Maryland United States
Member #35,589
March 20, 2006
185 Posts
Offline
I e-mailed this question to Mega Millions last week and i am now waiting for a response. In the meantime I am curious to see what do most of you think.
If you think about it....the odds get significantly greater than 175 mil to 1...if the numbers are selected based on what combo will pay out the least amount of winnings. Then it truly boils down to pure chance that you selected a combo that pays out the least.
By the way....I got $18 on two tickets from this drawing. One combo had two numbers plus mega ball. There are two numbers that I have been playing for the last 14 drawings and they have not shown up yet. When they do....ahem, ahem cough! cough!......I expect to go out for dinner at Ruth Chris SteakHouse.
United States
Member #34,265
March 1, 2006
188 Posts
Offline
Its hard to say if its random or not, sometimes you see the same numbers over and over again. 8, 7, 27, 50 seem to be coming up a lot. The mega ball, 4, 36, come up more than 47 or 5.
USA United States
Member #1,265
March 13, 2003
9,077 Posts
Offline
Random = (1) when state lotteries use machines that can be tweaked and adjusted while still delivering X amount of balls per draw as flawlessly as possible + (2) state lotteries rotate as many ballsets as they can justify using which do not escape number behaviors such as skips and number affinities + (3) conducting pre and post draw ballset tests for X amount of times before each draw + (4) retiring one or more of those ballsets periodically = Random.
The most "random" draw seems to occur when #4 above comes into play.
Yet jackpots are won and not always by a "random" quick pick which means someone somewhere figured it out or just kept persevering.
My answer ... no one knows for sure.
Try remote viewing future draws which seems to greatly reduce "randomness."
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
This is a good question, Shane. This subject was brought up before, but I'm not sure it was a poll. I remember when I first got onto this board another member posted that something random cannot be defined. I thought that was an interesting statement. At first I always thought that each number has an equal chance of being picked. This should hold true for every lottery pick that isn't computerized, which is why I am against any computerized drawing.
But obviously if they keep changing ballsets and also run tests, then the lottery commission feels that these games might not be 100% random. How carefully are balls checked for size, weight density & shape? This sounds silly, but I really don't like the pre-run tests. I'm glad those numbers are never made public. Imagine playing all the time and then your numbers are drawn, but they are discarded as only pre-test! I'm not sure that this practice makes the drawings random at all, but selective because people are selecting to discard XXX sets before a televised drawing. I agree with konane - nobody knows for sure.
MD United States
Member #1,701
June 18, 2003
10,731 Posts
Offline
Number 1 it's as random as it can be. Each ball has exactly the same chance of being drawn as every other ball. No one knows beforehand what those numbers will be. Some ball sets might favor certain numbers be it because they have slight differences in weight or size. However with the machine spinning the balls and a paddle working against the spinning balls and each one bouncing off one another, the ball that is closest to the opening when the timer selects the pull will be the ball that drops.
Just as in bingo those balls have equal chance of being drawn there is no manipulation taking place. Have you ever played bingo and the same number was drawn on the first pull for every game the second pull, the third, fourth etc. NO! why because it's random.
BigJohn says. You don't hit the number. The number hits you!!!!
I'm not Big John, I'm Four4me, Big John's a friend.
USA United States
Member #1,265
March 13, 2003
9,077 Posts
Offline
What if the "mass mind" of players actually controls the numbers drawn? That might shoot the whole lottery pre and post test theory out the window.
I read somewhere that RNG's were used to test mind over matter and that there was a slight enough variance in testing to determine that it could. That doesn't even get into someone "tweaking" their controlling software which is why I'm four squarely against using RNG's..
However, I believe those tests are done to satisfy the government as well as the general public that draws are not rigged ..... part of keeping them legal and available to the public. When trying to determine the jackpot numbers, simply "aim" for those without regard to pre and post tests.
New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
Seems to me the question of whether the lotteries succeed in achieving random outcomes in their draws is a matter that's easily decided:
LOTTOMIKE: Statistics Summary
Summary
Statistic
Current Month
Last Month
Current Year
Last Year
Lifetime
Picks
91,485
138,398
483,905
53,586
537,955
Hits
391
833
2,805
289
3,094
Hit Ratio
0.43%
0.60%
0.58%
0.54%
0.58%
Winnings
$22,641
$72,607
$189,845
$28,084
$217,929
Prize Ratio
24.75%
52.46%
39.22%
52.41%
40.50%
WannaWinSoon: Statistics Summary
Summary
Statistic
Current Month
Last Month
Current Year
Last Year
Lifetime
Picks
0
258
673
1,001
2,810
Hits
0
3
8
25
50
Hit Ratio
0.00%
1.16%
1.19%
2.50%
1.78%
Winnings
$0
$30
$80
$320
$484
Prize Ratio
0.00%
10.79%
11.54%
31.97%
17.10%
Rick G: Statistics Summary
Summary
Statistic
Current Month
Last Month
Current Year
Last Year
Lifetime
Picks
828
1,148
6,558
13,884
36,382
Hits
34
75
275
111
453
Hit Ratio
4.11%
6.53%
4.19%
0.80%
1.25%
Winnings
$690
$6,571
$19,641
$3,845
$36,046
Prize Ratio
83.33%
572.39%
299.50%
27.69%
99.08%
RJOh: Statistics Summary
Summary
Statistic
Current Month
Last Month
Current Year
Last Year
Lifetime
Picks
31
121
357
1,051
4,257
Hits
2
3
11
17
56
Hit Ratio
6.45%
2.48%
3.08%
1.62%
1.32%
Winnings
$20
$294
$360
$408
$1,558
Prize Ratio
64.52%
242.98%
100.84%
38.82%
36.60%
We can argue in any direction we like. We can believe whatever we like.
The odds for any hit on a typical Pick 5 draw are in the neighborhood of 1/74. Those odds are taking a beating every day by the same people.
But if we argue the numbers are random the weight of providing evidence to support our assertion rests on somehow explaining or disproving another piece of evidence.
That evidence is right there and it's on the predictions page every day.
"Here's how," a person who wants to argue the numbers are random would need to explain, "the same people manage to end up at the top of the LP predictions statistics through thousands of draws."
Maybe the best way to explain it is to merely ignore it and pronounce the numbers random by personal decree.
Honduras
Member #20,981
August 29, 2005
4,715 Posts
Offline
I believe that as long as you have pre-testing, you are not going to have a trully random game. Because pre-testing interferes with the game's history and trends.
Also, RNG developers talk about degrees of randomness on the RNG but really the degrees of randomness are subtle, on small scale and visible on a not large, but very large scale. And again i believe that it doesn't matter how high the degrees of randomness of a machine or Rng are, what matters is how high you set the odds in a game, and the particular configuration you choose for it. Besides subtle differences in randomnes should not matter because all Rng's and lotto machines/hoppers follow the laws of odds...
Guys i've just come to realize that what lotteries do that they call random are randomness according to odds (linked to the laws of odds). Because if something was random, the odds that a number will appear 7 times in a row on the same draw is big. So what we call trully random is randomness linked to the laws of odds.
New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
I believe that as long as you have pre-testing, you are not going to have a trully random game. Because pre-testing interferes with the game's history and trends.
Also, RNG developers talk about degrees of randomness on the RNG but really the degrees of randomness are subtle, on small scale and visible on a not large, but very large scale. And again i believe that it doesn't matter how high the degrees of randomness of a machine or Rng are, what matters is how high you set the odds in a game, and the particular configuration you choose for it. Besides subtle differences in randomnes should not matter because all Rng's and lotto machines/hoppers follow the laws of odds...
Guys i've just come to realize that what lotteries do that they call random are randomness according to odds (linked to the laws of odds). Because if something was random, the odds that a number will appear 7 times in a row on the same draw is big. So what we call trully random is randomness linked to the laws of odds.
pumpi76
That's an interesting viewpoint, pumpi. I hope you'll elaborate.
I believe that as long as you have pre-testing, you are not going to have a trully random game. Because pre-testing interferes with the game's history and trends.
Are you postulating that the game history of each game acts as a hmmm sort of sea-anchor to influence future draws?
Also, RNG developers talk about degrees of randomness on the RNG but really the degrees of randomness are subtle, on small scale and visible on a not large, but very large scale. And again i believe that it doesn't matter how high the degrees of randomness of a machine or Rng are, what matters is how high you set the odds in a game, and the particular configuration you choose for it. Besides subtle differences in randomnes should not matter because all Rng's and lotto machines/hoppers follow the laws of odds...
I find this fairly confusing. My impression has always been that, either randomness was a characteristic that applied to a given circumstance, or it was not a characterist that applied.
If you're correct in what you're quoting there must be come measurable degree of randomness calibrated on a randomness scale somewhere. If so, there must also be some 'acceptable deviation from randomness' within lotteries, also implying some unacceptable deviation.
A while back one of the lotteries drew the same numbers three days in a row, as I recall. I'd imagine that qualifies as an unacceptable deviation from randomness. However, they went in and 'fixed' it so's to bring the level of randomness back to an acceptable level.
They knew they'd succeeded when the same numbers didn't continue to hit every day thereafter, I suppose.
What level or degree of randomness would you suppose could be described as 'acceptable' as it pertains to lottery draws advertised as say, with million dollar prizes?
Guys i've just come to realize that what lotteries do that they call random are randomness according to odds (linked to the laws of odds). Because if something was random, the odds that a number will appear 7 times in a row on the same draw is big. So what we call trully random is randomness linked to the laws of odds.
I can't help wondering how anyone would know what the odds actually are in an environment where the numbers aren't random.
Findlay, Ohio United States
Member #4,855
May 28, 2004
401 Posts
Offline
I voted "All numbers are truly randomly selected".
I think in most states that the lotteries takes great steps to ensure that each drawing is an unpridictable or random event. To me, this means that each combination selected is one of a random origin and that there was no specific reason that the number was drawn. This also implies that the selected number was not previously known to anyone at the lottery office or was not "hand-picked" as a specific or intended number to be drawn to begin with.
However, there is a possibility that a phrase such as; "winners are chosen at random", could intentionally be misleading! If a lottery knew which numbers would pay out the least (and they do) they could select one of those numbers as the winner. This would, in effect, make them the most profit. Of course this scenario would most likely have to be carried out with an RNG or computer operated lottery.
Now even if a lottery stooped so low as to do this, they still may very well be sticking to their own phrase: "winners are chosen at random". Depending on how you look at it, the “winners” could imply the numbers being chosen at random – OR - it could imply winning people being chosen at random!
Stop and think of it this way: before you buy your numbers, you don’t really know which are the most or least played - and very often random chance will allow for certain numbers to be played much less than all others. If the people who chose these lowest played numbers are then chosen as winners by the lottery (based on the number they played) then the winners are, in many ways, still being chosen at random. It is bad, but it is possible and I got a hunch that this is just what Indiana does. Of course this would be very easy to prove if you had all of their sales info handy.
Honduras
Member #20,981
August 29, 2005
4,715 Posts
Offline
I made a mistake: this is what i said:
"Because if something was random, the odds that a number will appear 7 times in a row on the same draw is big."
what i meant to say: "Because if something was trully random, the odds that a number will appear 7 times in a row on the following draws should be very small."
MD United States
Member #1,701
June 18, 2003
10,731 Posts
Offline
Random or not...
If I get a sandwich bag and 10 soda bottle caps I write the numbers 1 thru 0 on each cap. place all ten caps in a bag shake it up close my eyes put my hand in and pull out one cap write the number down. Place that cap back in the bag and shake it up again. Pull out another cap write that number down. I do this X amount of times isn't that basically the same thing as a lottery ball machine where in every ball is being shaken up and drawn. It's random. No matter how many times I do it will always be random. Unless I peek or somehow am able to feel the raised portion of the numbers through my finger tips. I have no way of knowing what cap has what number nor am I able to influence which cap will be drawn. They designed the ball machines to act in a random way.
Random definition is being or relating to a set or to an element of a set each of whose elements has equal probability of occurrence.
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
four4me: there is another thread on this ballset subject where I just posted, but after reading your post, I do agree that your example of the bottle caps is true. Every time you pick them out of a bag, it is a random drawing. However, if a lottery has 6 or more pre-tests, even if every draw is random, the 6 sets of numbers picked will be discarded. So let's say the odds are 1 in 50 million you are going to win and your 6 numbers come up in the pre-test. What are the odds it will be chosen again and again? Are they the same? Year ago I wrote to FL and was told no numbers have ever won twice in the Lotto. That doesn't seem to be random to me. If 1-2-3-4-5-6 comes up, will they discard it because it's an unlikely number that doesn't look kosher? I read that in TX they make sure that the same ball doesn't get drawn more than 5 times out of 6. If it does, then they assume something is wrong. But what if it RANDOMLY does come up? Why can't number 42 come up over and over again? Maybe trying to be fair and random automatically takes all of the randomness away because they are only simulating randomness by using too much accuracy. Am I making sense?
New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
Random or not...
If I get a sandwich bag and 10 soda bottle caps I write the numbers 1 thru 0 on each cap. place all ten caps in a bag shake it up close my eyes put my hand in and pull out one cap write the number down. Place that cap back in the bag and shake it up again. Pull out another cap write that number down. I do this X amount of times isn't that basically the same thing as a lottery ball machine where in every ball is being shaken up and drawn. It's random. No matter how many times I do it will always be random. Unless I peek or somehow am able to feel the raised portion of the numbers through my finger tips. I have no way of knowing what cap has what number nor am I able to influence which cap will be drawn. They designed the ball machines to act in a random way.
Random definition is being or relating to a set or to an element of a set each of whose elements has equal probability of occurrence.
"It's random. No matter how many times I do it will always be random. Unless I peek or somehow am able to feel the raised portion of the numbers through my finger tips. I have no way of knowing what cap has what number nor am I able to influence which cap will be drawn. They designed the ball machines to act in a random way."
Yesterday I posted on this thread:
A person who wants to argue the numbers are random would need to explain,"Here's how the same people manage to end up at the top of the LP predictions statistics through thousands of draws."
Seems to me you've hit on the key element for a practical definition of randomness:
"I have no way of knowing what cap has what number nor am I able to influence which cap will be drawn. "
I don't know the odds on West Virginia Pick 6. I don't know whether it's computer or mechanical. I do know that almost every day Rick G. hits and hits and hits on it, even though there's a maximum limit of 50 picks, and I feel reasonably confident a single pick hit beats the odds.
He's just one of many examples of people who are beating those odds on predictions every day. Before reaching into that imaginary bag of soda water lids, he's saying, "Here are the numbers I'm going to find there."
By the practical definition of randomness, Rick G, RJOH, you, LottoMike, Tntea, nobody can do that.