How do I prove my state lottery's CGNs are fixed?

The various filters ("AABBCC", odd/even ratios, etc) are much like elements on the periodic table, they need to be combined with each other to get full use of them.

The limits of what can and cannot be simulated on a modern computer are mostly determined by what is between the keyboard and the chair.

Thorpe didn't use a computer to play blackjack; he used one to simulate thousands of blackjack hands from a single deck and analyzed the results. At that time, casinos use one deck and some dealt out all the cards, shuffled the discards and kept on dealing. He knew it was possible to track the discards and know which cards remained in the deck and used the data from the simulated hands find out if it could be an advantage to the player.

It's called card counting and variations of it are still used today.

"There are over 146 million possible Powerball combination; how many drawings would you have to simulate before you even start to determine what should or should not happen?"

People been saying this for years that there is 150 million combination...There is actually 3 million combinations if you count the 5 white balls..And those 3 millions are MULTIPLIED by the bonus ball meaning that they repeat 42 times...I notice that 80% of the bonus ball for Powerball is bellow 30 and above 5...So if you take the different is: 30-5= 25 so basically the odds of Powerball are more like 3 million X 25 = 1 in 75 million most of the time or 80% of the time...Not only that the first 5 balls is only 3 million, if you can get the 5 first ball constantly all you had to do is multiplied it by 12 (half of 25) by 12 even balls and in 4 or 5 following draws you WILL HAVE WON Powerball...And the odds will have been 1 in 36 million...

And the odds depend on the playing field that you are playing, because if you have 10 combinations and you know the winning combination is in there and you multiplied it time 12 even bonus ball giving you 120 dollars and let's say you win then the odds where never 1 in 146 million but more like i n 8 million...But you will not understand...

I'd like to redirect everyone. I have read the replies and there are good points in either pro or con. However, the original heading of the topic is 'How do I prove my state lottery's CGN is fix?' As of now, there is some indication that something is going a skew, but not the real 'gotcha betch!' moment; that's yet to come.

This was broken up into three different experiments, labeled Experiment 0, Experiment 1 and Experiment 2. Each follows on the other; Experiment 0 is the control setup for Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 is a play on the deficiencies created in Experiment 1. Experiment 0 and 1 had their numbers derived from previous draws, but Experiment 2's numbers a relatively fixed to previous draws. Experiment 2's numbers being posted in the Lottery Post's Perditions Board are wheeled from a fixed set of numbers {10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22} and they are centered on the deficiencies from Experiment 1; based on the bulk set of numbers established in the wheel number analysis. These are the numbers {13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19}. These numbers have shown to be deficient in the lottery's random number selection at the same numeric position where the greatest frequency of wheel numbers that were being posted for Experiment 1.

Experiment 2 has nearly nothing to do with trying to predict what numbers will occur based of previous draws. They are fixed, so there is really no feedback coming from the lottery. It's a sit and wait procedure; see what numbers are being selected and then analyze the numbers as they are coming out from the lottery. The next step is to see if there is some kind of correlation between what being posted and what's being selected. Ideally for truly random events, there shouldn't be any correlation because the two events are not directly related. In other words, if we were to not post the wheeled numbers there should be the same result; very little to low correlation. Even by happenstance, there shouldn't be a significant relationship between the two.

Now, I know some might say, well this could be an unusual instance and it doesn't mean any thing. But that's the way of the 'Naping Nay Sayer', always the exception never the rule. Well, when it comes to random selection and reasonable expectation, the exception is just that, an exception. What your going to find is that exceptions are actually harder to come by that one might think. It's like trying to win the lottery on the very first try; for the majority of people it ain't gonna happen on a regular basis. Pointing out the event that it has happened is meaningless because it's the ol' making a mountain out a mole hill approach. Look see... see look... it's happened! Yah, nice, now let's see that happen again and again and again every day, then I'll consider it a possibility worth analyzing.

For now, the posting and analyzing continues...

The Badger 5 game is 5/31 with 169,911 combinations that is drawn everyday using a RNG. If the drawing is truly random, matching the winning combo out of 10 would be a lucky guess. The side of effect of knowing how the game is rigged is that you would know one of your 10 combos would be drawn. Something that should happen in about 60% of the drawing but happens in 80% of the time is a bias but you never said how long your testing period was. Is that from all the draws or some of the drawings? 

"I notice that 80% of the bonus ball for Powerball is bellow 30 and above 5..."

There are 42 numbers, 17 numbers above 29 and below 6, and in the last 42 drawings numbers from that group were drawn 18 times. 20% of 42 drawings is about 9 times so the numbers from that group hit twice as many times as you noticed and about the same as probabilitity.

"So if you take the different is: 30-5= 25 so basically the odds of Powerball are more like 3 million X 25 = 1 in 75 million most of the time or 80% of the time..."

Your 80% of the time was only 57% in the last 42 drawings. It's been explained to you many times why it would be almost impossible to play 3,478,761 combinations and I don't see much odds improvement even if it was 36 instead of 25 chances out of 89 million combinations in 42 drawings.

"And the odds depend on the playing field that you are playing, because if you have 10 combinations and you know the winning combination is in there and you multiplied it time 12 even bonus ball giving you 120 dollars and let's say you win then the odds where never 1 in 146 million but more like i n 8 million...But you will not understand..."

I don't understand how anyone could "know" one of their 10 combinations out of 3,478,761 possible combination will have the 5 correct numbers in the next drawing, but if I "knew" it, I would play them with all the bonus numbers and win the jackpot. And you can get a much better odds reduction than 1 in 8 million by simply playing a 44 combination 2if5 out 55 number wheel and using each of the 42 bonus balls at least one time. The odds are less than 1 in 3.5 million.

Current applications of Gaussain Probability Density are encouraging. This will expand into other representations of available data.

Ok ..... after 3 months of trying to read through this post (sorry ... I'm dyslexic), I am still trying to take this all in and see where it leads.

My simple question for you, and I'm assuming others are curious as well, is what state lotteries and state lottery games are fixed and which ones aren't?  Plain and simple ... please help us out!

Thanks,

John

That was explained on Post 1, Pretext section, Paragraph 5, Sentence 1. Read carefully the first post and quite possibly several times to fully understand this posted topic.

My ATT DSL outage has interfered with the last three Badger 5 postings. I'll have to post a weeks worth Badger 5 combos, while limping along with dialup, and hope ATT gets its MFS togther.

Thank you for your work.