Tennessee Lottery computerized drawings under suspicion again

Looks like easy money.

Well, well,  04/10/08 day p3 402  MD. P3 night 351 went from from big block Chevy to Ford Cleveland.  Imagine that. I played 396 and 347 night.  I hope some 402 lovers hit as well as the Mustang Fairlane Club members.

i don't know why they would stop the computer draws because its all "random" just like how every other lottery game is "random"

You obviously have no idea what you are saying!!! How can computer draws be "random", when any programmer working in the Tn Lottery Hqs can manipulate the program. Don't believe all the bs about safeguards!!! My state's lottery is ball drawn, and they are using very questionable tactics, by using test draws. Are the draws being random when this method is used? I say NO. Test draws warp the stats.

I am against the computer drawings because of the risks of manipulating the system.  A person created the system; consequently, a person or persons can hack it.  The mechanical ball system is preferrable because of eliminating this manipulation risk.  Think about it, there is no 24/7 monitoring of the computerized system; therefore the opportunity is there.  At least with the mechanical drawing the player has the opportunity to "visually watch" the process.  As far as cost effectiveness, Tennessee has not saved money when you factor the independent audit costs for the "glitch" and the decrease in ticket sales since the switch. 

Someone needs a lesson in statistics.  You prefer ball drawings, but then claim it's the pre-tests which make them NOT random?  Aren't you glad they test in order to identify tampering? 

IF the drawings are random, testing will not affect the stats.  It's the definition of random.  There is no way to predict the outcome.  There are no patterns to discern. 

I don't think you realize how condescending that sounds.  Not to mention that you are completely misstating the complaints of those who oppose computerized drawings.  (And those people make up the vast majority, as shown in the numerous polls we've done on the subject.)

Computerized drawings have errors, and they have had errors in just about every state in which they've been used.  Why?  Because computers have to be programmed by people, and people make mistakes.

A certain segment of people are also corrupt (or corruptable), and if a smart, corrupt person has access to a computerized drawing system, that person could potentially swing the odds in the direction they wish, and they could prevent anyone from finding out about it.

I have documented this many times, so I won't do it again here. 

I do know a thing or two about computers, so I know full-well this is possible.  I also know that it is harder to do it with traditional ball machines, because any layperson with a little training can recognize a machine that has been tampered with -- which cannot be said about computers.

When the computer system in tennessee was not drawing doubles, it went on for three weeks without someone noticing an indicator flag was set incorrectly.  Can you imagine if a clever programmer was actually trying to hide something?  What if they triggered it to go off once a year?  Do you think it would be noticed?  I don't.

People want real drawings.  It is ludicrous to fight that.  It's our money, not the lotteries'.

Touche. 

I was replying directly to CARBOB's comment about how he prefers ball drawings but thinks pre-tests throw off the stats. 

You can't have it both ways.  If you think ball drawings represent random, then you can't complain that there are patterns that testing prevents from happening. 

Granted, it is possible that there could be corruption in any aspect of any business.  That's what pre-tests are designed to thwart.  However, using statistically insignifcant occurences as evidence that tampering is taking place is also ludricrous. 

Integrity is the heart and soul of any Lottery - I am certain they will do whatever possible to maintain integrity.  The system in question at one time had a flaw.  They did what was necessary to correct it.  If they have to change draw systems to regain confidence, they may do that.  But I don't think one error is evidence that all computer systems are flawed are somehow more vulnerable to corruption. 

In Missouri, they use a computer system that is stand-alone, not networked and in a completely secure building.  The drawings and thousands of tests have been certified by professionals and auditors to be random.  Drawings are open and can be witnessed by any citizen if desired.  I fail to see how a mistake in Tennessee has rendered their system also somehow untrustworthy.

I have been watching the numbers closely and sometimes see strange pairings or repeats.  But for the life of me, I cannot detect a pattern or predict the next combination.  That's because it's random.  Until someone can demonstrate otherwise, I remain skeptic of conspiracy theories.  And trust I remain a skeptic of everything.   

It's quite obvious to me and I'm sure others that you are speaking on behalf of computerized drawings.  I would not be surprised to find that it butters your bread. 

Your statement "I fail to see how a mistake in Tennessee has rendered their system also somehow untrustworthy" is so flippant about players who placed bets with "no chance" of winning.  Perhaps instead of you failing to see it, you refuse to see it or try to fog reality so others don't see it for what it actually is. 

My comments and others in this forum were not going down the path of conspiracy theories that your spin.  We just want to have confidence when a bet is placed it has "a chance" of winning.    Stop spinning!!

I know the claims of the computerized drawing supporters, and I've heard them repeated many times.  If the Pentagon can be hacked, so can a government lottery machine.  The fact that it is not connected to a LAN or WAN is really not the issue.  There are many ways to skin a cat. (sorry Em.)

There is nothing wrong with me or someone else saying that pre-test drawings throw off the stats.  Perhaps they do, and it does not diminish the argument at all.  In fact, it bolsters it.

If the numbers are truly random, then they should adhere to the mathematical precepts of random numbers — that over time the numbers will generally be selected more or less evenly.  If you can see the pre-test draws, then the missing data will most definitely affect your predicted outcome.

Any 5th grader studying probability knows that the more times you test a random event, the closer the results will be to the expected outcome.

I have no problem with pre-test drawings — as long as the lottery fully releases the draw data, with every drawing accounted for.  By hiding the pre-test data, the lottery is acting as if they are guarding important information — and they are, from my standpoint.

There is nothing about "having it both ways" here.  This is basic stuff.

There is absolutely no reason to move to computerized drawings.  The only affect on players is a negative one.