Personal Numbers

Reply #66

sirbrad — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 02:22:08 GMT

Whatever seems to work I stick with, regardless of whether anyone thinks it actually works or not. However when I win using a certain method I will not be telling anyone about it.

Reply #65

guesser — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 18:00:50 GMT

Bobby, you have summed up what I have been saying for months: nothing can predict all of the winning numbers.

And your title of 'organized guesswork' is almost like mine, where i have coined 'educated guesswork'.

I can happlily say I've never predicted numbers, nor have I said I could, but I'm doing pretty danged good at predicting tendencies, and that's about all anyone can do, yet some argue against that as well.

Reply #64

bobby623 — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 05:12:38 GMT

All serious lottery players have a plan, a system, a strategy, a program, or whatever. I have a couple which I use to generate the numbers I play.

In my humble opinion, there is no way under the sun that anybody, any plan, any program, RNG, or whatever, can accurately predict what the next winning numbers will be.

All a player can do is accept that the lottery is using equipment that produces random combinations. It doesn't matter if the equipment leans one way or the other, whether its c... [ More ]

Reply #63

guesser — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:05:10 GMT

You basically said there is a bias in the hardware, but you don't see it and I don't see it.

To me, if a person can't see it (in the realm of this conversation), then how can you say one exists for sure ?

I'm not being contrary to anything or anyone, I spend 100% of the time defending my own thoughts and theories, which is why I seldom post many of my own thoughts and theories, and which is also why several folks that are on here a lot NEVER post their ideas.

Some day I will learn.... [ More ]

Reply #62

KY Floyd — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:28:13 GMT

1. I'm not sure what your response is supposed to mean. I haven't seen any bias, but it's certain to exist. The only question is how much bias there is. I'd be surprised if any of the balls were more than 1 or 2% different than the average.

2. I don't use a system by any reasonable definition. Again I ask *why* do you need a system, and what is its purpose? Is it to make you feel good about the numbers that you'll probably lose with, is it to help you pass the time, or is it supposed to give... [ More ]

Reply #61

guesser — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:34:13 GMT

1) You tell me ? By your response, you must have seen something or else you would not have even bothered to reply to this one. And besides, the second part of your question answers specifically what I just implied, THANK YOU.

2) Same reason you do, same purpose as yours.

3) By paying attention. I'd venture to say MOST of the folks on here don't play QP's 100% of the time, all the time, every time.

4) See 1) above

5) I know, see 1) above, again.

And this... [ More ]

Reply #60

KY Floyd — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 07:01:17 GMT

1. Not seeing the bias doesn't mean it isn't there, it only means that you couldn't find it. How much data do you suppose you would need to find evidence of a bias? Do you think the amount of bias will affect the amount of data you need? How often do they change either the machine or the ball set, putting an end to your data collecting? The lotteries go to an enormous amount of effort to make the balls uniform, so I exect we'll all agree that there isnt a lot of bias, but does anyone think the... [ More ]

Reply #59

guesser — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:53:23 GMT

1) If there is a bias in the ballsets and ball machines, I don't see it, and I've spent time looking.

2) Unless a person plays a QP, then you gotta play something that is construed as a 'system'.

3) Would you play all 6 of the longest shots in one game ? NOBODY has affirmed that they do, so that leads me to believe folks DO NOT believe so much on the odds or probability that all things are equal when clearly, they are not.

4) Depending on how the floor is waxed, if the... [ More ]

Reply #58

KY Floyd — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:13:33 GMT

That last post should refer to the 7 ball being sukked (sic) toward the top of the machine. I edited the post 3 times, so apparently the thought police have installed a program to change is bad to is bad . Um, I guess you'll have to rely on context to figure out what word got changed

Reply #57

KY Floyd — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:04:35 GMT

Does all the math, odds, etc, brought out in this thread, apply to the first test? All tests? Only the last combination?

Yes. The laws of probability and physics apply to all of them. The balls don't know what's going on and the laws of probability and physics don't know what's going on either. The laws simply work and the balls just follow the rules, whether it's a test draw or a real drawing.

As far as making a rational judgement goes, you can only work with the data that's availabl... [ More ]

Reply #56

guesser — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:59:32 GMT

I would normally agree with you - IF they used the same ballset and same ball machine 'forever', but they generally switch them every draw night, so test games or not, the prior game is irrelevant, test or 'real'.

I look at the test games for one thing, but I don't look to see if my numbers hit in one of them, because if they did, life as I know it would be over......... I'd wander around in a drunken stupor all day long until the day I die.......... which doesn't sound too bad right a... [ More ]

Reply #55

justxploring — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:31:45 GMT

Agree, Bobby. That's why I don't like pre-tests. I'm glad they don't publish them in Florida. I'd rather be ignorant and not know that one of the personal numbers I've been playing for years came up last week on the third test run.

Reply #54

bobby623 — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 05:09:13 GMT

Situation:

A machine and a set of balls are selected. The machines is tested 4 times, producing 4 different combinations. The same machine and ball set is used a 5th time to obtain a winning combination.

Question: Does all the math, odds, etc, brought out in this thread, apply to the first test? All tests? Only the last combination?

How can one make a rational, mathmatical judgment without knowing what the 4th combination was?

It just seems to me that the best one can do is keep tra... [ More ]

Reply #53

justxploring — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 04:48:27 GMT

Thanks, Aye. I like the 5 star ratings. I now feel like a luxury hotel. Enjoy your stay

Reply #52

jarasan — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 04:44:51 GMT

AYE, guesser, I agree. Chose a system and stick to it. It is not solely mathematical, because those little balls do not obey purely mathematical rules. Odds, statistics, probabilities and all that stuff is for numbers, abstract constructions, that are on paper and in our minds. Every draw has so many differing influences due to the human involvement in every draw, which affects the outcome. Also, not only people affect the outcomes but room temperature, humidity, dirt, an earthquake in North... [ More ]

Reply #51

guesser — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:44:56 GMT

At first glance, I would not bet AGAINST a grouping of 2 or more numbers hitting from the 01-10 Group, and/or also the 21-30 Group.

HOWEVER, the one thing I keep thinking is, we have not had a Grouping from the 51-55 in 'forever', and we used to get them a lot more often.

And there are a few other oddities I see with Groupings as well.

If I had a tag line, it would be this:

You can argue odds and probabilities forever, but in the end, you gotta play SOMETHING, so how one person... [ More ]

Reply #50

ayenowitall — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:42:33 GMT

This has evolved into a pretty good thread. I'm surprised that nobody bothered to rate it before now, so I just rated it as Excellent - 5 stars.

Nothing changes the odds of hitting a jackpot, but my own experience has shown me that employing some systematic methods can result in cashing more and bigger tickets for the secondary prizes.

As for the debate about whether or not the odds of a given combination being drawn again remain the same once they've been drawn, the answer is....

Yes,... [ More ]

Reply #49

RJOh — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:20:30 GMT

In the last 119 PB drawings since the last matrix change 2 numbers from one of those groups have been drawn 23-24% of the time and 2 numbers from each of those groups were drawn at the same time less than 2% of the time. Since I think that is likely to happen in the future also, to get *how* unlikely those events are I would subtract their likely % from 100%. That's how I, a retired factory worker would figure it, a mathematician might do it differently.

Reply #48

KY Floyd — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 06:30:12 GMT

In the last PB drawing none of the numbers from 1 to 10 were drawn and two of the numbers from 30 to 39 were drawn. Strictly out of curiosity, what are the chances of 2 of the numbers from 1 to 10 being drawn next time? How about the chance for two of the numbers from 30 to 39? I agree that it's unlikely that two numbers between 30 and 39 will be drawn next Wednesday, but *how* unlikely

Reply #47

KY Floyd — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 06:24:33 GMT

Being a mathematician may call for more education than being a ditch digger, but that doesn't mean no stupid people manage to become mathematicians. It just means that there are some stupid mathematicians. News reports about the lottery are full of (selected and/or edited) quotes from mathematicians saying all sorts of things, but you'll find far more that disagree with your claim than support it. That's because the good mathematicians, and even most of the bad ones, know and agree that the numb... [ More ]

Reply #46

guesser — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 01:53:01 GMT

That's my theory too, Brad.

I cannot ever predict 'numbers', I just play tendencies: For example if the prior 3 games all had 2 or more numbers from between 20-29 hit, the 'probability' of that happening in a 4th game just isn't very good.

I CAN tell you most games have one grouping, and in a lot of cases two groupings, I may be able to tell you which grouping NOT to play, but I can't tell you which ones TO play.

RJ: That's what I've been saying also: different 'numbers' have di... [ More ]

Reply #45

sirbrad — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:37:24 GMT

Every number has the same chance, but that does not mean it has the same probability. Statistics continue to prove this. However with the matrix's it is still hard to narrow it down, but usually a lot closer for me than just a QP. Not always though.

Reply #44

RJOh — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:24:02 GMT

FYI. Mathematician who do this type of figuring have said that the odds of the same combination hitting twice in not the same as it hitting once. So once a combination of numbers has hit the odds of them hitting again are different.

Reply #43

RJOh — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:11:51 GMT

With the system I'm developing, numbers become letters in different positions. Numbers lose their identity as numbers so they don't belong to a group of numbers. Once I've decided to play a trend which is identified by letters, numbers are picked based on their positions in previous drawings to match that trend. Friday MM winning numbers had a trend/profile EGJLQ/ABCDG and the numbers I played that matched 3 had the profile DGJJL/ABDEF, since I had the GJL/ABD of the winning numbers profile I... [ More ]

Reply #42

guesser — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:08:45 GMT

Thank you RJ !

Floyd: you have your thoughts, statistical odds, and whatever, other people have theirs: Four numbers from the 40's just hit Wednesday night, you are saying the odds are just as good for that to recur as not ? I'm sorry, I don't buy it. To follow your thoughts, then the odds are just the same for ALL of the numbers in the prior game to hit in tonight's game as not, and I don't think there is anyone on here that would take that bet (all 6 repeating). Statistically sp... [ More ]

Reply #41

RJOh — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:55:28 GMT

KY Floyd,

What you say could be a fact but it doesn't matter to those using a system to pick their numbers. Most of the people who post here understand odds and how the size of the matrix effects them but players who use a system to pick their numbers enjoy the challenge of trying to beat the odds and some are better at it than others as shown by the prediction statistics. It's part of the fun of playing the lotteries.

Reply #40

KY Floyd — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 05:43:02 GMT

Every combination has exactly the same chances as each of the other possible combinations. Period. Eliminating some of the numbers from your selection process does nothing, nada, zip, to increase or decrease your odds. Your odds of winning are determined by the matrix and the number of chances you play. Period. No matter how much anyone thinks otherwise, it's really that simple.

Reply #39

guesser — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 05:01:02 GMT

For the record, I don't think numbers 'even out', I have too much data to say it doesn't. See Red Ball #40 for further clarification of one example.

There are noticeable trends or scenarios, but those scenarios won't point you to specific numbers, THOSE you have to pick on your own.

Case in point - we just had 4 numbers from the basic '40 group' hit - the odds are kinda rare for that to occur again in the near future, so there is one scenario for you - don't play 4 numbers from the... [ More ]

Reply #38

RJOh — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 03:52:32 GMT

From my earlier post:

I play MM in Ohio so I examine its history more closely and have found some unique trends that I play for. Since I usually play only 10-20 lines, I'm satisfied that this is a good way to pick my combinations even though I've never done better than a 3+1.

I posted the 10 lines I played tonight on the prediction board and as you can see I matched a 3+0, so I'm convinced I'm on the right track.

Reply #37

RJOh — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:13:54 GMT

Lotteries don't run long enough for everything to even out as I observed with Ohio Buckey5 and pointed out in an earlier post. Chances are if you wait until you see a trend happening, it too late to take advantage of it. As I mentioned earlier, some trends or conditions do repeat and if you pick combinations to take advantage of them then when they do happen your odds of winning are improved but you have to play expecting them to happen.

As shown by looking at the past 118 PB drawings, had... [ More ]

Reply #36

KY Floyd — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 05:41:31 GMT

Does everything just eventually even itself out? Yes. No. Sort of. Basically, everything eventually normalizes into a bell curve of some kind. Some of the curves are fairly flat and some are steep, and they pretty much all tend to be somewhat symmetrical. The exact shape will vary over time, but as long as you have enough data it will resemble a bell curve.

A lot of people seem to think that random means the results will be uniform if there are a lot of results. If you flip a coin 5 times y... [ More ]

Reply #35

guesser — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 04:54:27 GMT

And to further muddy the waters, go back to 7/1 and then go from there back about 20 games.

This leads to the question: do you play a trend, or does everything just eventually even itself out, given a stretch of games to do it in ?

As I have said on my website, most 'trends' last about 6 or 8 games, the problem is we don't notice them for 3-4 games, and then we sit

and watch (usually) to see if they are solid, THEN we play them, but by then the trend is over...... it's human natur... [ More ]

Reply #34

RJOh — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 01:28:43 GMT

FYI. Of those 68 drawings that did have a numbers from the previous drawing.

28 didn't have a number from just the previous drawing

14 didn't have a number from the previous 2 drawings

8 didn't have a number from the previous 3 drawings

6 didn't have a number from the previous 4 drawings

7 didn't have a number from the previous 5 drawings

1 didn't have a number from the previous 8 drawings

2 didn't have a number from the previous 9 drawings

1 didn't have a number from the... [ More ]

Reply #33

guesser — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:48:02 GMT

That's kinda my point: Play all 5 of the numbers from the prior drawing, each in a different game, and you have a fair chance of hitting one of them every other game 'or so'. Problem is, we are on a streak of 5 games where a repeat has not occurred, and that has only happened once before, and that streak ended after 6 games.

And now folks will come on and tell us all about the theories of probability, but folks, you gotta play something, odds notwithstanding.

Reply #32

RJOh — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:47:12 GMT

FYI. Since the PB matrix changed 118 drawings ago 68 of the winning combinations did not have a number from the previous drawing and 18 winning combinations did not have one of the 14-20 numbers from the previous four drawings.

Reply #31

guesser — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:33:47 GMT

Floyd, you are exactly right about what happens if you don't play any of the 5 numbers from the prior game: I pointed out several times that prior to last night, NONE of the numbers from the prior FOUR games had been hit - that's 20 numbers !

Same goes with numbers prior to 10/21, and prior to 10/18 none of the prior 3 games' (15) numbers had been hit, and prior to 10/14, the prior 2 games had no winning number drawn.

But this, to me, goes hand-in-hand with the inordinate number of 'l... [ More ]

Reply #30

KY Floyd — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:18:12 GMT

FWIW, the winning numbers in MM have been all odd or all even only 4 times in the last 100 drawings, which is about 1 less than expected based on probability and pure randomness. Statistically, the departure is completely insignificant. Interestingly, all 4 of those results have happened since June, 30, a period on which we'd have expected the result to happen just over 2 times. 3 of them have happened since mid-August and 2 in the last 4 weeks. That means this would have been a bad period to b... [ More ]

Reply #29

KY Floyd — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 20:42:44 GMT

You're completely right that it's very unlikely that a pattern will repeat forever.

I'm also not sure which patterns you're referring to as 5/0 and 3/2, but as PROB 988 says, it's all based on the relative number of possibilities. Since MM has an even number of numbers to choose from, there are exactly the same chances that all numbers will be odd or all will be even. Eliminating half of the numbers from consideration reduces the possible combinations from 3,819,816 to 98,280, which is not... [ More ]

Reply #28

RJOh — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:01:20 GMT

Systems are designed to work if and when the conditions are right and you can't expect those conditions to exist all the time. For example, in PB since the last matrix change there has been 12 occasions when the winning numbers didn't have any numbers from the previous five drawings so if your system excluded numbers in the previous five drawings it could have only worked 10% of the time but your number pool would have been reduced from 55 to 32-38 numbers too. Even winning with a system takes... [ More ]

Reply #27

guesser — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 16:51:50 GMT

Exactly, Brad.

I've said all along you can be off by one on each number, or off by ten on each number, a loss is a loss.

On another website, I predicted last night's game to be either two groups, or three numbers from one group would

hit, and that's exactly what happened - 42-43-48. (not another 'no group' or 'single group' game). I usually post my thoughts on

my 'blogs' here on LP. I don't predict numbers, I do predict types of games, FWIW.

Before anyone says it, I have num... [ More ]

Reply #26

sirbrad — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:33:19 GMT

It is the luck of the draw mostly. I have also had numbers repeat when I was hoping none would, and got burnt pretty bad using my system. But when all that happens that is supposed to, systems can really help you narrow it down. But it only takes one number to render your whole system useless, and cost you a lot of money.

Reply #25

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:44:18 GMT

We look at the same thing in different ways, I play by tendencies of things not to happen 'forever', on the short-term, and you play differently, I'm not ignoring anything. I factor in the splits: you say it doesn't matter, I have no problem at all with your beliefs, my beliefs tell me the same split generally speaking will not hit more than 3 times in a row, and specifically more than 4 in a row, so if I see that happen, I play against it. I may be right, I may be wrong, there is always anot... [ More ]

Reply #24

Prob988 — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:35:36 GMT

One doesn't look at the odds in any particular way. They are determined mathematically and not by having an opinion about them. The mathematics of the situation has been around for centuries and has not changed much. This is how the lottery is able to post odds on the play slips.

I have shown earlier in this thread that there is no tipping, but that the experimental outcome is well within what one might expect from the sample size. Sometimes the results are surprising, but non... [ More ]

Reply #23

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:11:35 GMT

You are mistaken: I DO get what you are saying.

You look at the odds one way, and I look at them a different way, that's all, I don't have any problems with it.

The only thing I am befuddled about is the 'odds' of an 0/5 coming up in the last 120~ games is 4 in 120, and the odds

of a 3/2 are like 43 in 120~, and even though the odds tell you there is no difference in which split is likely to hit, it's

right there in black and white that the odds DO tip towards one way. 4/120... [ More ]

Reply #22

Prob988 — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:02:15 GMT

Well I figured you wouldn't get it. I can say that insisting on a certain distribution gives you no edge whatsoever because it is true.

The probability of the number 20 coming up six times in a row is one in 1,412,466.987, which is relatively probable compared to winning the lottery. On the seventh draw the probability of 20 coming up will still be 9.4% unless some bias has been introduced involving the weight or size of the ball numbered 20. The lottery, however, claims to avoid this... [ More ]

Reply #21

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:02:14 GMT

Brad, that's great ! Whatever works for anyone is wonderful, I sure don't have a problem with how anyone plays the game.

You noticed a niche in the numbers, and you jumped on it, well done, Sir.

Reply #20

sirbrad — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:47:29 GMT

What really is bad is that I always beat great odds when they work against me. One time I played 3 last draw eliminations for about $50.00. Because I noticed that very rarely were the same balls drawn again. Sure enough when I decided to play them, 3 balls come up from the last draw alone! Yes, THREE! The odds of that are astronomical, unless of course I play it.

Reply #19

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:44:17 GMT

Well, I do understand you 100%, and I play along those lines. If you have 2 or 3 numbers hit from one of those groups, what is the likeliehood of 2 or 3 from the SAME group hitting in the next game ? It may be 0, it may be 50-50. If they did hit in the next game, what are the odds of it doing the same 3 games in a row ? It happens once in awhile. 4 in a row ? Not very often.

0/5 - no numbers picked under #28, 5 numbers picked over #27.

3/2 - 3 numbers picked under 28, 2 n... [ More ]

Reply #18

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:27:14 GMT

I never said I could pick the 5 winning numbers my way, or any other way, what I said was, a 3/2 has a better chance of winning than an 0/5.

Yes, I know all about odds, and if it's meant to be, it's meant to be, one losing number set is the same as another losing number set, but if a person could play 100 games of 0/5, or 100 games of 3/2, I think I know where I would take my chances.

Can anyone in all honesty tell me if they have been playing a system, and that system tells them to play n... [ More ]

Reply #17

Prob988 — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:26:30 GMT

It's none of my business how you play the lottery, first of all. You can do what you wish. I think I do understand, at least in general terms, what you are trying to say, but I am telling you that you are kidding yourself.

I'm not sure what you're talking about when you say 0/5, 3/2 etc, but the appeal to past events in probability has no bearing whatsoever on future events, first off.

I'm not sure I can convince you of anything, but you can try this on for size, and see if it helps.... [ More ]

Reply #16

RJOh — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:59:03 GMT

guesser,

Looks like you will have to enlighten the guys by actually picking all 5 winning numbers your way.

What the guys are saying is there may be more combinations of 2/3 and 3/2 than there are 0/5 and 5/0 but every combination is unique and one unique combination's odds of winning are no better than those of another. If a certain type of combination hit more often, it only because there are more of that type of combinations in the group of possible combinations.

Note:

I believe th... [ More ]

Reply #15

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:03:34 GMT

You guys both missed ALL of my points, that's pretty rare.

The odds of winning the lottery are what they are, but out of 121 or so games, a 5/0 has come in 4 times, an 0/5 has come in 2 times, but a 3/2 has come in 43 times, and a 2/3 has come in 34 times. (4/1-15, 1/4-22)

I understand what you are saying about odds being the same for one set of numbers vs. another, but I don't see how you can say you have just as good a chance winning by playing an 0/5 as you do a 3/2... [ More ]

Reply #14

Prob988 — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:03:54 GMT

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Reply #13

KY Floyd — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 06:43:06 GMT

None of those does a thing to increase your odds of winning. Here are the answers to help clarify:

1. For PB it's 1 in 3,478,761, exactly the same as the odds that those 5 numbers would have been drawn the first time, and exactly the same as the odds of *any* 5 numbers being drawn. The balls don't know they exist, let alone how often they've been drawn.

2. See above.

3. See above.

4. See above

5. See above, and plan on sharing with a lot of people.

6. See # 5.

7. see... [ More ]

Reply #12

guesser — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 04:07:28 GMT

There are just a ton of ways of increasing your odds of winning, here's a few:

1) The 5 numbers in the last game, what are the odds of ALL 5 repeating ?

2) The prior game to that, what are the odds of ALL of them repeating ?

3) Same goes for the 2 games prior to those, of the last 4 games, none of the 5 numbers have been hit.

4) We have 6 legitimate longshots out there, what are the odds of 2 of them hitting, let alone 3, 4, 5 or all 6 ?

5) What are the odds of #1-2-3-4-5 hit... [ More ]

Reply #11

Prob988 — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 21:25:22 GMT

Both of these numbers very close to what one would expect.

The number of combinations possible for 5 numbers in a field of 55 numbers is 3,478,761. The number of possible combinations of 5 possible numbers in a field of 31 is 169,911. Thus the subset of combinations covered by the 31 field is 4.9%, close to what is found.

The number of possible combinations covered by a field of 39 numbers is 575,757. Thus the percentage of this field's combinations covered is 29.5%, close to the... [ More ]

Reply #10

johnph77 — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:18:50 GMT

justxploring -

In a 6/53 lottery matrix there are 22,957,480 possible combinations. Of those combinations, only 475,020 will have all numbers less that 30. The odds of this occurance are 1::48.33.

gl

j

Reply #9

sirbrad — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:12:14 GMT

Wow, what a weird number to play too. 3 ones, 2 twenties, and a consecutive. Looks just like jackpot numbers.

Reply #8

dvdiva — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 03:28:37 GMT

That is surprising about a 5/39 game. If only 4% had combinations under 32 it's yet another good reason to stick with combinations above that.

Reply #7

RJOh — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:09:03 GMT

I wasn't surprised to see only 4% of PowerBall winning combinations had all numbers lower than 32 but Ohio Rolling Cash5 , a 5/39 games that had only 29% of it combinations lower than 32 was a bit surprising.

Reply #6

RJOh — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 00:54:28 GMT

Recheck your PB data file, my data file shows the following:

08/02/06 10 13 16 19 24 +15

04/22/06 04 05 06 18 27 +24

01/11/06 03 06 14 17 18 +14

11/23/05 09 12 24 25 27 +33

07/27/05 01 04 10 13 29 +03

06/18/05 05 08 10 16 24 +05

05/21/05 02 05 07 10 30 +23

02/09/05 09 10 15 18 29 +09

12/22/04 02 07 11 24 31 +18

12/04/04 06 09 16 22 30 +04

06/02/04 05 06 12 23 29 +30

Reply #5

Prob988 — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 00:01:24 GMT

The odds of 2-5-8-17-18 hitting are no different than any other set of 5 numbers.

Reply #4

justxploring — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:02:51 GMT

I agree with your theory, Guesser. I've studied the numbers drawn in FL over the past 10 years and there have been few draws where the 6 numbers are all under 30. However, what if one of these 2 winners had been playing for 10 years and then read an article explaining this fact, that is, he should stop and pick some other numbers or get a quick pick instead. He'd be very upset now, wouldn't he? This was my point. I realize that the odds were not in their favor picking such low numbers. Howev... [ More ]

Reply #3

rdc137 — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 19:56:15 GMT

Good points, but bear in mind:

The likelihood of those numbers being pulled are just as good as any others.

Reply #2

guesser — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 19:14:31 GMT

Looking back at PB since 1/3/2004, only 7 times has the winning numbers been chosen where the highest number of the 5 WB's was 31 or less, and of those 7 times, only once was the Jackpot hit (12/22/04).

So far in 2006 it's only happened twice - 1/11 and 8/2. Neither were hit.

7 out of 294 isn't too great, let alone winning once in 294.

When I started playing PB about 12 years ago, I had 'my 5 numbers' I always played, and in retrospect, that was a mistake because all 5... [ More ]

Reply #1

rdc137 — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 19:03:41 GMT

Oh boohoo! I only am going to get $7 million dollars! How can I expect to live on that?

NOTICE: This message may contain sarcasm.

Remember the classic line from Married with Children:

AL: Do you know what I could do with $10,000?

BUD: Take 10,000 trips to the nuddy bar?

AL: No, just ONE GREAT ONE

Personal Numbers

justxploring — Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:57:46 GMT

Finally - a $14 million jackpot was won Saturday by 2 players without a quick pick. The information on the Florida site indicates both players used their own numbers. The numbers drawn:

4-7-8-11-20-27

2 of the numbers (4 and 7) are mine. (no prize for only 2 numbers) but this pattern is very close to what I normally bet. I was surprised to see that only 2 people won with such low numbers. Every lottery expert says not to play birthdays and/or anniversaries because (a) the days in the mon... [ More ]