Which gives me a better chance of winning a lottery?

Reply #117

time*treat — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:54:58 GMT

Heh, I've seen this formula around before.

Reply #116

KY Floyd — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:36:44 GMT

Actually you've confirmed that concentrating your plays in thefewest drawings maximizes your chances of winning at least once. You used different numbers, but you've said the same thing that benmasdid.

Reply #115

Thoth — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:24:36 GMT

Actually......

Case 1: playing $1 for 1000 draws gives you a 63.23% chance of a winning AT LEAST once.

Case 2: playing $500 for 2 drawings yields a 75% chance of winning AT LEAST once, a 50% chance of winning EXACTLY once, and a 25% chance of not winning at all, as well as a 25% chance of winning exactly twice.

Playing $2 for 500 draws gives you a 63.25% chance of winning AT LEAST once - just about like playing $1 for 1000 draws.

1-(1-0.002)^500 = .632489

1-(1-0.001... [ More ]

Reply #114

pacattack05 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:20:31 GMT

I'm out of this thread as there is no point in telling hair raising stories to bald headed men.

I almost fell off my chair...lol Never heard that one before..

Reply #113

Coin Toss — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:53:16 GMT

OK KY Floyd,

Two post above you share:

Doubling your chances and cutting the odds in half are *exactly* thesame thing.

and then in the very next post you say:

if the belief is every $100 spent reduces the odds by a power of 100 (quoting me)

Nobody has ever said it works that way.

So which one of your own statements above are you sticking with?

I'll listen to your respopnse off the air , i.e., I'm out of this thread as there is no point in telling hair raising stories to... [ More ]

Reply #112

KY Floyd — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:12:18 GMT

if the belief is every $100 spent reduces the odds by a power of 100

Nobody has ever said it works that way. The idea that it might workthat way is only the product of your imagination. Unfortunately,

You either get it or you don't.

It's obvious which group you're in.

Reply #111

KY Floyd — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 09:10:23 GMT

I'm sure I've made plenty of references about those who are bad atmath. I realize that bad at math is overly broad, since people canbe good at math in general but bad at certain aspects of math, butthese discusions *are* about a specific aspect of math. I get thefeeling that you read too much into some of the things I say perhapsconfusing the general use of you as a comment that's specificallydirected at *you*. I know you think I'm mean sometimes, but all I do isstate the truth as I believe it.... [ More ]

Reply #110

pacattack05 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:35:36 GMT

Say I pick one Deity...1:10

Say I pick 2 deities....2:5

If I concede to 3 deities, I'm guaranteed to go to heaven.

10/3=1 God?

3 times as likely to meet 72 virginians....

Reply #109

Coin Toss — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 07:28:37 GMT

Actually, trinity is nowhere in the Bible.

But I'm sure some here would insist that whether it is or not, the concept would still multiply our chances by 3

Reply #108

pacattack05 — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 01:45:06 GMT

1,000,000 divide by 100,000=10 (this means you have a 1 in 10 shot of winning if you buy one hundred thousand tickets assuming no doubles)

Benmas, to me, this is a silly example. I mean, whether or not it's true, the whole point of gambling is to come out a winner, isn't it?

He was only using that as an example to show the math, not that someone sane would actually do such a thing.

Reply #107

LuckyLilly — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 23:33:19 GMT

Could Depends possibly be lucky underwear??? I think I'd feel very unlucky if I had to wear them.

Reply #106

Stack47 — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 23:13:29 GMT

It depends

Nice pun

Reply #105

justxploring — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:28:27 GMT

1,000,000 divide by 100,000=10 (this means you have a 1 in 10 shot of winning if you buy one hundred thousand tickets assuming no doubles)

Benmas, to me, this is a silly example. I mean, whether or not it's true, the whole point of gambling is to come out a winner, isn't it?

Any game that has only a million to one odds isn't going to pay much. So why would you spend $100,000 on tickets? 1 in 10 isn't that great either!! I mean, isn't 1 in 10 only a 10% shot because you have a 90% chance o... [ More ]

Reply #104

Coin Toss — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:23:43 GMT

benmas

Above you say:

The above is a perfect example why you DONT get it coin toss...to make it an even money bet you have to put up $1,000,000...

THAT is exactly right and that has been my point all along. Earlier in this very thread you took the Mega Millions jackpot odds of 175, 711, 536 and told us that playing $100 reduced that to 1,757,115 (read your own post).

Putting up $1 million in the example of a game with odss of a 1 million to one is a far, far cry from putting up

Reply #103

benmas — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 21:40:28 GMT

^^^^^^^^haha...^^^^^^^^^6

-----------------------------------

Just get a calculater, take 175,711,536 and keep dividing by 100. See how quickly you get it down to single digits or a decimal, and then try to explain to those of us who don't buy this concept that playing series of 100 combinations would get you to the same place.

Ex:

Let's say the odds were 1,000,0000 to one in a game.

1,000,000 / 100 = 10,000

100,000/ 100 = 100

100 / 100 = 1

Gee, it only took three times... [ More ]

Reply #102

Stack47 — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:37:42 GMT

Oh there propbably is, but for a really heated discussion go to a Christian discussion board

The New Testament has a Trinity; does that mean our chances of getting to Heaven are multiplied by 3

Reply #101

Stack47 — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:31:46 GMT

ROFL

Reply #100

Stack47 — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:26:08 GMT

The majority of this discussion has been about reducing the odds of $175 million to 1 and not about reducing the odds of winning more than they spent.

I assumed a better chance of winning meant a better chance of hitting the jackpot buying 100 QPs in 1 drawing or 50 QPs in 2 drawings. If winning means 2 bucks, we can guarantee that by playing all the mega balls for $46. If winning means more than they spend, they would have to match at least 4 + 0 or 3 + 1.

Reply #99

Coin Toss — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:02:26 GMT

Oh there propbably is, but for a really heated discussion go to a Christian discussion board and bring up:

Predestination vs Free Will

The Pope

Mary

Infant or adult baptism, or is baptism necessary?

Tithing, and thithing based on gross or net!

Why two creation stories in Genesis?

There's many more, but that would trigger quite a number of threads and posts, believe me!

_______________________________

Everyone, re: reduction of odds, try this.

Just get a calculater,... [ More ]

Reply #98

justxploring — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:12:35 GMT

Heated debate? You mean you can't feel the love?

Goodnight

Reply #97

justxploring — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:10:25 GMT

Coin Toss wrote (See Justxplorings remarks in her post about payments).

Sorry, Coin Toss - I edited my post because it was so long and deleted those remarks! It's nice to know someone pays attention to them. I'll try to remember what I wrote. I've worked as a loan officer for a while. What I noticed is that many people finance cars, furniture and buy lots of items on credit cards and only seem to care about one thing... the monthly payment and whether or not it will fit into their budget. Th... [ More ]

Reply #96

time*treat — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:13:57 GMT

<--- wonders if, on some real-estate forum, there is a heated debate being waged regarding the lottery.

Reply #95

Coin Toss — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:32:22 GMT

KY Floyd

I'm sure Coin Toss is busy thinking, but there's still 80% ofitthat isn't alcohol . As long as you so easily recognizethat twice as much alcohol makes the drink twice as strong, canyou explain why it wouldn't seem obvious that having twice asmany tickets for the lottery would make you twice as likely towin? I honestly don't think itrequiresunderstanding the math. I reallythink that for the most part theproblem is that people usefaulty math to convince themselves that theintuitive (a... [ More ]

Reply #94

justxploring — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:11:13 GMT

KY Floyd - first I'll answer the mortgage question. You wrote... for a houseand selling in a few years and in my last post one word was missing, since I wrote less than two years. I can't blame you if I made a typo, but I'm not sure your answer would have been any different. To the best of my knowledge, not many lending institutions give great rates for flips, if they lend money for them at all, but I only know about the company I mentioned in which I trained (which didn't offer them.) Also I'm... [ More ]

Reply #93

KY Floyd — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:27:01 GMT

In the past you've been one of the people who doesn't acceptthat having two tickets makes you twice as likely to win, soplease explain this to me:

If you have a drink with 10% alcohol and another drink with 20% alcohol, that drink is twice as potent as the other

I'm sure Coin Toss is busy thinking, but there's still 80% ofit that isn't alcohol . As long as you so easily recognizethat twice as much alcohol makes the drink twice as strong, canyou explain why it wouldn't seem obvious that h... [ More ]

Reply #92

KY Floyd — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:20:56 GMT

I purchase 2 tickets, let's say I pick 0, and 1.......2:5

That one is wrong. You have 2 chances out of 10 possibilities, so it's 2 in 10. That simplifies to 1 in 5.

Whenpeople see the5, they think Ooohhh, now I only have to contend withonly 5possiblities out there. But we all know that's not true

You're obviously right about people not understanding it, butit's also a matter of perspective. As long as you'veexpressed the odds as 1in 5, you are effectively looking at 5possibilitie... [ More ]

Reply #91

KY Floyd — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:15:22 GMT

Would you please be kind enough to explain that to those of us who aren't all that good at math

Reply #90

RJOh — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:01:20 GMT

You assume since no one won the jackpot, everyone who played was a losers. There were 15 second tier winners of $250,000 and 85 third tier winners of $10,000 which wouldn't have been bad for someone buying $50-$100 worth of tickets

Reply #89

Stack47 — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 02:48:01 GMT

Since nobody won the jackpot on Tuesday, the answer to obvious; had you bought $100 worth of tickets instead of buying $50 in 2 draws, your chances of winning was zero.

Reply #88

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:21:03 GMT

Coin Toss, I sold furniture in an upscale area of FL for years. During the housing bubble I furnished a few homes in Olde Naples for investors who paid $1 million cash, and sold them for $1.5 million in less than years. There's no way they could get all that interest in the bank or the stock market without risk. I agree with you almost 100%. Just get an amortization table.

On the other hand (the reason I said almost) I also agree that paying cash when you can get a very low rate and are makin... [ More ]

Reply #87

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:16:42 GMT

I worked with a guy in Vegas who had been an air traffic controller, leanred it on the Marines. This was in viet Nam, a Colonel approaching the airstrip asked him what the weather was like and he said, It has been raining all day long.

Well, when this colonel landed, he skidded - then came into the control tower, and demanded to know why the controller never told him the runay was wet!

If that's a true story, then we have a bigger problem than I previously thought...lol

Reply #86

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:12:07 GMT

As everyone here probably notices, I'm terrible at math. I can count to 10, and that's about it.

As far as the breaking of the ice, I agree with you, but there are better ways to do this. If it were me, I would say something like.... Did they forecast it to rain all day, or is it just passing? I wanted to play some golf, but I guess that's out of the question . I guess you guys need the rain anyway right?

That's a little more intelligible, I think.

I'm just glad it doesen't snow here.... [ More ]

Reply #85

Coin Toss — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:08:01 GMT

Oh is that true about the mortgsges!

I was at an adult ed. class where the teacher advised not paying cah for a house even if you coud. I told him I had to disagree with him, why pay for the house three times?

Another guy in the class spoke up and said he agreed with me. He sold Mercedes and said no one who xcould pay cash for a Mercedes would ever finance it.

the teacher then said, Well, who can really pay cash for a house, anyway?

Pac

I worked with a guy in Vegas who had been a... [ More ]

Reply #84

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:02:59 GMT

Pac, first I have to say I totally agree with you about smart people bad math. Take mortgages for example. A few years ago I worked 2 weeks for a broker who was pushing the interest only loans and the 1% Option ARMs. I left during training. People thought that 4% increasing to 5% was 1%, not 25%. Yes, the rate only increases by 1%, but the payment still goes up 25%. (doesn't it?) I tried to use a c**ktail as an example. If you have a drink with 10% alcohol and another drink with 20% alcohol, tha... [ More ]

Reply #83

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:57:53 GMT

In about a week I have to go to palce called Southern wine and spirits. A friend of mine recommended them to me. They pay something like 17 or 18 bucks an hour, and you get home by 3 or 4 pm. No nights, and no weekends. I can finally have my life back.

It's local deliveries of liquor. Maybe I can get a discount...lol

The price of Woodbridge, merlot is getting too high for me....lol

Reply #82

time*treat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:50:21 GMT

Heh, you can be good at what you do and still be bad at math. Especially when we get into numbers like 175,000,000 ~ things can get really abstract. That's not the same as being a plumber or electrician or mechanic (all challenging in their own right, and requiring their own skill set). Those are things you can see externally.

I thought you were doing the self-employed OTR driver thing.

Reply #81

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:45:29 GMT

What's even scarier is that I understand myself...

Reply #80

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:44:54 GMT

My favorite from Mad Magazine's Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions (probably 30+ years ago)

was a cartoon with people standing in an elevator and the sign clearly reads BASEMENT

question: Are you going up?

Answer: No, we're standing still so you must be going down.

Reply #79

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:41:17 GMT

I don't think it's merely because of people whao are bad at math. In general, people who I've discussed the lottery with, who are relatively smart individuals doing much better than I in their finances, and live in very nice homes, really aren't aware of just the basics of the odds and ends, and internal workings of the lottery. You'd be very surprised their overall outlook on the whole thing.

I pick up people at the airport who live in 2 million dollar homes, which shows they were doing some... [ More ]

Reply #78

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:40:55 GMT

Somebody please tell me I'm wrong, or am I going crazy?

Can the answer be both?

Actually, I know exactly what you're saying (which is very scary. lol)

Let's take a simple example like 1 ticket is 1 in 10 and 2 is 1 in 5..... There are still 10 numbers, so if you only play the first 5 possibilities, you aren't covering the second.

Take 10 $1 bills and put them on a table. Mark 1 of them with a red spot, turn them over and mix them up. You have 1 chance at picking the right bill.... [ More ]

Reply #77

time*treat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:29:59 GMT

Well, now your question is more clear.

The people who are bad at math may see it as 'only five more possibilities' ... but they are still wrong.

BTW, if you know any such people, I'd like to borrow $100 from them. I will then pay them $40 (2:5) of their money back. Then I will only owe them ...uh ... $5 more bucks, right

Reply #76

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:22:18 GMT

I think I found the perfect example of the misleading aspects of this whole thing.

Keeping it simple.

0-9 has 10 possibilities, right?

I purchase one ticket, let's say I pick 0......1:10

I purchase 2 tickets, let's say I pick 0, and 1.......2:5

When people see the 5, they think Ooohhh, now I only have to contend with only 5 possiblities out there. But we all know that's not true. There are still 8 numbers to contend with, which are 2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9.

Somebody please tell me I'm w... [ More ]

Reply #75

Coin Toss — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:30:42 GMT

The ratio of the number of drawings that produce no winner to the number of drawings that produe a winner or winners absolutely proves that the reduction of lottery odds is a myth.

Reply #74

time*treat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:53:42 GMT

Because there are people who can't understand the difference between absolute numbers and ratios of numbers.... even after being provided with examples.

Reply #73

RJOh — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:24:26 GMT

Who ever said this was a debate? What we have is a bunch of people posting their opinions. And you know what they say about opinions,.......everybody has one.

Reply #72

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:08:17 GMT

Well, apparently to people here, if you buy 100 tickets for a lottery that has the odds of say 200,000,000 to one, by some magical wand, the odds are dramatically decreased by 199,000,000

According to them, it's a big difference, when actuality you've only eliminated 100 possiblities, and the remaining 199,999,900 remaining possiblities magically get reduced down to about 2 million.hmmm...maybe if I buy a thousand tickets, the remaining possibilities would magically go down to a hundred.

W... [ More ]

Reply #71

JWBlue — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:48:15 GMT

How can anyone debate whether there is a better chance of winning with 100 tickets instead of 1 ticket no matter how little the difference is

Reply #70

benmas — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:58:18 GMT

YEah WOW...I'm right and KYFloyd is right but Coin Toss brings up the issue of some average folk not understanding probability concepts..it is the interpretation of probability that is so confusing to some...the numbers can be misleading (example: why is the probability of matching red powerball only 1:79 and not 1:42)..but Coin Toss and justexlporing and RJOh are right in ILLUSTRATING the fact that it is so freaking hard to make any serious improvement in chances when it comes to MEGA...so the... [ More ]

Reply #69

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:26:24 GMT

So change your settings. I only see 4 pages.

Reply #68

guesser — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:23:36 GMT

7, count 'em 7 pages of this. Wow.

Reply #67

KY Floyd — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:22:45 GMT

There's absolutely nothing misleading about it. The problem is that some people don't understand what the numbers mean.

I have no idea if anybody believes that buying 100 ticketseliminates more than 100 combinations from the losing side, butnobody has ever said that's how it works. I'll say it again, since somepeople have such a hard time understanding: Nobody has ever said that buying 100 tickets eliminates more than 100 combinations. That's simply an incorrect interpretation by those wh... [ More ]

Reply #66

KY Floyd — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:15:38 GMT

What benmas said is correct. Your chances of winning are directly proportional to the number of tickets you have, but you clearly don't know what directly proportional means.

If this were true, every $100 would reduce the odds by another 100th

You say this every single time the subject comes up, asIpointedoutin the post you responded to. That you stilltrotoutthesamemisunderstanding clearly shows that you don't understanditatall. For the 57th time: as far as I know, nobody has ever sa... [ More ]

Reply #65

RJOh — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 07:18:11 GMT

Actually with $100 worth of MegaMillions tickets, if you avoid duplications you can cover:

A. 100 of the 175,711,536 combinations that could win the jackpot.

B. 100 of the 3,819,816 combinations that could win second prize of $250,000

C. 500 of the 16,895,340 combinations that could win third prize of $10,000

D. 500 of the 367,290 combinations that could win forth prize of $150

E. 1000 of the 1,275,120 combinations that could win fifth prize of $150

Reply #64

benmas — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:49:06 GMT

and also with Coin TOSS...time to leave the math and the odds aside and play $10 max at a time in my opinion....you need luck with that many combinations in lotto...better be lucky than good..

Reply #63

justxploring — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:22:42 GMT

Let's change the subject for a minute, since this has been debated before, and the 2 sides will never agree. I'm sure everyone has heard of the show Deal or No Deal. It's a stupid show, and I'm surprised it's still on the air, but I've watched it anyway. Now it's the same ol', same ol' and it's totally boring. It's all luck..not even like Wheel of Fortune, since at least you have to know how to spell on that game! LOL Anyway, for those of you who have never seen it, there are 26 beautiful models... [ More ]

Reply #62

Coin Toss — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 05:14:22 GMT

Benmas

Both statements above can't be right.

In the former, you are saying that the $100 gives a probability of 1:1,757,115.

Since the odds start at 175,711,536, you are sayng that this $100 has covered 173,954,421 combinations, leaving 1,757,115.

The $100 doesn't do any such thing, it merely covers 100 combinations.

One, and only one combination is drawn as the potential (if anybody has it) winner.

Every doillar played covers one, and only one combination.

If you play $10... [ More ]

Reply #61

benmas — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:51:16 GMT

the odds discussed here are probability odds, or mathematically speaking..

mathematically speaking this $100 gives a probaiblity of 1:1,757,115

in practice i would call it covering all bases ($100 covers 100 bases and leaves the other 175,711,436 uncovered)...

Reply #60

time*treat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:24:23 GMT

Hmmm a jp with 1:10 odds ... o.k

1 ticket bought = 1 in 10

2 tickets bought = 2 in 10 (or 1 in 5)

3 tickest bought = 3 in 10

4 tickest bought = 4 in 10 (or 2 in 5) and so on

5 tickest bought = 5 in 10 (or 1 in 2), or 50/50 <-- but writing it that way can be confusing in this context.

it will always be total number of tickets bought / total number of combos

Reply #59

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 01:29:14 GMT

You're missing my point.

If the Jp was 1:10, and you bought one ticket, what would your odds be?

There are still 9 combos that have the chance to come out. So now it's 1 in 8 for you to win. But i'm sure you'll say something like, now you only have a 50/50 chance or something...lol

Reply #58

time*treat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 01:16:38 GMT

There's nothing misleading about it.

If there are 175,711,536 combinations, and you buy 100 tickets then it means you have 100 in 175,711,536 chances. You have bought 1 ticket for every 1,757,116 combinations.

The more tickets you buy, the higher your personal odds of winning, but there is no absolute jackpot guarantee until you've bought every combo. And there is no guarantee you won't have to share it.

Reply #57

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:55:06 GMT

If there are 175,711,536 possible combinations, buying 100 combinations improve your odd of having the winning combination to 175,711,536/100=1:1,757,115.

See folks, this is what I mean about misleading. The above shows that buying 100 tix, your odds come down from 1:175,711,536 to 1:1,175,712.

Now, again I say, in mathematical terminology this might be true, however it's misleading.

Does anyone really believe that if you buy a hundred tickets, that you've eliminated a hundred seventy f... [ More ]

Reply #56

pacattack05 — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:44:00 GMT

Coin Toss, for some reason Ky Floyd agreed with you, and then disagreed with you later on, when in fact you were in agreement with each other all along.

Something clicked in his head and read you the wrong way, when he actually agrees with you. I know it's confusing, but I can go back and show the inconsistency with what he said.

Reply #55

RJOh — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:30:28 GMT

If there are 175,711,536 possible combinations, buying 100 combinations improve your odd of having the winning combination to 175,711,536/100=1:1,757,115. Buying 100 combinations 10 times would be 1,000 combinations not 100^10=100,000,000 combinations which improve your odds to 175,711,536/1000=1:175,712 if there's no duplications.

The number of times you buy 100 tickets doesn't matter, it's the total number of tickets you buy that effect your odds of winning. Buy 100 tickets on one hundred d... [ More ]

Reply #54

Ridley — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:25:12 GMT

Coin Toss: If $100 reduced the odds by a 10 factor, or $100 by a 100 factor, what in the world woulld 13 to 30 million dollars played do?

Assuming that 30 million different numbers were played, that would make the odds of somebody winning a given drawing about 1 in 59. Far from miraculous.

It's not that every ten dollars spent improves the odds by a 10 factor, but rather every power of 10 spent.

Reply #53

Coin Toss — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:50:50 GMT

KY Floyd

On page 3 of this thread benmas said:

For MEGA the odds of winning jackpot with $1 are 1 : 175,711,536.

With $100 in one shot it becomes 1:1,757,115.

A lot of people fall for, uh, believe this.

If this were true, every $100 would reduce the odds by another 100th, not reduce the total number of combinations against you by 100, by reduce the odds in a manner of

1:175,711,536 to 1:1,757,115

and another 100 from

1:1,757, 115 divided by 100, etc...

UNTIL

Each ad... [ More ]

Reply #52

pacattack05 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:36:28 GMT

I don't remember the exact numbers or odds, but I've heard from many folks here that will say something to the effect....If you buy a hundred tickets, the odds go down from 27:35,000,000(or whatever)...to 4:12,000,000(or whatever)...things like that, which in mathematical expression might be true, however, it's misleading because after you purchase 100 tickets, there still remain 34,999,900 other combos left that have the chance of showing, yet 4:12,000,000 looks more appealing, but misleading.... [ More ]

Reply #51

pacattack05 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:29:07 GMT

I've said this a hundred times shere on the LP.

When someone throws out odds numbers, it looks better than it does. It's really misleading to the public.

If there are a million possibilities, and you buy one ticket, there are still 999,999 other possible combos still left, which have a chance to come out. But some math folks use lingo that is misleading, making those odds I mentioned above seemingly look better than it really is.

It's more about how math is expressed, than the reality.... [ More ]

Reply #50

ThatScaryChick — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:23:43 GMT

This is a discussion forum. Posts are bound to go off topic and not necissarily answer the OP question. It's not a big deal.

Reply #49

Stack47 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:58:51 GMT

I got 20 QPs and because of duplicates, I only had 15 different mega numbers and didn't check the other 100 numbers but I know that 38 was missing. That's the chance we take when we buy QPs and if somebody is thinking about buying 100 on Friday, they should consider other methods.

Reply #48

KY Floyd — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:42:50 GMT

How would there be more winners than there normallyare?You've said this on many occasions, but you've never explainedit.Please don't tell me that the theory says 1000 tickets(combinations)means your chances of winning are 2 to the 1000 times aslikely as with1 ticket, because I've told you about 30 times thatnobody says that'show it works. 10 tickets makes you 10 times as likelyto win, 1000 tickets makes you 1000 times as likely to win, and 1million tickets makes you 1 million times as likely to... [ More ]

Reply #47

KY Floyd — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:27:55 GMT

Of course we don't get to decide who answered correctly. The answeris a matter of fact, not opinion, so who answered correctly isdetermined by the factual answer. I don't think benmas was the only onewho answered correctly. I know that he was one of two (at that time)who answered correctly.

Reply #46

ThatScaryChick — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 06:04:12 GMT

I agree. I don't have a problem with quick picks. I sometimes buy them, but I could not see putting down $100 dollars on them. I like having control over what numbers I choose.

Reply #45

Stack47 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:57:56 GMT

In Raffle games they express odds as chances to win because they have multiple jackpots. If a state sells 500,000 raffle tickets and has four $1 million prizes, each ticket has 1 chance to win out of every 125,000 chances. In Mega Millions if you buy 100 tickets, you have 100 chances to win so out of every 1.75 million chances you have 1 chance. And it can be expressed as odds.

There are 3,904,701 combinations with the 56 white balls and if you bought all those combinations, the odds would 1

Reply #44

Coin Toss — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:28:25 GMT

KY Floyd

You yourself just said that there are between 13 and 30 million tickets sold for a typical MM drawing.

If this divide the odds by number of tickets played theory was valid, there would be a lot more winners than there ever actually are.

By their own statistics, MM (and PB) have 12 to 15 jackpot winners a year, out of 104 drawings.

According to these theories about 100 tickets rdeducing the odds 100 times, 1000 tickets a thousand times, etc., ad nauseam, we would see a lot

Reply #43

time*treat — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:01:36 GMT

100 tickets for 1 drawing. Play like you mean it.

... and if anyone has any shortbread cookies ...

Reply #42

ThatScaryChick — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:35:16 GMT

Whatever. I read it differently. You and benmas don't get to decide who answered what questions correctly and good for you that you think he was the only one who answered correctly. Want a cookie

Reply #41

KY Floyd — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:32:15 GMT

No, with $100 in one shot it beomes 175,711,536 minus 100, or

175,711,436.

Are you suggesting that the chances of winning MM with 100 ticketsis 175,711,436 ? Shouldn't there be some other number in there,since we're dealing with odds or probability?

Suppose the lottery offered a game where they draw a single cardfrom a normal deck. If you played the ace of spades you'd have a1 in 52 chance of winning, right? ow, suppose you played all 4 aces.Are your chances of winning 1 in 49, or... [ More ]

Reply #40

KY Floyd — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:25:01 GMT

They never said which game or if the chance of winningmeant winning something, more than they spent, or winning a hugejackpot.

Right. All they did was ask which of two choices gives them a better chance of winning.<-- period. Benmas answered correctly, and the example of playing1000 combinations in P3 explained why. If you play all 1000combinations you have a 100% chance of matching the winning number. Ifyou play 500 of the possible numbers in two drawings you'll have a 50%chance of winning... [ More ]

Reply #39

KY Floyd — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:20:13 GMT

Sure the OP got a lot of answers. Benmas (one of the two whooffered the correct answer) simply pointed out that a number of postersanswered questions that weren't asked instead of the question that wasasked. Not only didn't he do anything to prevent anyone else from answering as they choose, he didn't even suggest that they shouldn't have answered as they did. OTOH, while telling him to let others answer as they see fit, you appear to be taking issue with how he answered.

Reply #38

RJOh — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 04:03:21 GMT

According to this story: http://www.wesh.com/news/14023326/detail.html

his $600/day lottery habit had already won him $100K twice and $50K once before he won the big one. This guy was playing at a level that the average lottery player can't comprehend.

Reply #37

tntea — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:23:26 GMT

I believe what would give you the best edge is picking the numbers you are going to play with a reason behind it. I wouldn't buy 100 qps...

I use the vtrac chart and watch what is due to fall and narrow down my picks... 3/5 so far... but still working..

Reply #36

benmas — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:50:01 GMT

this guy in orlando was playing $600 a DAY on FLORIDA Lotto ..he hit for $100,000 and $50,000 along the way until he hit the big one ($13 mill for his share, shared jackpot with 3 others)

watch his interview on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBeAEa7qAbs

he said he would never play lotto again after he won...but ..guess what..HE was back the next draw dropping $1000 on lotto......

Reply #35

justxploring — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:14:29 GMT

Maybe you're right. I've only heard/seen it secondhand. I don't know for sure if someone at the market I see is buying tickets just for himself either. A person who buys 100 Lotto tickets might be buying them for an office pool. I don't personally know anyone who admits to spending that much money every week. I mentioned on another thread that, recently at a bank, we began talking about the FL Lottery and the young cust serv rep told me her friend's husband blows $100 of his paycheck every week... [ More ]

Reply #34

LuckyLilly — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:05:29 GMT

I don't even think it's the lottery toning it down. I think the people buying lottery do so their family and friends don't know how much they spend. Do you think those people dropping $100 tell their neighbors, co-workers, extended family, etc. how much they spend? I've seen quite a few people buy a whole bunch too, but I've never heard anyone I know admit to being one of those people. I bet most of them tone it down so they're not regarded as one of those people who are taxed on being stupid.... [ More ]

Reply #33

justxploring — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:58:36 GMT

I'm not so sure I agree with you about hiding the number of tickets people play. I go to the same Publix all the time and see people dropping $100 bucks (and more) on scratchers and online games. I don't talk about the lottery with my family because they think it's irresponsible to play.

You do have a point, however. The lottery might tone it down when making a press release, so they don't give the impression that they're promoting addictive behavior, although they are... [ More ]

Reply #32

justxploring — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:56:23 GMT

I am content with 7 million or 220 million.

I'll be content with a sale at the supermarket.

Not to be redundant, I agree with just about all the posts. Luck plays a key role in winning a game with such astronomical odds as MM. There are approx 302M people in the US (give or take 12-20 million illegals) So 175,711,536 (odds of winning) = more than 1/2 of every man, woman child from age 1 to 99 including people in comas. So even though 100 tickets gives you 50 more chances for an i... [ More ]

Reply #31

ThatScaryChick — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:28:53 GMT

I believe that $100 worth of tickets would have a better chance of winning over $50 worth of tickets. But in my opinion it really doesn't make a big difference when playing a lottery game like Mega Millions since the odds are so huge.

Reply #30

ThatScaryChick — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:26:03 GMT

Reply #29

Stack47 — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:40:07 GMT

I was on crap table in Reno when a guy who was probably 80 gestured five to the floorman. I thought he wanted a marker for $500 until they handed him $50,000 in chips. We both were using the same playing strategy but his bets were $500 chips and mine were $5 chips. He was a multi-millionaire that played craps 3 or 4 times a week.

Responsible gambling depends on much we can afford to lose and if $1 is your limit than only play a buck. I can comfortably afford to spend $46 on tomorrow's drawing... [ More ]

Reply #28

Stack47 — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:57:44 GMT

If I decided to blow $100 playing Mega Millions, I'd play it all on 1 draw and be done with it. However I would use a playing strategy and wouldn't buy 100 quick picks. The overall odds of winning any prize is 1 in 40 but the only way I know of guaranteeing that is by using all 46 mega balls. I've never bought 100 quick picks so I don't know if any or all random blocks of 100 quick picks include all 46 mega balls. If they don't and that missing mega ball hits, your chance of hitting the jackpot... [ More ]

Reply #27

LuckyLilly — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:31:22 GMT

Few admitted to spending more than $10. Playing the lottery is seen by many as wasteful or desperate or downright foolish. Ever heard it referred to as a tax on stupid people? Many people are embarrassed to admit to how much they spend.

I always carry my large wallet whenever I go to buy tickets so my neighbors can't see the playslip. I don't want them to know I'm buying tickets a couple times a week, and it's not just so they won't know when I win either. Many people look down on people who... [ More ]

Reply #26

MissNYC — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:56:54 GMT

I really don't think buying $100 worth of tickets is responsible. You only need $1 to win, and that's exactly how much I will be spending for tomorrow. If you ever read the stories of lotto winners, few spent more than $10.

Reply #25

RJOh — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 05:23:37 GMT

possible combos of 5 with 56 numbers and 1 of 46 bonus numbers are 175711536

MATCH ODDS

5/5+B 1 : 175711536

5/5 1 : 3904701

4/5+B 1 : 689065

4/5 1 : 15313

3/5+B 1 : 13781

3/5 1 : 306

2/5+B 1 : 844

1/5+B 1 : 141

0/5+B 1 : 75

___________________________________________________________________________

overall odds are 1 : 39.8

Odds are $50 worth of tickets will win something, maybe a 1+1 for $3

Reply #24

benmas — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:57:10 GMT

That is true Coin Toss...but the way the lotteries advertise it (PA example for match 6 where you have 3 lines for $2 they metion the odds being 1:4,661,272.3 which is dividing THE OVERALL by 3)

anyway the answer is still is $100 in one shot whether you divide or subtract...

Reply #23

Coin Toss — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 04:51:38 GMT

benmas

For MEGA the odds of winning jackpot with $1 are 1 : 175,711,536.

With $100 in one shot it becomes 1:1,757,115.

No, with $100 in one shot it beomes 175,711,536 minus 100, or

175,711,436.

No mater how many dollars are played, each dollar can play one set of numbers and only one set of numbers. There's no power of 10 or cutting the odds in half or dividing the 175, 711, 536 by how many lines are played, only one set of numbers is drawn, each line of numbers reduces the 1,... [ More ]

Reply #22

RJOh — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:41:42 GMT

Before BigGame became MegaMillions and came to Ohio, I participated in a $500 pool and the pool didn't win enough to pay for the gas to drive to Michigan to buy the tickets. Several months ago I bought $20 worth of tickets locally and matched 4+0 for $150. If you're lucky, one ticket is all it takes but when the jackpots are over $100K, I usually spend $20.

Reply #21

benmas — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:37:55 GMT

For MEGA the odds of winning jackpot with $1 are 1 : 175,711,536.

With $100 in one shot it becomes 1:1,757,115.

With $50 it becomes 1:3,514,231 but you have this opportunity twice with your $100 budget.

The odds are better with $100 in one shot but with $50 you have two shots but each one of them is twice as hard compared with the $100 at once.

The FINAL ANSWER is $100 at ONCE...there is no doubt about it...

Reply #20

JWBlue — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:06:44 GMT

Here is clarification of my question. The question is for Mega Millions.

Not factoring in the amount of the jackpot, which method has a better chance of winning. I am content with 7 million or 220 million.

Reply #19

Stack47 — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:10:00 GMT

Statistically (odds) $100 in one shot is better than $50 in two draws..no matter what the game.

You can win $220 million playing Mega Millions on Tuesday by buying only one ticket. Buying 100 tickets give you more chances to win, but it won't change the jackpot so you are decreasing the payoff odds from $220 million to $1 to $22 million to $1. Looking at from the reverse side since only one of your 100 tickets can win the jackpot, 99 of them have a zero chance of winning it. In ever Mega Mil... [ More ]

Reply #18

Stack47 — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:31 GMT

If you buy 100 tickets and none are duplicates, each ticket would have one chance of matching the winning numbers. If you decide to buy 50 tickets for the first drawing, don't win, and play the same 50 tickets in the next drawing, each ticket would have two chances.