are next, and the big blind's a little short.
The amount to call is also really nasty - you have 70,000, and it's 45,000 to call. Raising won't even make a difference: UTG's in, your 25k into a 175k pot isn't scaring the big stack, the medium stack is committed, and then the big blind might jump in, lowering your chances to 55%. Against random cards, which UTG probably has, for big stack and BB it's 50/50, the medium stack is clearly serious.
With aces, there's almost no flop that will make you fold, and if you do fold post-flop, you might end up the next guy shoving any two under the gun. If you do win, your gains still fall short of a triple-up.
So, are you going to risk the whole tournament on a 50%-60% shot?
Maybe you are, but let's see what can happen if you fold now. Whatever happens, you'll still have a comfortable stack for the final table. If the big stack wins - he clears out two players, gets you both into the money, and you aren't worse off by much, he had the lead on you as it is. If medium stack or BB wins - the stacks equalize and there is no big stack anymore, you are upgraded to one of the big stacks. If UTG wins, it's about the same, only with a side pot.
Folding just brings you better value than aces.
So you grind your teeth, do it, and some decades later sit by the fire telling your grandchildren how you folded pocket rockets on the button preflop.
Quote: rdw4potusI've heard this too. Might be true. But it's also by far the most likely outcome. Powerball is a 25 year old game that draws 2 times per week. 25*52*2=2600 drawings in the history of Powerball. The odds of winning the powerball are 1:175,000,000. It would be an incredible long shot to have two out of 2,600 Powerball drawings have the same winning numbers.
Reminds me of the Birthday Problem. If my calculations are correct, the chances of having at least one pair of matching winners in the history of the game would be 1 - (174,999,999/175,000,000)^2600, or about 1 in 67,308. Is this right? It's not quite as long a shot as I imagined.
Quote: P90It's simple. Aces are a favorite - but in a 4-way pot, only a 64% favorite.
Suppose now it's the bubble, you have a good stack on the button, but not the big stack. UTG is in the red and shoves all in, the big stack of your table raises, a medium stack calls, you are next, and the big blind's a little short.
The amount to call is also really nasty - you have 70,000, and it's 45,000 to call. Raising won't even make a difference: UTG's in, your 25k into a 175k pot isn't scaring the big stack, the medium stack is committed, and then the big blind might jump in, lowering your chances to 55%. Against random cards, which UTG probably has, for big stack and BB it's 50/50, the medium stack is clearly serious.
With aces, there's almost no flop that will make you fold, and if you do fold post-flop, you might end up the next guy shoving any two under the gun. If you do win, your gains still fall short of a triple-up.
So, are you going to risk the whole tournament on a 50%-60% shot?
Maybe you are, but let's see what can happen if you fold now. Whatever happens, you'll still have a comfortable stack for the final table. If the big stack wins - he clears out two players, gets you both into the money, and you aren't worse off by much, he had the lead on you as it is. If medium stack or BB wins - the stacks equalize and there is no big stack anymore, you are upgraded to one of the big stacks. If UTG wins, it's about the same, only with a side pot.
Folding just brings you better value than aces.
So you grind your teeth, do it, and some decades later sit by the fire telling your grandchildren how you folded pocket rockets on the button preflop.
If it's the WSOP main event, then yeah, I MIGHT...fold... might. But I would never fold them in any other tournament. I play for 1st, not to double my money...
The story behind the video, is this was a pokerstars event cash game (I think it was called the big game), and the winner at the end of the season won some sort of all exclusive poker tour package(valued at roughly $500,000). They give you $100,000 in chips, and you are able to keep anything you win over the 100k. This guy ended up by the end with $230,000, which put him in the lead with only a few contestants left.
On the season finale, the guy won a monster hand and was up something like $280k, so this guy didn't get the package. I think the contest was kind of BS, as the last players to go obviously had the advantage. It would have been more fair if no one was told who the leader was...
