POLL - On The Whole Do The Lotteries Provide Truly Random Numbers?

Reply #104

Hermanus104 — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 20:32:27 GMT

Virginia ball drawings from 1994 (before day drawings were conducted):

Sat. 04/23/1994 - 137

Mon. 05/23/1994 - 137

Tue. 05/24/1994 - 137

Tue. 08/02/1994 - 137

Mon. 11/28/1994 - 137

Also:

Mon. 11/03/2003 night - 618

Tue. 11/11/2003 night - 618

Wed. 11/19/2003 day - 618

Tue. 11/25/2003 day - 618

Same number won straight four times in one month in a state with ball drawings. Lots of lucky Virginians born on June 18th.

Reply #103

garyo1954 — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 19:55:42 GMT

Random events require some conditons apply.

For example, one is not likely to be struck by lightning standing in their yard on a cloudless day. That would certainly be a random event.

Reply #102

CutlassBob — Sun, 03 Oct 2010 18:26:30 GMT

I say yes, and randomly normally not the one's i've picked.

Reply #101

Spot-UK — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 14:12:23 GMT

I have no reason to doubt that the numbers drawn are not random, but my analysis of past results show that high, odd numbers in the 30s tend to appear more often than others in the UK 6/49 and 5/39 draws.

Reply #100

rdgrnr — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 00:20:01 GMT

With sufficient time given to vote, it appears that Lottery Post Members by a 2 to 1 margin think the lotteries do not provide truly random numbers.

Thank you for your votes and comments.

Reply #99

wheeltowin — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 14:52:13 GMT

Hmmm, the blue pill or the red one? How far down the rabbithole to go. I say other because what we understand as random today will likely be solved by some equation in the future. Human beings trying to explain random things, (tornados, floods, death) have come up with some pretty good stories like....oh say religion , when in actuality weather patterns and hygiene turned out to be the culprits. What's cool about humans is that at least we question our world and everything in it. Do I think give... [ More ]

Reply #98

CarHauler — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 09:19:05 GMT

I believe that they CAN fix the computerized lottery. Here are a few examples:

The most simple is that the machines can check all of the number combinations played for that game, and exclude the winners in the case Mega Millions for instance. Well, what about Cash 3 games? The computers would have to pick a winner, but it could pick the number combination that had the fewest numbers that played. That way they could cut back on the amount of winners, and the payout.

Here is another theory.

Reply #97

butch2030 — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 16:18:40 GMT

He is a preveious post I did, just in case you missed it.

I am sorry that they are ending the TN Pick 5 on 10/01/10. But in case anyone missed my last post on the TN Pick 5, here is the file you look at.

You can view / download combos patterns found in the Tennessee Pick 5 game at the following: http://www.box.net/shared/cp89q4j79x

Please advise of any questions and/or problems.

Good Luck Best Wishes To All on the last remaining drawings.

Reply #96

jimmy4164 — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 16:04:33 GMT

Butch2030,

Because of the potential for fraud, I don't trust computerized results selection and believe all draws should be live, witnessed, and televised, physically observable mechanical processes. However, the observation of results you made above do not prove that the Lottos in question are not as Random as can be expected. To see why, consider the following:

The dates are important: On 2009-11-13, the odds of 01-04-07-14-39 being drawn on 2006-09-21 were 1.0, a CERTAINTY, because it h... [ More ]

Reply #95

rdgrnr — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 15:44:34 GMT

Thanks butch, that makes me feel a little better about continuing to play my same Cash5 numbers in VA which came in already a couple years ago (the drawing after my 48 play multidraw expired).

If your assertion that the numbers aren't random is true, it could well be to the advantage of people who regularly play a line of their lucky numbers in addition to their workout numbers or QP's.

Reply #94

butch2030 — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 13:04:08 GMT

My thought on this is that for a game to be truly Random it has to be done in a vacuum where there are no man-made forces acting on it. If it is man made, it will not be truly Random. Neither on a Lotto Machine nor on a Lotto Computer. Odds on getting 5 out of 5 numbers on a 5/39 game are 1 in 575,757. View these results. Two seperate games with results with less than 2,400 drawings on ea. Remember the odds of getting all 5 numbers = 1 in 575,757. Anyone want to calculate what the odds are of th... [ More ]

Reply #93

jarasan — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:34:42 GMT

I am specifcally talking about Maryland Keno played in bars, stores etc. What am describing is the manner in which the game outcome is determined and run NOW in the present.

It is naive to believe what you wrote here:

They are government commissions so it's reasonable to believe that both practically and politically, they will not base the draw machine choice on wagers placed. The draws are every 5 minutes and hence the wagers can be placed virtually immediately before a draw leaving lit... [ More ]

Reply #92

KY Floyd — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:53:06 GMT

You may buy them at the same time, but you're buying individual tickets, and each ticket has exactly the same chance as any other ticket. If the winning numbers were 1,2,3,10,11,12 you'd win two 3/6 prizes regardless of which pair of tickets you had gotten. If the winning numbers were 1,2,3,15,16,17 you'd win 2 prizes with the first pair of tickets, but only 1 prize with the second pair. You may cover a wider range of possible combinations with one pair vs the other pair, but the overall odds re... [ More ]

Reply #91

Stack47 — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:48:53 GMT

Yep, it's just like saying even though I know I'm getting cheated, I'll keep on playing .

Reply #90

Tenaj — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:24:59 GMT

I voted NO - there is a method to the madness.

Reply #89

jimmy4164 — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:12:58 GMT

Unless the techies at the lotteries are dummies, which I seriously doubt, I think it's very unrealistic to believe an exploit of a rigged Draw is [reasonably] possible in a time critical situation. JMHO.

Reply #88

jwhou — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 03:54:21 GMT

I'm talking about the Keno run by lottery commissions not the networked VLT's. The specific one I'm considering spans three commissions and the draw is done centrally, audited and then broadcasted to the Casinos, only one of the three jurisdictions require that Keno be limited to the Casino, the other two allow Keno to be played where-ever draw lotteries are played i.e.: convenience stores. They are government commissions so it's reasonable to believe that both practically and politically, they... [ More ]

Reply #87

jarasan — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 02:01:24 GMT

That is the problem...........they determine the outcome of the payout as history the game has been played already before the wagers are closed. It is not just a couple of RNGers' it is a lot more than a couple, I think it is close to 20 machines they can select from as the payout once the wagers are closed. IT IS RIGGED YOU CAN T BEAT IT.

You can try but they'll clean your pockets every way till Sunday and beyond..................... they know the outcome.

Reply #86

jwhou — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 01:31:02 GMT

The way I see it is that they probably do the RNG Keno's for convenience and though it is vulnerable to abuse, there would be severe consequences if they were caught doing so hence there's unlikely to be a conspiracy at least not a organization wide one, individual techies probably have their own personal exploits that are probably easy to catch due to their insider status and hence they tend to be the suspects should there be any abnormalities. However, RNG's present interesting opportunities f... [ More ]

Reply #85

jarasan — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 00:53:02 GMT

I think the computerized KENO is the most egregious violator of human decency. The statists that steal money from us in taxes........ also do it with RNG KENO, just another way to get tax monies. From what I understand the draws are done 5 games back with multiple RNG machines when the the next game is wagered they use the RNG'er computer (machine) RNG draw that would pay the least out for the wagers for the current game and that is the one (game shown and paid on) they show in the present being... [ More ]

Reply #84

JonnyBgood07 — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 23:49:05 GMT

Here's a snipet of random in its cleanest form...look at the first position of Michigan eve 3 and it's relation to the 0094 drawn midday4.Notice the numerical regression that stemmed from the mid4 draw 0094

Thu, Aug 26, 2010 3-7-0

Wed, Aug 25, 2010 3-6-3 7-9-8 5-7-9-3 8-4-9-9

Tue, Aug 24, 2010 7-6-9 0-7-8 8-8-7-6 1-9-0-9

Mon, Aug 23, 2010 3-8-6 0-1-9 3-5-6-8 6-5-5-2

Sun, Aug 22, 2010 4-3-5 8-6-2 4-2-9-1 2-2-7-9

Sat, Aug 21, 2010 3-4-2 4-5-5 2-5-6-6 9-5-0-9

Fri,... [ More ]

Reply #83

jwhou — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 23:27:37 GMT

The lottery commission here runs RNG Keno draws every 5 minutes. It's just prime for someone with a lot of computers and a lot of storage to database several RC-4 runs and see if the sequences are matching any of them. You can probably assume it's just the Microsoft CryptGenRandom() call with a straight modulus add 1 operation. Might take months before one matches your pre-generated runs but then you can have your computers SMS you with some likely numbers to come up in the next couple of hours... [ More ]

Reply #82

eddessaknight — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 22:28:01 GMT

Jarason, et al-

You have it right, I have a trusted friend who is a tech supervisor for IGT in Vegas who woukld confirm all you say about computerized Video Keno machines, they can program them accordindingly. He says it's similar to 23 old telephone technology of simply pressing re-dial; phone memory recalls past numbers PRESTO ! Trick is when you win change machines.

The slower Live Keno Parlor game with live balls is surer (unless balls are defective)

Bonn Chance,

EddessaKni... [ More ]

Reply #81

jwhou — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:24:58 GMT

With that Western Canada PayDay game where you pick one line and it picks 14 lines for you. It would be a big advantage to get duplicates of the winning number but on separate tickets. If there's 5 top prize winners, instead of the grand a week for life (real life not a defined number of years) or $675,000 cash, they would split 2.7 million between the 5 tickets, unfortunately the odds of that happening with purely QP's would be (1/1,353,275)^5, it would be far easier and more lucrative to just... [ More ]

Reply #80

truecritic — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:15:00 GMT

One advantage...

If you get a couple of MM QPs with 5 numbers duplicated and they are the correct 5 numbers, then you win twice.

Reply #79

jwhou — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 03:27:57 GMT

The interesting thing is that's not true in Canada. With the Canadian Lotto Max, even if you select your own numbers on a playslip, you get one line with your selection and two quick pick selections, you have no choice, you always get the quick picks. They do the multiple lines to give the desired prize structure. People complained about the prize structure produced by American style pick 5 + bonus ball draws because it rendered the subsidiary prizes too small and too difficult to win. They have... [ More ]

Reply #78

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:10:47 GMT

Chuck2

Many many times I have bought 2 sets for a pick-6 game and only had 8 different numbers

of the 12 picked. This should answer the question of is the game fair and is a QP better

than a SP.

RL

Reply #77

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:05:26 GMT

jwhou

Thumbs UP.....

RL

Reply #76

Chuck2 — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:33:39 GMT

I asked on another post about how come duplicate numbers show up on the last nr, the Power Ball and MEGA Ball? We seem to get more then we should when we buy four numbers on one ticket, and end up with same PB/MB nr. Am not discussing all numbers, just the Power/Mega Ball . The odds of the dulpictes are rather large, more so when we buy twice a week, and it happens at least three to four times a month, or about 8 buys per month and at least two of them,sometimes more have duplicates.

Email... [ More ]

Reply #75

JonnyBgood07 — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:18:14 GMT

On The Whole Do The Lotteries Provide Truly Random Numbers?

Of course!

Why do alot of people insisit that since folks can pedict numbers then random ceases to exist or has lesser value.?

EXCERPT FROM jOKER 17::

No matter what the officials do to throw the flow of numbers into a wild and seemingly unpredictable frame of reasoning, one thing will always overcome it. That is knowledge

you hit the nail on the head there joker

Reply #74

RJOh — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 20:53:54 GMT

Sounds like you want the terminals to have programs that allow you to select parameters for the combinations it generates for you. If that was an option then the combinations generated wouldn't be random. You are allowed to generate combinations offline any way you want and fill out a play slip with them which allows you to pick combinations with any parameters you chose, when select to have the terminal pick them you give up those options.

Reply #73

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:23:48 GMT

In Texas, they shutdown the Statewide network between midnight and 6 am every night in order to be able to do things like this. You can't even cash in a ten dollar scratcher after midnight unless you find a retailer willing to take a risk and validate in the morning. Really puts a damper on a winning streak.

Reply #72

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:11:04 GMT

If I was to sue, I would argue that Buying a ticket with a certain number of lines was buying a certain number of chances at various prizes. If the numbers that the machine chose were identical or overlapped then I would not have received as many chances for my money as I would've had they be different.

For example, imagine a pick 6 game where the lowest value subsidiary prize was awarded for a 3/6 match. The two tickets 1-2-3-4-5-6- and 1-2-3-4-5-7 would represent 30 chances at that lowest v... [ More ]

Reply #71

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:56:09 GMT

Some people will be buying because they believe that it isn't random and they know how to predict the next set of numbers and hence it can be unfair to their advantage.

Some people will be buying because they think that it is random and that it is therefore fair.

Some people will be buying because they think that it isn't random but it isn't systematically predictable and hence is fair.

Some people will buy it for the fun of it.

Reply #70

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:44:03 GMT

Yes, this is why I like what Texas does with their Scratchoff's. They publish the number of claimed prizes as well as the number of prizes printed in each category and the total number of prizes printed updated on a daily basis. A game that may have been initially 1 in a million for the top prize will often be 1 in 650,000 before another top prize is claimed.

Now, I would like to be able to get the addresses of the stores where the winning tickets were purchased, that should define the deliv... [ More ]

Reply #69

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:25:22 GMT

An RNG is a number sequence. The very earliest versions were just counters. If you remember the 70's, you may have remembered early handheld electronic games where a number would be flashing very quickly till you hit a button and then it would freeze on the result, you saw this in handheld dice games and Blackjack games. There the RNG there is simply counting.

A common RNG sequence is to take the seed, multiply it by a very large number and then add a very large number to it, this is called t... [ More ]

Reply #68

tiggs95 — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:14:59 GMT

Right now the poll shows 58.3% don't believe the numbers are true and fair..These people should not be playing the lottery if they don't trust it..Buy your ticket win or lose and stop complaining about it..Find some other form of gambling if you need to gamble..

Reply #67

jwhou — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:53:46 GMT

Very unsatisfactory. Physical security, background checks, auditing and monitoring, that's a given. But what are the RNG algorithms? Are they Merseille Twisters. It looks like a Windows platform so is it the CryptGenRandom libraries? Microsoft has a history of using lawyers to define their code as satisfactory instead of actually writing good code, saying that the software has been verified means very little, who verified it? How was it verified? All Quasirandom algorithms are far more distribut... [ More ]

Reply #66

cajunken — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 03:04:20 GMT

no.

Reply #65

konane — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:02:38 GMT

About the only factor that influences ball drop draws is 'number affiinities' which is an anomaly even the best of 'em haven't been able to figure out why it happens. Number affinities is when certain numbers seem to be drawn with other numbers more frequently for a given time.

Reply #64

bobby623 — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 14:16:52 GMT

I think it would be interesting if a member of LP would explain to the general audience HOW random number generators function.

Personally, I don't think the RNG in the terminal where I buy my QPs scans the total number of combinations available for the

game I'm playing.

The clerk punches the buttons that tell the machine to generate 5 QPs, for example, and Presto, the machine spits out a

ticket with 5 lines.

I've stood behind folks buying 100 QPs. It took some time for the mach... [ More ]

Reply #63

Hermanus104 — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:04:59 GMT

Whether you use a computer or balls to generate numbers, in a set of truly random numbers there are going to be anomalies like these. Virginia uses balls, and they drew 137 five times in just under 200 drawings in 1994, including two days in a row:

04-23-1994 (Sat): 137

05-23-1994 (Mon): 137

05-24-1994 (Tue): 137

08-02-1994 (Tue): 137

11-28-1994 (Mon): 137

In addition, Virginia once produced the same number 4 times in the same month:

11-03-03 (Mon, eve): 618

11-11

Reply #62

Dollar419 — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 03:34:52 GMT

I just contacted the headquarters @ CA Lottery and ask the same question and receive, belive it or not an letter with a weird explaination how they randomly pick the numbers; all I know is CA Lottery is not very good in rotating numbers fast enough--it's driving me to sheer frustration playing the same numbers over and over and not get one or bearly two numbers. However, I know the minute I stop, that is when they will hit

Reply #61

truecritic — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:42:25 GMT

I started thinking about what I wrote for scratch-offs. It seems to me that the lotteries are misstating the full odds of winning a scratch-off grand prize.

If the lottery says the scratch-off grand prize odds are 1 out of a million, isn't that false?

If they issued a million of those tickets, that is correct. But then you have sort of a different lottery to play. That grand prize is only sitting in one store. If there are 10,000 lottery stores, don't you have to add in an additional 10,00... [ More ]

Reply #60

truecritic — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:57:51 GMT

You know I hardly ever disagree with your analysis?

When I said the terminal only had 500,000 possibles, I really meant, none of the terminals have 100% of all the numbers available. The reason might be irrelevant but let's say it is because they couldn't access all possible combinations and produce a ticket in a reasonable time.

So, you think, it is OK to buy a ticket, even though the number has not yet been drawn that does not stand a chance to win - once the number is chosen? We alread... [ More ]

Reply #59

KY Floyd — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 16:09:32 GMT

Imagine the winning numbers were drawn before sales started and kept secret until sales ended, and the RNG only chose from 20% of the possible combinations. If the winning numbers weren't in that 20% you'd have a valid argument that the ticket was invalid and had no chance of winning. OTOH, if the winning numbers were in that 20% you'd be 5 times as likely to win. As a practical matter we could expect the winning numbers to be in that 20% 1 out of 5 times, and being 5 times as likely to win in 2... [ More ]

Reply #58

Delta Draw — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:14:23 GMT

Despite our recent differences in opinion I agree with how you look at the game above. It s healthy. In fact your optimism is a breath of fresh air for any systems player. I wish you well, in fact, I wish you wealth! No need to prove to me what you are doing will work, I believe it will as much as you anticipate it will regardless of any outlying circumstances. Chaos is irrelevant.

Best to you,

DD

Reply #57

jimmy4164 — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 05:42:09 GMT

The data is public information.

Statistical software is available.

Probability Statistics textbooks abound!

Be my guest...

Reply #56

bobby623 — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:56:00 GMT

Questionable in the sense that I might not have followed your instructions correctly, or that my math may not be correct, or I wouldn't be able to convince anyone that my opinion is the correct one.

Reply #55

jimmy4164 — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:46:32 GMT

bobby523,

Looks like we agree that the lotteries are 'sufficiently random.'

However, just what, specifically, is the questionable conclusion you refer to above?

--Jimmy

Reply #54

bobby623 — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:07:14 GMT

jimmy4164

Thanks for the thread.

Seems like an awful lot of work to come up with a questionable conclusion.

Not sure what I would do with any information suggesting a game, which is still in play, is biased one way or another.

If elected officials in Tennessee couldn't get rid of computer drawings, I doubt I could convince Texas lottery folks that

their games are not fair, if I thought I had information justifying the charge.

Personally, I believe the Texas lotteries are 'su... [ More ]

Reply #53

rdgrnr — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 08:10:04 GMT

OK psyko, but the last time my ship came in I was at the depot waitin for a train.

Reply #52

truecritic — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 06:40:31 GMT

Yes, of course...you can sue anyone. I think it is a valid assumption that if you buy a QP, that you have a valid ticket for the drawing. If the matrix at the terminal where you bought your ticket only went up to 500,000 combinations and the winning number wasn't there, the whole integrity of the lottery is at stake.

I would think a class action lawsuit would be in order and the judgment, even if only for the cost of the ticket, would be quite hefty.

Reply #51

KY Floyd — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 06:20:05 GMT

You can sue anybody for any thing. Fill out the papers and pay the fee, and the process starts.

The real question is will the suit be dismissed quickly or will it continue? What *exactly* would you sue the lottery for? Not being able to generate every possible combination isn't a cause of action in itself. OTOH, if the lottery claims that the RNG generates random combinations and it doesn't* there might be a cause of action. If they know it can't generate them all they may be committing fraud... [ More ]

Reply #50

psykomo — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 05:39:03 GMT

rdgrnr:

I voted (LET U Know $JACKPOT$!!!!!!}

BIG^BOAT^in^D^ GULF of MEXICO $JACKPOT$!!!!!!}

named LOTTERY POST .......................$!!!!!!}

a Corvette will pick U^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@@@@@@@@ DOCK (lp

Reply #49

truecritic — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 23:01:34 GMT

Man has come this far with balls - let it continue

Reply #48

jarasan — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:51:49 GMT

Random Number Generator = Rigged Number Generator(S)

With computers they can analyze all wagers and payout however they please. They do this with computerized Keno. They can do what ever they want with outcomes.

YOU MUST PLAY GAMES WITH BALLS! BALLS ARE FREE OF SOFTWARE! ALL BALLS FOREVER

Reply #47

jimmy4164 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 22:01:55 GMT

bobby623,

Further, I don't know how knowing 'odds' of this or that happening can be used to determine whether the drawings

are random, or not.

Here's how: If you analyse a large body of Draws using Probability and Statistics, and the resulting statistics and summary numbers that you observe conform to widely known and accepted measures of a Random Distribution, you can be reasonably sure that the data is random.

See my Thread here for further discussion and demonstration of this to... [ More ]

Reply #46

jimmy4164 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 21:00:36 GMT

Keystone,

If you check out my Thread about the PA Daily Number (Evening), I don't think you'll continue to have any concerns about the Randomness of the numbers you posted. They look just fine to me! There lots of PA numbers here that will surprise you.

Go here:

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1736396

Sorry it's not clickable; didn't figure that out yet.

--Jimmy

Reply #45

Keystone — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:55:00 GMT

My opinion is that some states have draws that are more random than others....................and some states have stats that are more crooked than others.

Here are some stats that do not appear random from Pennsylvania's midday computer draw:

06/06/2010 1 0 6 Payout

03/15/2009 1 0 6 Payout

02/19/2009 1 0 6 Payout

02/10/2009 1 0 6 Payout

01/28/2009 1 0 6 Payout

09/05/2008 1 0 6 Payout

02/18/2010 1 6 2 Payout

11/11/2009 1 6 2 Payout

02/24/2009... [ More ]

Reply #44

RJOh — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:32:30 GMT

A 960906170511294750

A 960913010304093047

A 960920060524313448

A 960927080825353748

A 961004010816183638

A 961011220223374050

A 961018180918242646

A 961025092328303543

A 961101170210283949

A 961108171123253546

Using the above format to save a sequential file with all 1379 dates and numbers for the MegaMillions and BigGames since 09/06/1996 uses only 33K of space on the hard drive. Data files don't take up a lot of room.

Reply #43

lotterybraker — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:10:03 GMT

well..for all of you people that think the lottery isnt RANDOM..let me tell you what you do..gather up all your friends and family and take all your systems and sit down at the time of the drawing and try to hit the pic 3..

IF you get the exact order STRAIGHT you got lucky and I will bet you , you cant do it again..

IF, I had to wager a bet..I would bet that you and your family, and all your friends will miss because you have no idea what is coming out at a specific time ie, the next draw.... [ More ]

Reply #42

bobby623 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 17:04:46 GMT

The Texas lottery website has a feature where any Pick 5 combination ready for play can be compared to all prior drawings where

the winning combination has 2 or more hits.

I don't know exactly what this has to do with the the topic at hand - random drawings.

It just demonstrates that players don't have to use up computer space by downloading entire drawings results.

Of course, folks who are looking for specific whole or partial sequences may need the files for whatever special

ana... [ More ]

Reply #41

billyloco — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:09:15 GMT

About 7 yrs ago when I was really into the Lottery, I recorded all

cash 3 drawings for about 3 yrs in Georgia...I actually hit a certain set

3 times in a 7 day period...I wish I could remember that set now....

but that was a heart attack, a severe bout with pneumonia,

a partial amputation of my right foot, and discovering I was a

MUCH better sports bettor than a Lottery player.......ago.

Reply #40

jimmy4164 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:59:11 GMT

RJOh,

If you follow the Thread at

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1736396

through to its completion, you may reconsider your last paragraph above.

--Jimmy

Reply #39

RJOh — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:33:59 GMT

jimmy4164

It really isn't surprising that you can get weary looking for previous winners by randomly typing in sets, is it?

I don't do it that way. My program can search any file for a match with lines from another file or itself. It will do it continuously until every line have been checked and show all the matches at the end of the routine or stop when ever a match of the size I'm searching for is found.

Are you saying, then, that employing betting strategies that increase the numbe... [ More ]

Reply #38

jimmy4164 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:06:22 GMT

MzDuffleBagLady,

The video showed that they have all the trappings of security and assured RANDOMNESS. However, as a programmer, I was disappointed that they did not address in any way the issue of just what sort of RNGs (codewise) they're using, and more importantly, they didn't even give a hint as to how they seed the process. Having multiple computers and choosing one randomly at each session doesn't tell me anything. All of their computers could be seeded identically! It may very well... [ More ]

Reply #37

jimmy4164 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 07:32:00 GMT

...which helps to make my point with even bigger numbers.

You can multiply all the thousands of years by a factor of 7/6

Reply #36

rdgrnr — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 02:19:36 GMT

They jest ain't no accountin fer Kintucky, Hermanus.

Did you ever hear that song There Is No Arizona by Jamie O'Neal?

Well, I'm writin a new one called There Shouldn't Oughta Be No Kintucky

Reply #35

Hermanus104 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 01:53:57 GMT

I think you are forgetting to take into account that Texas does not do Sunday drawings.

Reply #34

Hermanus104 — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 01:52:13 GMT

I'm not trying to come to the defense of computerized drawings, but things like that do happen on occasion. If you do 10,000 drawings or so from a lotto machine, it's likely something strange is going to happen at some point. Here are some interesting things I've noticed from states that do ball drawings:

Virginia: 03-13-10 day: 930 / 03-14-10 day: 939 / 03-15-10 day: 934.

Texas: 07-15-10 day: 104 / 07-17-10 day: 105 / 07-19-10 nite: 103.

And perhaps the most amazing of all: Kentucky... [ More ]

Reply #33

jimmy4164 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 23:54:19 GMT

RJOh,

Are you saying, then, that employing betting strategies that increase the number of hits for the smaller prizes will CONSEQUENTLY increase your chances of Hitting the Jackpot?

If so, how?

--Jimmy

Reply #32

jimmy4164 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 23:42:56 GMT

RJOh,

If you divide 435,897 by 365, you'll know the minimum # of years it will take for Texas to draw all the combinations! Given that you've found repeats already, which was/is possible, but only expected rarely, it will even take longer than that! It really isn't surprising that you can get weary looking for previous winners by randomly typing in sets, is it?

Mankind might be forced to move to another planet before all the combinations of a (6,49) Lotto are drawn!

On 2nd thought, we... [ More ]

Reply #31

RJOh — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:59:45 GMT

I have file of all the drawings for Ohio Buckeye5 (5/37) which was replaced by Rolling Cash5 (5/39). Both games used ping pong balls and air in their drawings In Buckeye5 2723 drawings there were 5 combinations that repeated, I am sure if you could compare all of Texas Cash5 drawings with each other you would find the same thing has happened.

Reply #30

RJOh — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:26:50 GMT

How about we try to predict one event out of 10? Or 20? or even 30? Will that work? Can we find an algorithym that will, with certainty, predict one out of 30? If you have truely deep pockets you can go as high as one out of 100.

I firmly believe such a scenario is possible.

You aren't the only one to believe such a scenario is possible, the odds of producing a line that pays when playing the MM or PB are 1:40 and 1:35. Since there are 4,405,086 to 5,560,464 combinations that will win s... [ More ]

Reply #29

bobby623 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:04:24 GMT

I believe the winning numbers for the Texas pick 5 game are generated randomly with ball machines within the confines of the 5 of 37 matrix, or box.

There are 435,897 possible 5-digit combinations, beginning with 1.2.3.4.5 and ending 33.34.35.36.37.

Cash 5 is a daily game. There have been hundreds of drawings since 1995.

Yet, anytime I've run a check to see if a combination I want to play has come up in a prior drawing, the answer is 'no.'

I'm sure that have been some repeats, but I... [ More ]

Reply #28

GASMETERGUY — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 18:06:02 GMT

Let's address that quantum mechanics things first.

Chaos reins on the quantum level. On that point all the physicists agree. Yet out of all that randomness the material world we see, touch, smell, and taste everyday emerges. Our visible world is extremely static with only a few exceptions. How did that happen? How does the world go from total chaos to total order? No one knows the answer to that question at this point in time. If they have, they have yet to write a book on the subject.

So... [ More ]

Reply #27

GASMETERGUY — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 17:39:22 GMT

Random simply means that by studying past results you can not with certainty predict the next event. I think the lottery meets that requirement

I totally agree. There is no way to predict the next event with any degree of certainty.

How about we try to predict one event out of 10? Or 20? or even 30? Will that work? Can we find an algorithym that will, with certainty, predict one out of 30? If you have truely deep pockets you can go as high as one out of 100.

I firmly believe such

Reply #26

Coin Toss — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:58:42 GMT

If there was no randomness the American League would have never went to the DH

Reply #25

RJOh — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:39:07 GMT

If they weren't, someone would have come up with a way to regularly beat their odds of winning which assumes the numbers are random. Players are always analyzing past drawings results trying to come up with an edge so a lack or randomness were be quickly noticed and exploited. Anyone consistently beating the odds would probably be investigated by the lotteries also.

Reply #24

bobby623 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 16:15:42 GMT

Interesting question!

I keep all of my lottery tickets for tax purposes.

I've checked and I have tickets having every possible number in the lottery games I play.

I have to conclude that the RNG in the terminal where I buy my tickets is fully functional.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think to win a case, one has to prove wrong doing to the satisfaction of a judge or jury.

I don't know how I could prove that a specific lottery terminal's RNG isn't working properly.

Another question is... [ More ]

Reply #23

truecritic — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:28:58 GMT

The main question is will the combination generated by the random number generator in the lottery terminal where I buy quick picks will match the winning combination put out by the lottery

Interesting point...

Slightly off topic but an interesting idea. Could you sue the lotteries if each terminal was not capable of spitting out every single possible combination on a QP? That idea has floated around here often.

Let's say you go to buy a MM ticket and the terminal is only capable of gene... [ More ]

Reply #22

bobby623 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:18:35 GMT

I like the 'sufficiently random' theory.

But, this is basically a 'circular argument' with no final answer.

We believe what we believe.

My belief is that the ball machines are sufficiently random.

Now computer drawings are something else. I don't think lottery officials would intentionally manipulate drawings results,

but who knows. Anything is possible when drawings are conducted in secret.

The main question is will the combination generated by the random number generator in t... [ More ]

Reply #21

Jack-C — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:16:15 GMT

Reply #20

truecritic — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 15:11:24 GMT

They are as random as possible with the ball drawings. The lotteries don't have to cheat. They are not pulling some stuff as is commonly seen in various threads.

For Pick 3s and Pick 4s, they do not manipulate doubles (TN might have been the exception). They do not manipulate triples. They do not manipulate quads.

Question was, if they are cheating, why play? Because even if they did cheat, someone can still win. Speaking of horse races, there were rumors about certain races being fixed.... [ More ]

Reply #19

jarasan — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:07:54 GMT

No, wholly.

Reply #18

Todd — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:52:00 GMT

They say it was a mistake, and they were caught -- after more than 3 weeks of no doubles.

Reply #17

ttech10 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:51:27 GMT

I'm a little questionable about computerized drawings, not completely sure about their randomness (I remember reading about that switch and also how auditors weren't going to investigate why certain errors occurred).

When it comes to ball drawings yea, I definitely think they're random. Since every ball is weighed to be the exact same weight and measured to be the same size there's nothing but randomness.

Reply #16

rcbbuckeye — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:39:00 GMT

I don't live in TN, but I still have a hard time believing that they programmed the computers purposely to take out doubles. Why do such a foolish thing knowing eventually they would be caught.

On a side note, some time ago I was using LP's RNG to come up with about 20 or so pick 3 numbers just to compare with the draws in TX. And occasionally I would get two numbers that were the same on the RNG. I asked Todd about that, expecting that the numbers should be all different each time I ran some... [ More ]

Reply #15

rcbbuckeye — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:29:48 GMT

Well said.

I've always felt that if a person thinks the lotteries cheat, why bother playing?

In my opinion, lotteries (even the ones with RNG) know that they need public trust to survive. Once that trust is gone, so are the lotteries. So they don't cheat, and don't really have to.

Reply #14

rcbbuckeye — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:23:44 GMT

Well, rdgrnr, they have to figure out how to pipe in sunshine first. LOL.

Reply #13

Longarm — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 09:36:47 GMT

Reading over what was written, sufficient randomness and perfection are ideas that, to me, get toward an answer to your question.

A perfect lottery would be random. We don't have perfect cars, or perfect computers, or perfect lotteries. I would view true randomness as a form of perfection, which is unattainable.

In spite of the lack of perfection, I still like ball machines. Even if we assume that they're not more random, they can't as easily be misprogrammed, and malfunctions are more lik... [ More ]

Reply #12

rdgrnr — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 09:29:52 GMT

I agree with your contention about the states not having much incentive to cheat because they're already guaranteed to be the winner over time and I don't want to make this thread about cheating.

But we also can't leave out the fact that Tennessee was caught with a switch on their computers which would rule out the possibility of doubles being drawn.

Reply #11

rdgrnr — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 09:19:46 GMT

There's some great answers and opinions coming out. This is getting interesting.

Jap69 had me convinced they're random then Jack-C brought up sufficiently random , then Longarm introduced Quantum Mechanics which says they can't be random if we manipulate them. All the theories make sense to me which makes me wonder if I'm just wishy washy about the whole dadgum shootin match.

Reply #10

Longarm — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 06:04:16 GMT

Quantum mechanics suggests that nothing that can be influenced by humans can ever truly be random, and that the only random events are at the quantum level. Beyond that, I also question what exactly constitutes randomness.

I think a more direct question is whether you think lotteries cheat. Some people seem to be suspicious about that, but I tend to believe that the states have no reason to cheat. The games are built in favor of the lottery. That doesn't depend on chance, it's a structural co... [ More ]

Reply #9

JAP69 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:58:47 GMT

Another thing to be considered on randomness is that cash 5 and jackpot games the balls are circulated in the same chamber and drawn from that one chamber. Cash 3 and 4 the balls are circulated in individual chambers for positional drawing. So with cash 3 and 4 their is a 1 in 10 chance of the same ball number being drawn per positional chamber and they also rotate ball chambers and ball sets for cash 3 and 4 from drawing to drawing.

Reply #8

Jack-C — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:44:56 GMT

In my many years of experience working in the cryptographic community, I have found a few things to be true.

Random simply means that by studying past results you can not with certainty predict the next event. I think the lottery meets that requirement.

In cryptography we understood that some things can be sufficiently random . That means that random numbers used for secret communications only need to be random enough to make a code that fools the people that may see (read) it. I can use

Reply #7

JAP69 — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:38:17 GMT

I would say they are random.

How many times has cash 5 and jackpot games duplicated all the same winning numbers? In pick 3 and 4 you will have the same numbers come back as you will have a higher probability of random reapeating.

Thats the way the ball bounces or where an r n g random cycle stops at that split second.

Reply #6

rdgrnr — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:34:27 GMT

Some day they're gonna pipe in Hi-Speed Internet to us hillbillies way back in the woods so we can watch them videos too.

Reply #5

rdgrnr — Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:27:31 GMT

That sounds reasonable to me but don't let that make you feel good because I'm pretty dumb.