POLL 1 of 3: Computerized drawings vs. ball drawings

Reply #46

scorpio — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:27:10 GMT

i don't know about the ball droppings,but i hope tri states isn't abusing lottery employees bonuses like in georgia.this time of year,very little in lottery winnings because they give out bonuses i'm afraid.how do we get our state lotteries to check on this,to make sure they aren't robbing us players

Reply #45

thewayforward — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 19:11:33 GMT

Interesting poll Todd,

As much as I love the balls I cannot see anything wrong with computerized drawing as long as the system truly is a random system. I have been browsing around a bunch lately and have seen some pretty wacked out ideas for drawing numbers which include stock markets and currecny exchange which just seems bizzare to me, if anyone knows more about this please enlighten me.

Drawing balls I feel will always have a (dare I say it) romantic appeal to it that can simply not be... [ More ]

Reply #44

cyrus86 — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 04:38:33 GMT

Balls good, Computer Bad. Me hate to lose.

Hey boys and girls, they like the computers so we can't even get close to picking the correct numbers. Plus they don't have to maintain the pp-ball machines. Also, they can control the pay-outs, the odds, the works. I have seen the Great Oz and he's a bad man

Reply #43

rec1944 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:56:43 GMT

you can fight fire with fire fight computerized drawing with you computer your winnings will be better than you think do not use your system with ball drop

Reply #42

Doc Tor — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:06:03 GMT

Did the system you were using for Tx work pretty good. If so would you share them with me.

Thanks

Doc Tor

Reply #41

bigato1010 — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:46:34 GMT

Ball drawings, i prefer

Reply #40

psykomo — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:28:55 GMT

transluation.................................................................of a PSYKO

recall the BALL's

no more RNG >>>

people gett'ng SICK

(RNG's not healthy )

recall the BALL's

(putt'um back where they BELONG

Reply #39

Scentrys — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 17:12:30 GMT

Call me old fashion, but this woman just love balls.

Reply #38

jarasan — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 23:03:43 GMT

Most of the time? Theory or fact?

Balls are definitely not connected to the sales database, you see there is no network card or RJ45 connector hooked to the mechanical ball machine.

Reply #37

seejjjr — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:41:14 GMT

You might want to believe that but I disagree with you. It has been (as of 10/21/07) almost A year that the IN lotto has been hit. Even with the odds that the lotto has it should been hit two or three time in that period ,maybe even more. I haven't done any research on the other online games exclusive to IN only But I bet my last lotto $ they haven't been hit as frequently as they were hit before the computer started picking the winning numbers. As you said in your comments most of the time, sal... [ More ]

Reply #36

Captain Lotto — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:50:12 GMT

Drawing machines aren't connected to sales computers. Most of the time, sales are handled by a contractor.

Reply #35

seejjjr — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:48:55 GMT

I agree with you on this matter. The hoosier lottery is fixed. The machine picks all the numbers nobody picks and then picks the winning numbers from that list. As I said in a comment I made maybe the Indiana Attorney General needs to look this problem very hard and in great depth. By 10/21/07 the jackpot will have gone a year w/o being hit. Way too long in my opinion. Go back too the ping pong balls and live televised drawings.

Reply #34

LottoMining — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 13:20:22 GMT

I ll vote in favor of the computerized draws due to the theory (or just my belief) that the random number generator is not completely random and the occasional patterns can be tracked for profit. California s Fantasy 5 used to be mechanical balls in the hopper though they switched to computerized at some point in 88. Here s an interesting test when looking at the data sets for the early mechanical and later computer draw methods. I built a database table that has the frequency of the 39 num... [ More ]

Reply #33

lesonook — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:44:38 GMT

i for one hate computerized drawings..delaware has computerized drawings and they cheat so badly it is pitiful..why i still play i will never know..at least when they had the ball drawings you had a half a chance ..not so with computerized drawaings..delaware cheats and cheats...it is a sorry state of affairs when a state does that...oh well..there time will come...lesonook

Reply #32

Amazing Grace — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 02:27:29 GMT

We hav 50% cp drawings in W.C

The systems are stand alone ( the tickets sold) The number drawn 2 machines not tied in together.

Reply #31

stillbroke — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:03:38 GMT

I am an Indiana resident who has played our state lottery since it's inception. We used to have a televised drawing, but no more. I was informed a few weeks ago that we had gone to the computerized drawing. Though I'm not 100% sure of this, it seems to make sense. Indiana's lotto has never exceeded the $20 million dollar range, if I'm not mistaken, and now we're posting a $47 million jackpot. With the ball drawing the winning numbers were readily available, though winning tickets were not ann... [ More ]

Reply #30

Amazing Grace — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 12:50:08 GMT

Has anyone proved that one is more/less predictable than the other?

or is it a trust issue

Reply #29

Speednet — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 23:15:50 GMT

Look at the State Lottery Report Card in the results menu. Every game and state is listed.

Reply #28

BevsPicks2 — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 02:19:33 GMT

I'm in that small percentage also Steve. I agree with your philosophy. But only because I know it to be true.

Reply #27

BevsPicks2 — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 13:09:54 GMT

What type of drawing does NC and SC have? Whatever it is it works for me.

Reply #26

Just6ntlc — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:05:29 GMT

I don't like computer drawings. The odds of winning a jackpot is better fair if it's ball drawn.

Reply #25

Rocket 455 — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 02:38:44 GMT

Random will never be programmed, I don't care what any computer scientist says. Just like voting machines, it's too easy to stack the deck with hidden code. And if you did finally figure out the rhythm the programmer would just change it. Less hits for the people who play this game. The answer is simple.

Balls

Reply #24

DoubleDown — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:46:04 GMT

101 to 7 at this juncture in favor of balls...

Reply #23

Just6ntlc — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:09:26 GMT

I hate computer drawings. I like ball drawings that are fair as my vote.

Reply #22

csfb — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:16:24 GMT

I chose balls. I wondered though about the make of the balls. For example, balls of metal vs. balls of rubber. Would there be a predictable difference in the outcome

Reply #21

tntea — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:30:57 GMT

I am with you on this. I quit them too. Best chance to even come close in TN now with Pick 3 is to do a qp and hope it is a number that was played the least.

Reply #20

JAG331 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:05:46 GMT

Definitely not Connecticut. Still all balls.

Reply #19

Stack47 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:52:22 GMT

What if, 5 or 10 minutes from draw time. They do a check, find the the number with the least sales, then generate that number with a few lines of code change.

Or they could program the computer to automatically scan for the combinations with the most money wagered on them. Football season is about to start so every Monday we'll see the opening lines in the sports section. If too much money is bet one way, the bookies add or subtract from the point spread to entice bets on the other way.... [ More ]

Reply #18

AuntiePat — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:08:19 GMT

Nicely Put

Reply #17

four4me — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:57:31 GMT

sfillippo wrote:

Okay, don't flog me here, but I chose Computerized drawings because that would open up possibilities that maybe it would be possible to create a system that could get hits more often than trying to guess the machine ball outcome.

I often thought about this for keno the 3 minute games some states have, if you could record every game say via a camera hookup and some computer software you could figure out how their RNG chip processed the numbers and write a program to make mo... [ More ]

Reply #16

jarasan — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:27:16 GMT

Yes, here in the US some states have computerized KENO games that run every few minutes, they have controlled payouts, dependent on the amount of players and who knows what other factors.

Reply #15

Newb — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:56:47 GMT

I thought that's how computerised drawings worked lol! It gives lottery companies greater control over the amount winnings they have to (or not) pay out.

Reply #14

LOTTOMIKE — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:49:39 GMT

i think some of these computerized states do this.they check and see the number bet on least and like rebecca paul hargrove said 'maximize profit'.i just realized something thanks to carbob.i should've thought about it sooner.think about it everyone.rebecca hargrove said tennessee was trying to 'maximize profit' which means the winning number every night in tennessee is the one bet on the least and therefore they maximize their profit because they are paying out on the least bet number.hell they... [ More ]

Reply #13

CARBOB — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:09:50 GMT

I'm not flogging you Steve, let's take this example. What if, 5 or 10 minutes from draw time. They do a check, find the the number with the least sales, then generate that number with a few lines of code change. Do you think that could happen or how many times has it really happen and the public will never know. When a lottery official starts using the word integrity , beware.

Reply #12

sfilippo — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 09:58:04 GMT

Okay, don't flog me here, but I chose Computerized drawings because that would open up possibilities that maybe it would be possible to create a system that could get hits more often than trying to guess the machine ball outcome.

Seems I've heard that it's pretty tough to actually write a true RNG program and maybe players could spot a rythmn or glitch and take advantage of it.

The outcome of a Mechanical ball machine is pretty tough to unravel in my opinion. Maybe I'd have better luck wit... [ More ]

Reply #11

pumpi76 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 06:49:17 GMT

It doesn't matter to me, i like each one either way...I've said before that it doesn't matter if you are using RNG or Balls machine is how high you set the odds that matter...I wish they put the lottery machines in a squared or cylindrical candy machine or machine that looks like a blender (all of them with the same dimensions) and perhaps mix some bigger balls with a lot of smaller balls...I'll be so happy the day they ever do that....If they change to RNG i wouldn't care...The day they make... [ More ]

Reply #10

jarasan — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:37:19 GMT

Excellent commentary and analogies.

Reply #9

psykomo — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 00:07:06 GMT

Had to vote for the BALL's on this WON>>>>>justxploring::::::::::::

BUTtttttttttttttt yes there is alway's a BUTT out there somewhere,

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

how do we factor in the women who R .....RUINING D LOTTERY?

?????????.. RING

Reply #8

tnlotto1 — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:27:03 GMT

i voted for BALLS. bring tennessee back our BALLS.

Reply #7

LOTTOMIKE — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:24:38 GMT

i've got a very interesting question for everyone here....

who started this computerized nonsense? what state had the first RNG? Whoever started this trend of RNG should be hung with no chance of being pardoned for this terrible mistake that threatens lotteries like a bad uncurable cancer.

Reply #6

jim695 — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 19:12:13 GMT

I think I've made my position very clear on this subject. Aside from the very valid argument that they're more easily and undetectably compromised, using computers to draw lottery numbers removes an essential element from all of the games. We enjoy the excitement of watching the balls blow around inside the hoppers, watching our numbers roll out one by one and, most of all, anticipating that final number while our hearts pound so hard we think we'll pass out or die.

Now, that's exciting... [ More ]

Reply #5

Noodle — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 18:42:41 GMT

I moved from Texas to Louisiana two years ago. Texas uses balls. LA is computerized. None of the systems I used in Texas work in LA. Wins here are few and far between. None of the systems I used in Texas work here - they don't even come close. I play much less.

Reply #4

Guru101 — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:14:52 GMT

Ball machine.

Reply #3

spy153 — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:29:02 GMT

lol ! Yes

Reply #2

justxploring — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:35:43 GMT

IMHO if a state wants to run a lottery that is fair random, it should have the balls to do it

Reply #1

CARBOB — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:27:10 GMT

There's no doubt in my mind about this!!! Even tho, I believe that test draws distorts the stats, like Fla does.

Balls

POLL 1 of 3: Computerized drawings vs. ball drawings

Todd — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:22:35 GMT

I know there have been many polls like this before, but let's do a fresh poll, to find out what the current feelings of lottery players are. I'd appreciate as much participation as possible, no matter what your viewpoint is.

Please indicate your preference as to what type of lottery drawings your prefer

Computerized drawings, which use a computer system to generate random numbers. Some computerized states show the results in an animated cartoon sequence, and other computerized states... [ More ]