Suspicious random number behavior

Reply #20

powerplayer — Wed, 26 Oct 2005 11:07:43 GMT

I have a question for all the LP posting so far in this topic.I read up on Cali. lottery and they use to machines. One computer is RNG. The other computer is a Algorithm. This is stated right on the Cali. web page. So my question is: Maybe there is a way to figure out which machine they are useing by watching the drawings? I have not checked out all lotto sites on how they do there various drawings. I do know that I have been concentrating on Cali. because they use computers and being a IT perso... [ More ]

Reply #19

BaristaExpress — Wed, 12 Oct 2005 02:53:58 GMT

Look guys you have to remember something, I think you all forgot about! Even though the #'s are computer generated #'s, they have more than one computer to pick from everyday! Some states have a lottery each and everyday just to pick the one computer to use that day for the drawing! That way no one and I mean no one can be sure as to what computer will be used that day for that drawing!I know Delaware has 3 computers to pick from everyday, but as to how they pick the one to use, I don't know how... [ More ]

Reply #18

JAG331 — Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:33:15 GMT

Yes.Powerball is still posting the results of the four pre-draws, the REAL draw, and the one post-draw. Some of us keep trying to figure out how to use all that information. Every sixth draw is an acceptable way to achieve randomness, and the stats that most people work with.If you use all the draws, you've got 60 drawings to work with, not just 12 under the new matrix.

Reply #17

psykomo — Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:19:52 GMT

CHASING JACKPOTS.....MM$.....PB$.....or.....6/49??????????????????????????They don't L@@K random to meeeeeeee......(but).......confess......LOST$$$on QUICK-PKS / these games (not BE on anything.......I've <<<<<tried ????NOW................I'm $PREADING more BREAD on LESS MAYO$$$$$$$$$$$$$$LOLPSYKOMO

Reply #16

psykomo — Mon, 12 Sep 2005 02:07:42 GMT

NemeSys:Over a billion years........is a long, long time!!!!!!!!!!! and so winning a lotterymay not be the way for everyone. Recently, I put six numbers in an RNG.... TOOK over 50 years playing twice (2/plays a week) to hit 5 of the numbersI chose to play....that made me take notice and throw all software, wheelspencil and papers away. Now, I'm playing QP's.................thru December 05.(good idea or bad, won't know til 6-months are up as thats QP time to end)In, meanwhile......had FUN and sp... [ More ]

Reply #15

NemeSys — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:10:34 GMT

Over billions of years the results would have converged to the outcomes probability says will happen, including those Imatlaw considers suspicious. Even supposedly 'rare' combinations like 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 44,45,46,47,48,49 will eventually come out thousands of times.It'll be interesting to see how people react when such combinations do appear (those in the mathematical know will simply say told you so ).

Reply #14

paurths — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 22:26:48 GMT

In the example i pointed to the fact that there must be no limits on bets, so that issue can not interfere with the potential solution to the question. (ofcourse the house protects itself, they would be pretty stupid not to do so...)Well, nemesys, the sequence was interrupted by the test and you will never know whether your odds just dropped to 1 in 2 again.Everyone knows the example with the coin. If you would throw it up just once in your lifetime, then you would have 50% chance. If it would b... [ More ]

Reply #13

NemeSys — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:52:39 GMT

If the casino is honest, the test won't affect the wheel (how would a test affect the wheel anyway?) I'd still bet. RJOH is right about the martingale bet. It's been proved to be one of the quickest ways known to lose money. Of course, if I want to win at roulette I just strap on my portable prediction computer under my dinner jacket, ha ha! Guaranteed to give a 40% improvement over random chance (and maybe a few broken ribs if caught...

Reply #12

RJOh — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:51:16 GMT

A gambler with no limits has a gambling problem and too much money to waste. The casino always have betting limits to protect itself, so doubling up is a gamble with the odds in the house's favor even if the betting was continuous.

Reply #11

paurths — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:40:07 GMT

As long as there is no maximum bet-size and there's enough money in your pocket it is a win-situation, in the end. (in the example, each time the ball 'picks out' a red number the odds rise in your favor, that's a statistical (probability) fact, no hocus-pocus)But the question was, would Nemesys still place the bet after everyone had to leave the casino b/c the tables had to be tested? (and ofcourse, the results of the test would remain hush-hush...

Reply #10

RJOh — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:21:39 GMT

I never believed in that doubling up system no matter what game you're playing. The odds are always in the house favor.

Reply #9

paurths — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:16:39 GMT

Ofcourse analyses can only be based on what is known, but here's an example.Casinotime, we will be playing roulette;Nemesys enters a casino and watches a few roulette-tables. Suddenly he decides to play on table 3, b/c 5 times in a row a red number came out. He figures black has to come, hopefully, soon, if not the next play. Nemesys puts $50 on black.The wheel turns, red comes up. No problem, Nemesys thinks to himself and he puts in $100 on black.And again red comes out. Okay, lets play $200 I... [ More ]

Reply #8

RJOh — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:11:59 GMT

Over time the public drawings should be as random as all the drawings public and private and if there was a predictable pattern, it would be in the public drawings too. It just that you have less data to work with. The idea of the private drawings is to identify any such behavior and eliminate it before having a public drawing.

Reply #7

NemeSys — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:00:04 GMT

Machines are tested regularly, but since the general public never gets to know the test results we just have to factor them out of any predictions. Analyses can only ever be based on what's knowable so test results are irrelevant.I look at it this way: the two sets of numbers form separate 'trajectories'. The one that is made public is the only one that is of interest anyway, being the one all those millions of dollars/pounds/whatever are riding on.

Reply #6

paurths — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 20:32:21 GMT

There is one little thing lots of people seem to forget...And this goes for ballmachines and RNG's: one can only come this close to predicting the numbers for the next draw.That's all very nice, but in fact no one really knows what the last draw was.Even if one would know the seed for the RNG, it is useless unless you exactly, beyond any doubt, know what the last draw was.If your lottery test-draws the machine/RNG, in between two official draws, without the public knowing, well... you don't... [ More ]

Reply #5

NemeSys — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:32:27 GMT

It would be interesting to hear what kind of algorithm their RNG uses. Even the best RNGs only generate pseudo-random numbers (i.e. the numbers begin to repeat eventually), although over the length of their period (the span of numbers before repetition sets in) they do pass stringent statistical tests for randomness.You might think ah-ha! If I knew which algorithm they use I can predict the numbers! Sorry, but you'd have to know which seed they use too (the seed is an initial number fed into t... [ More ]

Reply #4

Badger — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 16:11:44 GMT

We have a 5/31 game....I only play it when the jackpot gets to around six figures, but I keep a database of all the draws anyway.It isn't unusual to see a specific number repeat as many as four days in a row in the game. It is computer-generated, supposedly a RNG. But they will tell you that this IS an example of RANDOM. In other words, you can filter all you want.....but ANYTHING can happen because it's random.

Reply #3

psykomo — Sun, 11 Sep 2005 15:37:33 GMT

lmatlaw......don't know much about your 5/32....but at least you sent an......e-mail, hope you get a reply of somekind from the commission?????????????Lotto South......seems interesting now with tons of consective pairss andtripletss in Aug. Sept. (22, 23) (41,42..44,45) (33,34) (13,14)???????????and (41,42,43) (36,37,38) and another (36,37,38)......on Sept. 9th????????No wonder this jackpot gets knocked-off...............but wonder if the winnersare using software to pick or just guessing bi... [ More ]

Reply #2

JAG331 — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:43:58 GMT

I think it's within the realm of random...just don't expect those three numbers again tonight. $20,000 jackpot for odds of over 200,000 to 1? You Coloradoans gotta fight for more.

Reply #1

RJOh — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:01:39 GMT

In the last 277 drawings of the Ohio Rolling Cash5 (5/39) these are the counts of matches for numbers from the previous drawing: MATCH 0 = 123 MATCH 1 = 125 MATCH 2 = 23 MATCH 3 = 4 MATCH 4 = 1 (12/14/04) MATCH 5 = 0Since a match 2 pays $1, 3 pays $10 and 4 pays $300, if the 5 winning numbers from the previous day had been played every day, it would have cost $277 and paid $363 for a profit of $86. Numbers do repeat quite often and some day when all 5 numbers repeat back to ba... [ More ]

Suspicious random number behavior

lmatlaw — Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:36:04 GMT

I live in Colorado and play the Cash 5 game daily which is a 5/32 format with a $20,000 jackpot. Drawings are done by computer.The past 3 days the numbers 1, 7 and 27 have repeated and the number 22 has repeated twice. Doesn't seem random to me though it is possible. I've e-mailed the Colorado Lottery for their comments. I'd like to get feedback from some Lottery Post members as to their thoughts. Thanks, Len