probability types

Reply #18

guesser — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 20:14:32 GMT

When it comes down to it, I don't think Hot/Cold exists either, but you have to chalk up the 'chance' to something, I guess.

The Trends I talk about are, if you have had no 'longshots' hit in the last two games, the 'trend' is that one is due, and the historical facts bear that out.

I speak of 'well, this has happened in the last two games, what are the odds of it happening again ?' Or, 'what are the odds of two real longshots hitting in one game, or two games in a row ?'. Not... [ More ]

Reply #17

RJOh — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 17:36:38 GMT

Thoth writes:

What I'm imaging is an event that has a specific and constant probability, but at the same time performs at a much higher percentage than what it has mathemtically been alotted according to its probability. As an inflated example: say an event has a probability of .05 or 5%. This event should only occur 5% of the time over the long term. Now imagine that the event actually occurs 10% to 15% of the time not just in one state, but in every state that has the same game. Of cours... [ More ]

Reply #16

Thoth — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:22:13 GMT

I don't really expect the laws of probability to defy themselves at all, I just have a hope that someday certain such events will be discovered. So far, everything I have ever tested performs at a percentage which is extremely close to its true probability. When the probability is very low (higher odds) then measuring them for accuracy can and will takes many more future draws. The simply probability of a straight Pick 3 for example (.001), 1 in 1000 or .1% is difficult to measure even over 1... [ More ]

Reply #15

ayenowitall — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 10:23:15 GMT

Thoth,

I think you've touched on the essence of lottery prediction with what you're saying, but it doesn't seem very realistic to expect the laws of probability to defy themselves.

I generally start with the true probabilities associated with the numbers of any given game. My expectation is that all numbers and phenomena will approach those true probabilities over time. Some numbers and events will be very close to that true probability, but most will be over or under to some degree. I ge... [ More ]

Reply #14

guesser — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 04:24:58 GMT

It's almost like you are choosing numbers based on 'hot/cold' based on you saying 'had done well in the past'.

There are some numbers that DO follow a hot/cold play, but I don't think you can predict with any certainty when a number will turn hot or cold, or for how long. Or which numbers. I see numbers that hit 3 out of 6 games, then don't hit again for 30-40 games, and I see numbers that hit, skip 8 games, hit, skip 10 games, hit, skip 8 games, so you think you can time it ? Nope - i... [ More ]

Reply #13

RJOh — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 20:42:57 GMT

guesser,

I agree we are doing somewhat similar things. I don't really chase numbers because I define the events using letters and in my programs I don't compare numbers I compare charcters for example I don't use 1=1 but 01 = 01 , the 01 could easily be AB or Bb the way my program works. In the final step I convert the letter characters to number characters based on the most recent drawings so the characters B or k could be any number. Good luck to you, I'm still trying to fi... [ More ]

Reply #12

guesser — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 19:46:54 GMT

You and I think alike in that we choose numbers based on an event likely to happen in the near future, but how we choose our pool of numbers is quite different. I don't 'chase' numbers, I chase events/trends/scenarios, hopefully I will hit one one of these days.

Reply #11

RJOh — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 13:08:59 GMT

Using the 16 games in the last example or using the 3 games to eliminate numbers in the first example was just a way to define a pool of numbers less than 55 that had done well in the past. Other parameters could probably do even better. If I could reduce the pool to 10 numbers that had in the past hit 5% of the time then I would just play those numbers and wait for the event to happen.

In the MM and PB challenges in the jackpot section, participants have been picking 15 white balls and 5

Reply #10

guesser — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 03:04:54 GMT

If you play only numbers that are 16 games old or newer, then you only have a chance in 'about' 33% of the games.

It comes back to knowing when to play what, which is dependent on how the recent games have hit.

If you pick 4 out of 5 numbers from the prior 16 games, then you stand a 66% chance over three games, it's that 5th number that's killer.

I don't exactly wet my pants when I get 3 x 5, I'm aiming for 5 x 5, but not everybody is like me. I aim for a 5 x 5, and I nev... [ More ]

Reply #9

Thoth — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:46:13 GMT

Honestly I don't play PB (not available in Ohio) and I rarely play the Mega Millions, so I dont know the particulars of the strategy you mentioned. But, if I was playing PB with the choices you laid out, I would probably try to anticipate the 26% and choose my numbers from that group. On the other hand, playing or expecting digits to repeat from X amount of games back is also a good stategy.

What I meant in my post was that if any real mathematical advantage is ever found for winning the ga... [ More ]

Reply #8

guesser — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:26:31 GMT

I may be wrong, but according to what you are writing, I think you are selling yourself short if you only look at the numbers comprising the last 16 games. But your hypothesis is correct - but only 33% of the time. You may as well just play games every third drawing.

You and me look at the 'numbers' totally differently, and I'm absolutely not going to tell you your way is 'wrong', but I understand how my way works, maybe one of these days one of us - or both of us - will get lucky.

Every... [ More ]

Reply #7

GASMETERGUY — Fri, 22 Sep 2006 01:02:58 GMT

RJOH

IMHO, I would settle for having a 1% chance if I knew that 1% would result in a win. Winning PB once a year is, to me, an attainable goal. So what if I lose 99% of the time? If you do it right, once is enough.

Reply #6

RJOh — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:30:28 GMT

The above observations about 26% of the time was just one example. Going the other way if one looks at the previous 16 drawings which usually covers 38-46 numbers, all the winning numbers are in that group 29% of the time and if you only include numbers that have hit 1-2 times, the pool is reduced to 26-40 numbers and have all the winning numbers 7% of the time.

As Thoth suggests, the trick is to find an event that has a mathematical advantage by the number of times it occurs. I suspect the... [ More ]

Reply #5

guesser — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:46:35 GMT

Danged system threw me out. maybe it's an Omen.....

Anyway, RJoH, your stats are flawed, I generally only go back 20 games because to go back further than than in generalities is misleading. Trends and tendencies change.

Of the last 20 games, 17 have had repeats from the prior 3 games, going back 40 games and it's 34/40, go back 60 and it's 47/60.

This makes sense because this is where a majority of the 55 numbers are (top 3 age groups), it's the things that don't make sense t... [ More ]

Reply #4

guesser — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:15:22 GMT

You are on the right track, but you need to look further at the 'age' of a number, and what other numbers fall into that 'age' category.

Reply #3

RJOh — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 17:18:45 GMT

Thoth,

Are you suggesting that the significant of a particular event repeating is more important than the repeatable of particular numbers? For example (the event)- 26% of PowerBall drawings have no numbers from the previous three drawings which means by eliminating the 12-15 numbers in the previous three drawings a player could increase his odds of winning the jackpot or second prize 400-500% every time that event happened, but would having the better odds 26% of the time and no chance 74

Reply #2

Thoth — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 16:26:08 GMT

Interesting post Jordi

For the daily games (pick 3/pick 4) you can actually calculate all of the true probabilities using the methods that are outlined by combinatorics. Examining empirical amounts of data (large histories of previous results that is) will verify the accuracy of the probability calculated by the combinatorics: if something has a 20% chance of occuring, it will occur 20% of the time, if something has only a 1% chance of occuring, it will only occur about 1% of the time, etc.... [ More ]

Reply #1

jordi marey — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:09:27 GMT

empirical seems the most useful for the daily Picks.

probability types

jordi marey — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:07:08 GMT

John Schofield's article in the Personal Finance section contributes a number of calculations to Maclean's Magazine. The expectations were based on the payoffs of the September 7, 1996, $10,000,000 lottery. At the time the amount was quite unusual. He used the amount $2,217,321 which was the jackpot a week earlier, and which is a more typical figure. Provided below are some useful information concerning Lotto, both probability calculations and strategies.

Probability Background

The th... [ More ]