California United States Member #46824 October 1, 2006 270 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 12:55 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Thoth on December 6, 2006

The real problem here is that ODDS are being confused for PROBABILITY and the two are being used interchangeably...

Buy 1 Pick 3 combination the ODDS are 1 in 1000 or 1:999. The PROBABILITY is .001 ...written as a fraction, that decimal becomes 1/1000. As a percent it is .1% (one tenth of one-percent).

Buy two different Pick 3 combinations the ODDS are 2 in 1000 or 2:998. The PROBABILITYIS .002, written as a fraction it equals 2/1000 or 1 in 500 reduced. Whether reduced are left alone, that percentage of CHANCE to win is exaxtly .2% (two tenths of one percent)

Now, if the term "ODDS" is used solely as ones definition or idea of their overall chance to win the game, then I'd definitely have to say the ODDS in this respect are Fractional.

Most state lotteries treat odds fractionally as well. This is why many of them list the "odds" for a no-match boxed Pick 3 win as 1 in 167 instead of 6 in 1000....and the "odds of a double-digit boxed win as 1 in 333 instead of 3 in 1000.

How about the standard 6 of 49 lotto game. I do not know of any state that lists the "True Odds" for this game. You play 1 combination and your "odds" are listed as 1 in 13,983,816.

Is this really your true and exact odds of winning??? Nope, sorry, afraid not. The real odds are: 720 in 10,068,347,520!!! These are the real odds of a 6/49 games because there are exactly 10,068,347,520 possible ways to draw exactly 6 balls out of the machine. There are 720 ways that the 6 you choose can be drawn. So the fractional odds of 720/10,068,347,520 is always reduced to 1/13,983,816.

Toth...I think you hit the nail on the head with the odds/probability comment.

Dump Water Florida United States Member #380 June 5, 2002 3140 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 1:54 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on December 6, 2006

"1 ticket = 1in14mil 2 tickets = 1in7mil"

Horsefeathers.

If 1 ticket = 1 in 14,000,000

2 tickets = 2 in 13,999,999.

Otherwise, using your example, when Powerball or Mega Millions was in the huindreds of millions people with deep enough pockets would be buying the amount of tickets necessary to "guarantee" a jackpot.

But people with the expertise to be able to amass enough money to do that aren't so lame as to fall for this nonsense about odds being halved.

And in your own example above, you start with:

1 ticket = 1 in 14 mil

and go "down to"

16,785,408 tickets = 1 in.89

I find it extremely interesting - and entertaining that someone trying to peddle this tripe:

"This is the odds progression in action . . . doubling the tickets cuts the odds in half each time as anyone can clearly see"

starts out with 1 in 14 million and "proves" they've halved the odds by taking it to the point of 16,785,408 tickets - when the original endeavor was to half the 1 in 14,000,000.

If the original odds were 1 in 14 million why in blazes would you get 16, 785,408 tickets.

go bavk to the Abbot and Costello routine, it makes a lot more sense. Unless of course you're going to "prove" that if the uncle and his niece wait "long enough" they will eventually be the same age.

"Otherwise, using your example, when Powerball or Mega Millions was in the huindreds of millions people with deep enough pockets would be buying the amount of tickets necessary to "guarantee" a jackpot. "

How do you think buying fewer than all the possible combinations guarantees a jackpot? If there is even one combination left unpurchased the jackpot is not guaranteed.

When the lottery sells tickets they don't run through all the possible combinations and begin again, not even for Quick Pick.

Even when more tickets are sold then combinations in the game the number of duplicate ticket sales leaves some combinations unsold and others over subscribed.

"If the original odds were 1 in 14 million why in blazes would you get 16, 785,408 tickets."

Because that's the continuation of the progression example. The lottery isn't a raffle with tickets numbered and limited. We're talking ODDS of winning, not guaranteed. For example we know it takes at least 163 wheeled combinations to guarantee a 3if6 prize in 6/49 where as the odds are 1 in 57 because if you don't win with your first 57 tickets you are likely to win 2-3# prizes in the next set of 57 and so on. ODDS GUARANTEE NOTHING!!!

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10460 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 2:10 pm - IP Logged

BobP

"How do you think buying fewer than all the possible combinations guarantees a jackpot? "

I don't. I never even came close to saying I did. But you might want to pose that question to the "magic dollar" crowd, the folks here who honestly believe that each adittional dollar "cuts the odds in half".

Pick 3

1000:1

dollar two = 100:1

dollar three= 10:1

dollar 4= 1:1, where's my payoff?

That is what some people here are saying, the only thing different is the game and starting odds.

In the game of casino craps (dice), there is one way to roll a 12, a 6 and a 6, out of 36 possible combinations of two dice. There are actually people that hang on the tables waiting for 35 rolls withouyt a 12 and then "load up" and bet a bunch on the next roll, because, hey, a 12 has to hit every 36th time. What they don;t realize is that it can hit five times in a row and then not show for hundreds of rolls, but in the long run will work out to having rolled 1 in 36 times.

Like I said, the lottery commission loves people who really think they're cutting the odds in half with another buck.

There's a catch, Yossarian.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

NY United States Member #23835 October 16, 2005 3555 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 3:41 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on December 6, 2006

BobP

"How do you think buying fewer than all the possible combinations guarantees a jackpot? "

I don't. I never even came close to saying I did. But you might want to pose that question to the "magic dollar" crowd, the folks here who honestly believe that each adittional dollar "cuts the odds in half".

Pick 3

1000:1

dollar two = 100:1

dollar three= 10:1

dollar 4= 1:1, where's my payoff?

That is what some people here are saying, the only thing different is the game and starting odds.

In the game of casino craps (dice), there is one way to roll a 12, a 6 and a 6, out of 36 possible combinations of two dice. There are actually people that hang on the tables waiting for 35 rolls withouyt a 12 and then "load up" and bet a bunch on the next roll, because, hey, a 12 has to hit every 36th time. What they don;t realize is that it can hit five times in a row and then not show for hundreds of rolls, but in the long run will work out to having rolled 1 in 36 times.

Like I said, the lottery commission loves people who really think they're cutting the odds in half with another buck.

There's a catch, Yossarian.

"Pick 3

1000:1

dollar two = 100:1

dollar three= 10:1

dollar 4= 1:1, where's my payoff?

That is what some people here are saying"

As near as I can tell nobody has actually said that, except for when you've chosen to post imaginary conversations. You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again. What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half. For pick3 cutting the odds in half means you have a 2 in 1000 chance or 1 in 500, not 1 in 100. The third ticket gives you one more chance to win for 3 in 1000 or 1 in 333.3. For the mathematically challenged, that's 1/3 the odds for a single ticket.

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10460 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 6:39 pm - IP Logged

Ky Floyd

You just said:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again. What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

That is:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again."

followed by

"What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

I'll bold the highlights of that:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again."

What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

Hello. If the second dollar (ticket) actually cut the odds in half, each subsequent dollar (ticket) would have to cut the previous oidds in half. Just more proof that that whole theory stinks, is inaccurate, and totally bogus.

I REST MY CASE.

I never suspected Baghdad Bob of posting on here but I'm really starting to wonder.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

NY United States Member #23835 October 16, 2005 3555 Posts Offline

Posted: December 6, 2006, 9:13 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on December 6, 2006

Ky Floyd

You just said:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again. What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

That is:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again."

followed by

"What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

I'll bold the highlights of that:

"You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again."

What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

Hello. If the second dollar (ticket) actually cut the odds in half, each subsequent dollar (ticket) would have to cut the previous oidds in half. Just more proof that that whole theory stinks, is inaccurate, and totally bogus.

I REST MY CASE.

I never suspected Baghdad Bob of posting on here but I'm really starting to wonder.

This would be so much easier if you understood the things you read and then quote. I'll quote my statement and highlight the proper part of it: "You are definitely the only one who has suggested that anyone thinks each additional dollar cuts the odds in half again. What people have said is that the second dollar doubles your chances of winning, which means it cuts the odds in half."

Now let's look at what you said:

"If the second dollar (ticket) actually cut the odds in half, ..."

The second ticket doubles your chances of winning, which is the same as cutting the odds in half, because you have two chances to win instead of one. Everybody who understands the math has said this in one way or another.

"... each subsequent dollar (ticket) would have to cut the previous oidds in half."

Other than in your imagination, nobody has said that each subsequent ticket cuts the odds in half again. The reason nobody has said it is because that's not how it works and the pople who understand the math know that. That you would suggest it would work that way "If the second dollar (ticket) actually cut the odds in half" just demonstrates that you don't understand the math. Nobody else has said it does or should work that way.

Only the second ticket cuts the odds in half, because the second ticket is the only one that doubles the number of tickets you have. The third ticket gives you three chances to win. Since 3 isn't twice as much as two it doesn't double your chances. It only increases them by 1 1/2.

If you had two tickets and decided to buy two more tickets those two would double the number of tickets you have and would therefore double your chances again. Doubling them yet again would require buying twice as many tickets again, which would now mean four more tickets.As I've said before, it's the ratio of [possible combinations] to [the number of those combinations that will result in you having a winning ticket] that determines the odds. Since the number of possible combinations doesn't change, the ratio changes in proportion to the number of tickets you have. Doubling your chances of winning always requires doubling the number of tickets, whether you're going from 1 ticket to two, 2 tickets to four, or 1 million tickets to 2 million.

And yes, we all know that there is only one winning combination drawn. Your fixation on that is just another indication that you don't understand the math. If you have one of 10 possible combinations you will win only if the winning number matches the only number you have a ticket for. If you have two of 10 possible combinations you will win if the only winning number matches either of your two tickets. If you have tickets for 3 and 4 you will win if the only winning number drawn is a 3 or if it is a 4. There will be only one winning number drawn, but if it is either of the two numbers you have tickets for you will win. It isn't how many winning numbers are drawn, it's whether or not the winning number matches any of your tickets.

I'll try one one last idea to see if you can make sense of it. Let's flip it around and look at it completely backwards. Suppose you buy every single combination except for one. The only way to not have a winning ticket is if the only winning combination is the only combination that you don't have a ticket for. Now imagine that you buy every possible combination except for two of them. Isn't it incredibly obvious that there are now two combinations that, if drawn, will result in not having a winning ticket? Isn't it incredibly obvious that there is now twice as much chance you won't win? Mathematically, winning and losing aren't any different. They're just at opposite ends of an equation that is symmetrical.

If that isn't enough to make you reevaluate your belief I will humbly admit that I'm not smart enough to explain it in a way you can understand. That doesn't mean I won't be here to give people the right answers if you continue to post answers that are wrong.

BALONEY. Let's say there's a game with 100,000 combinations.

Buying a second ticket on no way means you now have 50,000 combinations covered, and that is what cutting the odds in half would mean. That's all there is to it.

Bye.

I know a lot of graduates of Maven University post on christian boards, I didn't expect to see some here -

GOOD OLD MAVEN U.

OPINION OVER KNOWLEDGE

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

BALONEY. Let's say there's a game with 100,000 combinations.

Buying a second ticket on no way means you now have 50,000 combinations covered, and that is what cutting the odds in half would mean. That's all there is to it.

Bye.

I know a lot of graduates of Maven University post on christian boards, I didn't expect to see some here -

GOOD OLD MAVEN U.

OPINION OVER KNOWLEDGE

It's not coverage, it's versus like a battle.

The enemy has 100,000 troops and you are alone scouting, if you attack the odds are 1in100,000 or 1 versus 100,000.

Your buddy shows up, the odds are now 2vs100,000 or 1in50,000 because each of your share to take on is half the 100,000.

Two more of your guys show up, the odds are now 4vs100,000 or 1in25,000.

Four more of your guys show up, the odds are now 8vs100,000 or 1in 12,500.

Eight more of your guys show up, the odds are now 16vs100,000 or 1 in 6,250.

Sixteen more of your guys show up, the odds are now 32vs100,000 or 1 in 3,125.

When 49,968 more of your guys show up the odds are 50,000vs100,000 or 1in2 or two to one.

Remember it's a doubling progression cutting the odds in half not simple addition. 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 etc. for each odds chop.

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10460 Posts Offline

Posted: December 7, 2006, 1:34 am - IP Logged

"The enemy has 100,000 troops and you are alone scouting, if you attack the odds are 1in100,000 or 1 versus 100,000.

Your buddy shows up, the odds are now 2vs100,000 or 1in50,000 because each of your share to take on is half the 100,000."

Unless you're Israeli Commandos I'd say you have a problem!

-Sorry, couldn't resist.

Ah - this is the formula for Powerball courtesy of the Idaho lottery website:

POWERBALL CHANCES OF WINNING THE JACKPOT: (5 of 5 plus the Powerball)

So, 55 x 54 x 53 x 52 x 51... = 417,451,320 and 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 120; divide one by the other:

417,451,320 / 120 = 3,478,761 (chances of 3,478,761 to 1 of picking all 5 white balls out of 55)

And don't forget that now we have to combine the possibilities of choosing the Powerball, which we know is one in 42. That formula works just like the one above:

Despite all the "eduaction" being offered in this thread, I just can't see an additional dollar cutting the above in half!

Like I said though, we're really entertaining the lottery commission lurkers.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

Dump Water Florida United States Member #380 June 5, 2002 3140 Posts Offline

Posted: December 7, 2006, 3:56 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on December 7, 2006

"The enemy has 100,000 troops and you are alone scouting, if you attack the odds are 1in100,000 or 1 versus 100,000.

Your buddy shows up, the odds are now 2vs100,000 or 1in50,000 because each of your share to take on is half the 100,000."

Unless you're Israeli Commandos I'd say you have a problem!

-Sorry, couldn't resist.

Ah - this is the formula for Powerball courtesy of the Idaho lottery website:

POWERBALL CHANCES OF WINNING THE JACKPOT: (5 of 5 plus the Powerball)

So, 55 x 54 x 53 x 52 x 51... = 417,451,320 and 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 120; divide one by the other:

417,451,320 / 120 = 3,478,761 (chances of 3,478,761 to 1 of picking all 5 white balls out of 55)

And don't forget that now we have to combine the possibilities of choosing the Powerball, which we know is one in 42. That formula works just like the one above:

Despite all the "eduaction" being offered in this thread, I just can't see an additional dollar cutting the above in half!

Like I said though, we're really entertaining the lottery commission lurkers.

It might help to keep in mind we are not physically dividing the game's combinations into two independent stacks for this odds splitting trick. It's like shooting fish in a tank, they keep moving back and forth no matter how many guns we add to cut the odds.

I think you're just yanking our chain, so I'll leave the last laugh to you.

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10460 Posts Offline

Posted: December 7, 2006, 11:49 am - IP Logged

BobP

I honestly am not the one yanking anyone's chain here.

From your example:

"The enemy has 100,000 troops and you are alone scouting, if you attack the odds are 1in 100,000 or 1 versus 100,000.

Your buddy shows up, the odds are now 2vs100,000 or 1in 50,000 because each of your share to take on is half the 100,000."

You're telling us that if a game had 100,000 to 1 odds, when your buddy (the second dollar) showed up you would have "double the coverage". Once again, nope.....

It's actually more, in the case of lotto, like a second sniper shows up and each is covering one opponent.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

BALONEY. Let's say there's a game with 100,000 combinations.

Buying a second ticket on no way means you now have 50,000 combinations covered, and that is what cutting the odds in half would mean. That's all there is to it.

Bye.

I know a lot of graduates of Maven University post on christian boards, I didn't expect to see some here -

GOOD OLD MAVEN U.

OPINION OVER KNOWLEDGE

" Buying a second ticket on no way means you now have 50,000 combinations covered, and that is what cutting the odds in half would mean."

I see a major part of the problem. You don't understand the difference between being twice as likely to win and half as likely to lose.

You've mentioned dice often enough, maybe that will make sense to you. Suppose we're playing a game that requires you to roll a 6 to win. If you roll one die and I roll two dice, do I have twice as much chAnce of rolling a 6?

Roslindale, MA United States Member #5377 July 1, 2004 137 Posts Offline

Posted: December 7, 2006, 6:43 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coin Toss on December 7, 2006

"The enemy has 100,000 troops and you are alone scouting, if you attack the odds are 1in100,000 or 1 versus 100,000.

Your buddy shows up, the odds are now 2vs100,000 or 1in50,000 because each of your share to take on is half the 100,000."

Unless you're Israeli Commandos I'd say you have a problem!

-Sorry, couldn't resist.

Ah - this is the formula for Powerball courtesy of the Idaho lottery website:

POWERBALL CHANCES OF WINNING THE JACKPOT: (5 of 5 plus the Powerball)

So, 55 x 54 x 53 x 52 x 51... = 417,451,320 and 5 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 = 120; divide one by the other:

417,451,320 / 120 = 3,478,761 (chances of 3,478,761 to 1 of picking all 5 white balls out of 55)

And don't forget that now we have to combine the possibilities of choosing the Powerball, which we know is one in 42. That formula works just like the one above:

Despite all the "eduaction" being offered in this thread, I just can't see an additional dollar cutting the above in half!

Like I said though, we're really entertaining the lottery commission lurkers.

So 42 really is the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything!

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10460 Posts Offline

Posted: December 7, 2006, 7:24 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by noahproblem on December 7, 2006

So 42 really is the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything!

KY Floyd

"You've mentioned dice often enough, maybe that will make sense to you. Suppose we're playing a game that requires you to roll a 6 to win. If you roll one die and I roll two dice, do I have twice as much chAnce of rolling a 6?"

One die was a no roll in any joint I ever worked in. With dice a six can only be made 2-4, 5-1, or 3-3, there is no 6-0. There is no 6-0 and there is no cutting the odds in half with another ticket.

noahproblem

re:42 - at least not to the Japanese!

The world of Japanese superstition.

Do you panic after breaking a mirror because it may mean seven years'bad luck? Do you avoid letting a black cat cross your path? Does the number 13 make you uncomfortable? Do you scold your children when they open an umbrella in the house? When you knock over a salt shaker do you throw a pinch of salt over your left shoulder? Perhaps you keep a rabbit's foot or a "lucky" coin in your pocket or handbag. And, I'm sure you never walk under a ladder. Any Japanese who saw such reactions would probably laugh and call you a superstitious, unscientific, old-fashioned person. Yet the same Japanese might turn around and tell you with teh sincerest conviction that numbers 42 should be avoided at any cost, that badgers are mischievous, evil, little wrong-doers, that dead spirits are sometimes embodied in female cats, that women ghosts haunt txi-cabs, and that every rock, tree, mountain, river and even grain of sand has a spirit