Stone Mountain*Georgia United States
Member #828
November 2, 2002
10,491 Posts
Offline
Don't worry, as far as the lottery goes ...and as far as we players are concerned......... it's just a measure of a bunch of existing data by someone trying toaudit the lottery game for true results. Nothing to do with anything future. Unless they were to leave it with some sort of bias variances. LOL
Computer draws ....would be the biggest target for such a measure as far as we are concerned here.
I think the State Games should post the audit results of those computer draws on their lottery sites on a regular basis.......particularly the ones I might play. LOL
......especially those.
The only real failure .....is the failure to try.
Luck is a very rare thing....... Odds not so much.
Kentucky United States
Member #32,651
February 14, 2006
10,302 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Prometheus1 on May 27, 2014
One of my friends here on LP has talked to me about using standard deviation test a couple of times before on the computer draws.
Has anyone here ever done testing on any of those perverted computer drawn games?
Is that how they finally caught the Tenn crowd with their pants down, or was it all the LP members emailing the press that alerted the public?
The TN lottery defied all probability when the drawings went one week with no duplicate digits especially with the 4 digit game. It went on for over three weeks and had anyone noticed, they got 720 to 1 odds on pick-3 and virtually 50/50 with pick-4.
One of the arguments against computer drawings is with the programming very few people see, but abnormalities similar just not as extreme as in TN probably do happen. Currently the digit "7" has appeared more than the digits "2" and "6" combined for the last 30 morning cash 3 drawings for anybody keeping score.
Note the difference between "Statistical" Randomness and "True" Randomness. Many patterns that LP members think are not Random, are really to be expected in "True" random sequences.
Note the difference between "Statistical" Randomness and "True" Randomness. Many patterns that LP members think are not Random, are really to be expected in "True" random sequences.
hmmm. just catching up on some reading. i find nothing random about any of the lottery games "I" play since I get correct numbers EVERY time I play hmmm
I use LOA and never fail, ppl want you to THINK it is a random game so subconsciously you THINK it is hmmm
A lot of this post had our fellow member and our wonderful friend "Ricky" Paurths ...contributing and offering some great input on the subject.
The question still remains even to this day........
Is there a "standardized test"or safeguards ....for these state run games and their computer draws?
There should be.
The question still remains even to this day........
Is there a "standardized test" or safeguards ....for these state run games and their computer draws?
The standardized test for randomness in lottery drawings is chi-square hypothesis testing. You can also use ANOVA tests with your own random number simulations to determine if the difference in population variance is significant. Among other techniques both of these are used by lottery auditors and vendors.
It's a little beyond the scope of this forum and frankly, most lottery players just want statistics that confirm their beliefs rather than disprove them. Needless to say, the blog posts here and here give a pretty good layman's explanation (if you're genuinely interested). There is a lot of academia on this subject so if you have access to a university or major library you can find more detailed information.
I've done my own statistical testing on several lotteries and have come to the conclusion that almost all of them are drawn randomly with exception that some RNG drawings are susceptible to periods of non-randomness. That is to say, they are random "enough" the majority of the time but potentially exploitable, though I have yet to come across a RNG exploit that would actually defeat the house edge. Occurrences are common particularly in states where the vendors are small and the system is very low-budget, lacking training or resources to properly conduct audits. If a lottery goes a period of time with an actual glitch (not just a player-perceived glitch), that means they aren't thoroughly testing the drawings.
If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?