Do some number combinations have better odds?

You're welcome.  I keep a list of past winning numbers for the games I play and had an old program I wrote years ago that checks them with any group of numbers.  Since that program was written in GW-Basic, I too will be behind the technology curve when I upgrade my main computer from Windows XP unless I upgrade all my programs too.

I'm sure will iron out any any wrinkles in your system.

This 5/28 "even numbers" group is small so it will be easier to wheel. The other side of the coin would be the "odd numbers" group (if you want to post those for comparison) which has been "hotter" than the evens. Unlike my friend LL I would be the person who plays the "cold" group thinking that they are "overdue".

I may need to rethink this because you know the old saying:

"When your HOT your HOT and when your NOT your NOT"

     June 6 2012    19- 30- 33- 48- 59-  (27)

     May 26 2012    13- 14- 41- 49- 59-  (14)

     May 5  2012     9 -12- 20- 44-  59-  (23)

     April 18 2012    20- 22- 39- 46- 49-  (29)

    March 3  2012    29- 30- 45- 47- 49-  (35)

     Jan. 25 2012     4- 19- 28- 29- 47-    (5)

These are draws, that drew last digital  9  in PowerBall  since Jan.  (about once a month)

  Can Ronnie  help kosmo  and see which last digital  has hit the most? PAIRED

  Like two 4'     or two   1's    or mabey two 7's  in PB?

Then mabey we'll have a leg -up on the Red Horse

In a sense you're right, it's not completely random.  But that's not because the balls have numbers on them, it's because their is no event that is completely random.  Lottery draws are physical events, so physics could describe them, but they are so uncertain, with so many variables, that it is essentially random.

Even if the physical processes make it non-random, you'd have no means to measure the non-random aspects of it before the drawing closed.  It's like watching clocking a roulette wheel.  It's basically impossible for a human until the ball and wheel slow down significantly.  If the Casino calls "no more bets" in a timely manner, they have nothing to fear.  In the case of the lottery, they, of course, have nothing to fear except manipulation by employees.

Thanks Boney, btw I really don't think raising EV is insane..... I just like saying the word -insane- lol.

I'm glad you can see that I'm not just trying to argue about if the draws are random or not random. Of course they are random, but as you say nothing is completely random.

I dont think the lottery should start worrying about some new discovery that the game is "not random" lol

What I do believe is that the numbered balls will show identifiable patterns over time.

NOT that a 5 number combination will EVER be predetermined, BUT that the numbers can be divided into smaller, more manageable groups for playing, even if it is just simulated play.

Thanks again RJ,

Please understand that I'm not trying to say that some number combinations have "inherently" better odds. But I do think that from a prediction standpoint some combination groups are more likely to hit, giving them "better odds"

I'm better at predicting than I am at technology so I was hoping you would be interested in teaming up with me by producing some of these combination groups that we can simulate playing?

Right now I think we can hit with the all even group over the next 10-15 draws, (call it a crazy hunch) but If I don't have a list of selected combinations it would not even be "a flute" if they hit. lol.

If you don't want to, thats cool too. We can just as easily watch the next 10-15 draws and see if I called it. Its really all the same to me because I will not have won anything either way. lol.

I'm better at predicting than I am at technology so I was hoping you would be interested in teaming up

Sorry, as I've posted many times before I don't participate in or with lottery teams or pools.  I discuss lotteries and sometimes post information that I hope may be helpful to someone and that's it.  I have ideas of my own I enjoy pursuing.

"Of course they are random"

There you go. Now you have the answer to the question you asked when you started the thread.

"What I do believe is that the numbered balls will show identifiable patterns over time."

Only because events can produce patterns even though the events are random. What they can't do is produce patterns that can be predicted to occur at a known time. If you flip a coin you can expect to get H H H T T T H H H T T T once in every 4096 flips as a long term result.  What we don't know is when it will happen.

EX-ACT-LY.  All this work on identifying patterns and what-not is a great academic exercise, but it's of absolutely no help when trying to predict what's next.  You never know when the pattern will change.  Bottom line, you can't outsmart random.

EDIT:  There's a line in the Powerball FAQ that states 70-80% of combos played are quick picks and 70-80% of winners are quick picks.  This tells me that all of this effort to try and predict the winning numbers is a huge waste of time.

EDIT:  There's a line in the Powerball FAQ that states 70-80% of combos played are quick picks and 70-80% of winners are quick picks.  This tells me that all of this effort to try and predict the winning numbers is a huge waste of time.

This is EX-ACT-LY the kind of negitivism I'm talking about with LL. You and ky come on here with all your "realism" and tell people they are "wasting their time" trying to hit a JP. In realty you are just anti-capitalism, pro-government control. 

It is possible to predict which number group holds the next JP winning combination, therefore:

SOME NUMBER COMBINATIONS HAVE BETTER ODDS

I don't see how you equate realism with pro-government control.  It's not negativity.  I don't play much because it would be too costly.  If I did play too much, the costs would outweigh the risks and I'd be going broke.  That's actually a huge part of capitalism, DECIDING WHAT TO DO WITH YOUR OWN MONEY.

I'm a complete Laissez-Faire Capitalist, hell chances are I believe in less govenrment and more capitalism than the most conservative members of this site, because some of my favorite economists have been anarcho-capitalists.

But I know that know number combination has better odds.  At this point I won't even call it a belief, because it has been proven to me.  You can call you opinion a belief, and I'm not going to argue with you, because I have solid reason, logic and proof backing up my side of this debate.

Believing it or not believing it does not change the fact that some number groups have better odds than others, from a predictability stand point.

Think in terms of card counting at a Blackjack table.

Yeah, the number groups with more numbers.  If they have more numbers, they are more probable.  And the odds of any line are exactly the same.

And card counting works differently.  The results in the past directly affect the chances for certain results in the future.  That's true if disacarded cards aren't put back into play (in a shoe game, not a CSM.)  If no aces come up for 2 our of 6 decks, there are 8 extra aces.  The probability for a Blackjack increases, and Blackjacks help the player more than the dealer (3 to 2 payout vs 1 to 1 for the house.)

Counting cards works at blackjack because each card has a different affect on the game, and because played cards are left out of play.  This is not true of the lottery balls.  They are all always in play, and are (at least supposed to be) constantly checked for accurate size and weight.  So given a random drawing process, what leads you to believe you can predict the future results?  If it has anything to do with the past results, I can tell you it doesn't hold muster, simply because past results don't matter.  The odds are just what they are.

If what you believe is a fact then it shouldn't be hard for you to prove it by posting the group before a drawing. 

Members who have participated in Maddog's MM and PB challenges have tried doing that and an occasional match 3 or bonus number match is consider an excellent result.  Put in real terms 12 WB and 4 Bonus balls equal playing 3168 combinations.

Is there something in the water here?  Why are Lottery Post members always so flippin' obsessed with bringing politics into everything?  Even if you were correct about my political leanings -- which you're not -- that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand.

Everybody thinks they've got the perfect system, but strangely enough, they all clam up when you ask them to show their results.  Turns out that even the "best" systems lose much more money than they get back.

With over 175 million combinations, figuring out the one winner is pure luck.  It's practically the very definition of "needle in a haystack".

It is true that some combinations have better odds than others, but only in the most general terms.  I highly doubt this can be broken down specifically enough to be of any real (i.e. big-money winning) use.  But, like RJOh said, if you really think you're on to something, participate in Maddog's challenges and show us what you've got.