Lottery question revisited
A few guys here from the 'crew' have agreed with me on this in a past lottery thread >> With the larger lotteries here in the U.S., (Powerball as one example) there is a stat that says, the same combination has never hit twice. I have no idea what this cut-off point is in regards to the overall ODDS of winning. Meaning, I cant compare the Powerball odds to some goofy pick 3 game.
Ok, Powerball is a game played twice a week. Would it be a BAD IDEA to play the numbers that just hit in the LAST drawing (back to back)? Afterall, (to date) no repeating set of numbers has ever hit again, much less back to back and as far as I recall reading, even come close to repeating.
BUT
"There is no such thing as BAD or good numbers to play", correct? Whether it be roulette or the lottery.
Ken
If we are talking about what you'll win if they do ALL hit, there may be an effect that last weeks numbers are more commonly picked (meaning more chance you will share the jackpot with someone) or there may be an effect that last weeks numbers are less commonly picked (meaning less chance you will share the jackpot with someone).
So there is a theory that there are bad numbers to play in the LOTTERY as some sets of numbers result in a lower -payout- (rather than a lower chance of hitting).
Just as if Number 29 on the Roulette table paid 34:1, but every other number pays as it does today. That'd be a difference.
Quote: thecesspitIf we are talking about the odds of them -hitting- they are as good as any others.
If we are talking about what you'll win if they do ALL hit, there may be an effect that last weeks numbers are more commonly picked (meaning more chance you will share the jackpot with someone) or there may be an effect that last weeks numbers are less commonly picked (meaning less chance you will share the jackpot with someone).
So there is a theory that there are bad numbers to play in the LOTTERY as some sets of numbers result in a lower -payout- (rather than a lower chance of hitting).
Just as if Number 29 on the Roulette table paid 34:1, but every other number pays as it does today. That'd be a difference.
Thanks for posting. No, not talking about splitting the winnings with anybody else.
More or less, lets say it IS A FACT, that no set has ever repeated itself. You are stating (for the record) that choosing the SAME numbers from the previous drawing is JUST AS GOOD as buying a quick pick set, same? Correct?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjThanks for posting. No, not talking about splitting the winnings with anybody else.
More or less, lets say it IS A FACT, that no set has ever repeated itself. You are stating (for the record) that choosing the SAME numbers from the previous drawing is JUST AS GOOD as buying a quick pick set, same? Correct?
Ken
I'll repeat what I said as the first line of my answer to be absolutely clear for you :
The odds of them hitting are as good as any other numbers choosen.
If anyone can show me an effect I have missed where this it not true, I would be interested. I am amenable for someone to show me information that could make me change my mind.
Quote: mrjjj
More or less, lets say it IS A FACT, that no set has ever repeated itself. You are stating (for the record) that choosing the SAME numbers from the previous drawing is JUST AS GOOD as buying a quick pick set, same? Correct?
Ken
Yes, choosing the same numbers as the previous drawing is just as likely to win as buying a quick pick. Also, duh...
You're also right about the Powerball never having repeated a winner. But, there's only been about 2000 drawings in the game's history and the odds of winning are 1:175,000,000. So having no repeated winning numbers is by far the most likely scenario.
How about this.....WOULD you choose the previous set of numbers? If no, why? (lets assume you play Powerball) I guess the question is for anyone.
Ken
What should I do for this Wednesday's draw? (yeah, it's rhetorical, I always buy random picks when I buy lottery tickets.)
Quote: mrjjjLet me ask this.....the math says to YOU (thecesspit) , its all the same, okay, I got it.
How about this.....WOULD you choose the previous set of numbers? If no, why? (lets assume you play Powerball) I guess the question is for anyone.
Ken
(lol) My post didn't get posted, everything is kind of slow today.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjLet me ask this.....the math says to YOU (thecesspit) , its all the same, okay, I got it.
How about this.....WOULD you choose the previous set of numbers? If no, why? (lets assume you play Powerball) I guess the question is for anyone.
Ken
I wouldn't play them. For the same reason as I wouldn't play 1-2-3-4-5-6 or the numbers from Lost or 1-2-3-5-8-13 or 5-7-10-11-17-x. They're likely to be more popular than other numbers, which means a higher likelihood of a split jackpot if I would happen to win. I'd rather take a quickpick or manually select 6 numbers over 31 and try to increase my chances of winning alone.
Quote: IbeatyouracesOdds of winning PowerBall jackpot: 1:195,249,054. 2 draws per week. Odds of repeat, once every 1,877,394.75 years. Someone want to check my math?
I think that's the old odds of the jackpot. It's now 1 in 175,223,510 after the changes that started in February.
Quote: rdw4potusI wouldn't play them. For the same reason as I wouldn't play 1-2-3-4-5-6 or the numbers from Lost or 1-2-3-5-8-13 or 5-7-10-11-17-x. They're likely to be more popular than other numbers, which means a higher likelihood of a split jackpot if I would happen to win. I'd rather take a quickpick or manually select 6 numbers over 31 and try to increase my chances of winning alone.
Ok but this is not a SPLITTING question.....I do understand your point though. The question is more about 'NOT GOOD' numbers to play.
Ken
"it IS A FACT, that no set has ever repeated itself, YET."
and
"it IS A FACT, that no set will repeat itself."
Quote: mrjjjOk but this is not a SPLITTING question.....I do understand your point though. The question is more about 'NOT GOOD' numbers to play.
Ken
I would say that splitting is the only possible consideration that can create "not good" numbers to play. or "good" numbers to play. It's the only thing that changes the relative quality of numbers at all.
Quote: andysifI think you have to appreciate that there is a difference between:
"it IS A FACT, that no set has ever repeated itself, YET."
and
"it IS A FACT, that no set will repeat itself."
I dont recall saying.....WILL.
Could a set repeat itself? Sure it could but lets not rule everything out then.
This is the MATH part that separates the "you can't win" crew with others that put their nuts on the line >> Its POSSIBLE (you guys love that word) that the Powerball numbers might be 1-2-3-4-5-6 for the NEXT 75 drawings. It COULD happen, right? (lol)
Ken
Quote: Ibeatyouraces
I don't believe in the 1-2-3-4-5-6 theory. Never once saw anybody play this set.
Sadly, I have. It's not like it's common, but 2 of my regulars played 1-2-3-4-5-6 when I worked the customer service counter at a grocery store between 10 and 15 years ago. And 3 guys played similar versions of the marine corps birthday (11/10/1775) so those derivations are really trouble when they hit. I didn't see anyone play the Fibonacci, but I assume it's popular.
Quote: IbeatyouracesYou're correct. I used an old "how to play" form. Either way, the chance of a repeat is pretty remote given the number of draws per year.
lol. yes, indeed. something like 1 expected repeat in 1.6MM years now.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj"Either way, the chance of a repeat is pretty remote" >>> Yep, myself.....I would never play repeating numbers but to each their own.
Ken
My numbers have never won, therefore they are also bad choices.
In Colorado, a set of numbers did get chosen twice.
Let's say for some reason someone is convinced the combo 1-2-3-4-5-6 will win on the next drawing. But this person also knows that's one of the most popular combos. So he goes and buys, say, 20,000 tickets with that number. The drawing is held and 1-2-3-4-5-6 wins.
Question, would our hypothetical payer be suspected of cheating?
Answer: Duh!
So how would the inevitable investigation develop?
Quote: NareedHere's an interestnig hypothetical.
Let's say for some reason someone is convinced the combo 1-2-3-4-5-6 will win on the next drawing. But this person also knows that's one of the most popular combos. So he goes and buys, say, 20,000 tickets with that number. The drawing is held and 1-2-3-4-5-6 wins.
Question, would our hypothetical payer be suspected of cheating?
Answer: Duh!
So how would the inevitable investigation develop?
What good would buying 20,000 tickets to the Powerball do? The jackpot is the jackpot and if there are multiple winners then it gets split, unless of course, you are assuming someone else would win and you would get 20,000/20,001 of the jackpot leaving some poor sap in Pigsknuckle, Arkansas the other 1/20,001 of the jackpot,
Quote: NareedHere's an interestnig hypothetical.
Let's say for some reason someone is convinced the combo 1-2-3-4-5-6 will win on the next drawing. But this person also knows that's one of the most popular combos. So he goes and buys, say, 20,000 tickets with that number. The drawing is held and 1-2-3-4-5-6 wins.
Question, would our hypothetical payer be suspected of cheating?
Answer: Duh!
So how would the inevitable investigation develop?
I wonder at what point it is better to intentionally match only 5 numbers ($1MM win/ticket), rather than prorating the jackpot via this method. Certainly that'd be viable at low jackpot amounts. But what happens when the jackpot grows? Increased play makes a tied jackpot more likely, but the increase also leaves a bigger pot to be split.
Quote: rdw4potusI wonder at what point it is better to intentionally match only 5 numbers ($1MM win/ticket), rather than prorating the jackpot via this method.
But then you have to consider complications like multiple combos (ie, where you pick 7 or more numbers and get all the combos for those; ergo many jackpot winners will take the 1 million prize as well).
Quote:Certainly that'd be viable at low jackpot amounts. But what happens when the jackpot grows? Increased play makes a tied jackpot more likely, but the increase also leaves a bigger pot to be split.
The idea is that the player knows he'll split the jackpot, therefore he buys more shares of it, as it were, in order to collect them all. Let's say 10,000 tickets with the 1 through 6 combination are sold on average each week (likely it's more). Then he'll get 2/3 of the big prize, rather than 1/10,001th of it.
Quote: Nareed
The idea is that the player knows he'll split the jackpot, therefore he buys more shares of it, as it were, in order to collect them all. Let's say 10,000 tickets with the 1 through 6 combination are sold on average each week (likely it's more). Then he'll get 2/3 of the big prize, rather than 1/10,001th of it.
But the $1MM prize is static. Let's say that the jackpot has just reset, and is $24MM (cash). If he wins the big prize on each ticket, he gets 2/3 of the stated jackpot, which is $16MM. If he wins the second prize on each of his 20,000 tickets, he gets $20B ($1MM/ticket * 20,000 tickets= $20B)
Quote: rdw4potusBut the $1MM prize is static.
Oh, well. that does make a difference.
Quote:If he wins the second prize on each of his 20,000 tickets, he gets $20B ($1MM/ticket * 20,000 tickets= $20B)
And then there would be no way in hell he'd ever see a penny. Even if he didn't cheat, the assumption would be that he did.
So Joe gets a time machine and... :)
Alas, it's been done, and more cleverly. I need to look up my library, but I think it's a story by Cyrill Kornbluth.
Quote: CrystalMathMy numbers have never won, therefore they are also bad choices.
In Colorado, a set of numbers did get chosen twice.
On which lottery? I'm only talking about the larger ones and do you know the two dates that this happened?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjOn which lottery? I'm only talking about the larger ones and do you know the two dates that this happened?
Ken
It's happened at least twice for pick-6 lotteries:
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/lottery-math-101-801/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3970484,00.html
Quote: mrjjjI am not saying I agree or disagree but this is a fun read. I found it by accident >> http://ezinearticles.com/?Ten-Reasons-Why-You-Should-Never-Play-These-Six-Lotto-Numbers&id=2127634
That article is almost all BS. The only valid lottery strategy is to try to select a unique set of numbers. I'll look for the repeated CO lottery info later.
1/3/2001 1- 8- 9- 21- 35- 39
8/4/1993 1- 8- 9- 21- 35- 39
There have been 2360 drawings, with 2359 unique outcomes. The probability of winning is 1 in 5,245,786. The probability the next drawing matching a previous drawing is 1 in 2,224.
Quote: CrystalMathHere are the results that matched in Colorado:
1/3/2001 1- 8- 9- 21- 35- 39
8/4/1993 1- 8- 9- 21- 35- 39
There have been 2360 drawings, with 2359 unique outcomes. The probability of winning is 1 in 5,245,786. The probability the next drawing matching a previous drawing is 1 in 2,224.
I guess I could re-word my POINT. So it has happened ONCE in 2,360 draws (est). Sooooo, in most of the draws, there has NOT be a repeat. Tough to argue with that, right?
I play a state lotto here, its a 350K prize. Here are my stats >> This game was started in 2/91. The odds of hitting are.... 1:1.6 million.
If someone else hits, you do NOT split, its a 7 day a week lotto, two plays for $1. I started playing 9/1/99.
I missed hitting it by ONE number 11 times and two numbers.... 307 times. You net $235K if you hit (est).
I play BOTH quick picks and I have 10 sets of numbers that have never hit since 2/91 (21 LONG years).
Those 10 sets, I play two lines per set so *IF* it were to hit, its 700K. Its a fun little hobby, I enjoy it.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj
I play BOTH quick picks and I have 10 sets of numbers that have never hit since 2/91 (21 LONG years).
So, you interpret the fact that a repeat set never hit before as a reason to believe it is less likely to happen, yet you are playing a different set of numbers that also never hit before, and seem to believe it makes it somehow more likely to win.
So, if an event has never happened before does it in your view make it more or less likely to happen in the future?
Quote: weaselmanSo, you interpret the fact that a repeat set never hit before as a reason to believe it is less likely to happen, yet you are playing a different set of numbers that also never hit before, and seem to believe it makes it somehow more likely to win.
So, if an event has never happened before does it in your view make it more or less likely to happen in the future?
Dont lecture me rookie. Say something nice for a change or nothing at all, you are ALWAYS causing trouble here. What is the attraction at this here board, slamming people?
(lol)...whatever, I'll play it as I so choose, dont worry so much about it.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj
Dont lecture me rookie.
I don't lecture you, oh, the Greatest Master! How could I? I am just asking a question. Did I frame it wrong? Do you have problems understanding written communications?
Quote: weaselmanI don't lecture you, oh, the Greatest Master! How could I? I am just asking a question. Did I frame it wrong? Do you have problems understanding written communications?
......and HERE WE GO. Its 10am, this will be an all day thing I guess, I just love this board.
Ken
| date | numbers |
|---|---|
| Sunday, July 24, 2005 | 1 4 11 17 27 35 |
| Thursday, October 12, 2000 | 1 4 11 17 27 35 |
| Monday, October 07, 2002 | 1 7 8 25 27 32 |
| Monday, June 26, 2000 | 1 7 8 25 27 32 |
| Tuesday, July 05, 2005 | 3 6 19 27 32 35 |
| Tuesday, June 14, 2005 | 3 6 19 27 32 35 |
| Saturday, July 04, 1998 | 4 5 8 14 16 19 |
| Friday, April 08, 1994 | 4 5 8 14 16 19 |
| Wednesday, December 01, 2004 | 5 14 21 26 27 33 |
| Thursday, August 01, 1991 | 5 14 21 26 27 33 |
| Tuesday, May 24, 2005 | 7 10 11 17 20 31 |
| Friday, February 04, 2005 | 7 10 11 17 20 31 |
| Wednesday, September 22, 2004 | 9 17 23 27 29 34 |
| Monday, December 08, 2003 | 9 17 23 27 29 34 |
| date | numbers |
|---|---|
| Tuesday, September 08, 2009 | 3 14 19 23 25 28 |
| Monday, September 15, 2008 | 3 14 19 23 25 28 |
| Thursday, February 09, 2006 | 4 5 10 16 25 29 |
| Monday, January 30, 2006 | 4 5 10 16 25 29 |
There are two tables here, because the number of balls available increased on 10/23/05 from 36 to 39, making the probability of winning 1 in 3,262,623.
The lottery advertises the chance of winning as 1 in 1,631,312, but this is based on purchasing two panels (the minimum purchase) and choosing unique numbers in each of the panels. If you choose the same number in both panels, the chance of winning is 1 in 3,262,623, but your payout will be double.
Quote: mrjjj......and HERE WE GO. Its 10am, this will be an all day thing I guess, I just love this board.
You are not going to answer, are you?
Quote: weaselmanYou are not going to answer, are you?
Ken always answers questions. Always.
Quote: CrystalMathWisconsin Supercash Repeat drawings 10/22/05 and earlier
date numbers Sunday, July 24, 2005 1 4 11 17 27 35 Thursday, October 12, 2000 1 4 11 17 27 35 Monday, October 07, 2002 1 7 8 25 27 32 Monday, June 26, 2000 1 7 8 25 27 32 Tuesday, July 05, 2005 3 6 19 27 32 35 Tuesday, June 14, 2005 3 6 19 27 32 35 Saturday, July 04, 1998 4 5 8 14 16 19 Friday, April 08, 1994 4 5 8 14 16 19 Wednesday, December 01, 2004 5 14 21 26 27 33 Thursday, August 01, 1991 5 14 21 26 27 33 Tuesday, May 24, 2005 7 10 11 17 20 31 Friday, February 04, 2005 7 10 11 17 20 31 Wednesday, September 22, 2004 9 17 23 27 29 34 Monday, December 08, 2003 9 17 23 27 29 34 Wisconsin Supercash Repeat drawings 10/23/05 and later
date numbers Tuesday, September 08, 2009 3 14 19 23 25 28 Monday, September 15, 2008 3 14 19 23 25 28 Thursday, February 09, 2006 4 5 10 16 25 29 Monday, January 30, 2006 4 5 10 16 25 29
There are two tables here, because the number of balls available increased on 10/23/05 from 36 to 39, making the probability of winning 1 in 3,262,623.
The lottery advertises the chance of winning as 1 in 1,631,312, but this is based on purchasing two panels (the minimum purchase) and choosing unique numbers in each of the panels. If you choose the same number in both panels, the chance of winning is 1 in 3,262,623, but your payout will be double.
Yes but for ONE set of numbers (not two 'panels') its 1:1,631,312.
Ken
Quote: thecesspitKen always answers questions. Always.
A better record than you.
You won't even post your age, really?
Ken
Quote: weaselmanYou are not going to answer, are you?
"Do you have problems understanding written communications?" >>> This is the big unanswered question? Try not to be so insulting. My analogy for the day.....thats like me asking you, why are you such a jerk? Of course you would not answer, who would? Then I reply, why did you not answer me?
Ya get it? This isn't tough. I love the gang-like tactics here and all from wannabee winner guys, I just love this board. (lol)
Ken
Mostly, talking behind his back, saying how he would "waste it all", etc.
People absolutely crack me up. I dont come here to LEARN (learn what?), I come here if I had a bad day or am in a crappy mood.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj"Do you have problems understanding written communications?" >>> This is the big unanswered question?
No, that was rhetorical ... more of a statement than a question really.
The real question I asked you was whether an event never having happened in the past is in your view an indication that it is more (like the numbers you pick making sure they have not hit before) or less (like a repeat of the same combination) likely to happen in the future.
