Oh Joy! We finally have the CORRECT numbers!

Now to get crackin' on figuring out HOW they arrived at them.

If I am successful in doing that then I will freely share it.

It would be a riot if one of my own algorithms given their data gave the same result!

And again, if we guess that 10percent? of players use systems, then when there is a winner (all else equal) there is a 10% chance they used a system. If there were a disproportionate amount of winners that used systems or if a thorough honest backtest of their secret system shows that it made profit even before this drawing, then let me know how much the shareware fee is and if it can do it in nj.

BY the way, it DID happen before, and even more so. A man in Seattle played the same Mega for 10 tickets with different bonus balls but same white balls. He had the first 5 but none of the bonus balls and won I think 1.75M at the time, and said HE used a system.

In January I used a system in PA, and played the same P3 several times for a win.

And I wonder now will WI re-evaluate their draw procedure and do whatever they can to prevent this from happening again???

Who says there is no system!!!!  This couple has one.  So predicting the lotto is possible after all!

More power to them!!!!

There are more systems out there than teenagers at a Jonas Brothers concert. But I have never seen a backtest of any showing consistent profit, which would be a key selling point more so than one major jackpot win and several small wins that may or may not have netted profit before then. I do hope that their system is valid and profitable and can be used on other games including here. I would even be interested in buying it if it could help with Jersey 5 or MM or PB etc. But I would have to see the backtest results first. In fact being a programmer if they want they can contact me to write a program for them to automate their system, wink-wink, nod-nod!

The one big hurdle with any system is it has to overcome the poor return with otherwise random play. 50 cents on the dollar usually. Sometimes less because of taxes. But if a system has a chance to give me just one multimillion life-changing win then it's worth it even if it's otherwise in the red. I'd rather win 5/5 or 6/6 once than several 3/5, 4/6 etc. It depends on the particular system.

The math professor is correct only in an ideal world. A while back in TN a good system was to not play any doubles ever. Also I predict that tonights Mega bonus ball will be on a YELLOW colored ball, in fact I guarantee it, so only play the YELLOW bonus balls on Mega!!!

"But after presenting the first two tickets, Judith Adamson said, "I'm in a state of shock." She also said they had been playing the same numbers for several years."

What kind of "system" can it be if they have been playing the same numbers for several years?  Sounds mighty strange to me.

It's not much of a system for jackpot games if it came up with the same combination four times unless they were playing to win several lower tiers prizes.   Since one ticket can win as much as four tickets when the same person owns them, it makes more sense to not have repeats unless you were playing a pick3/4 game.

Whatever system they used, it sure paid off! Congrats to them, again!

You took the words right out of my mouth (or should I say fingers?)  I began to type something similar before I saw your post. 

Brad Duke claimed to use a numbering system that had won him a couple hundred dollars (and 85 million) in the Powerball.

Bull.

Sorry guys but it's mathmatically impossible.  ONE:  If such a formula existed, it would have been discovered easily by now.  There is no forumla.  A formula would defeat the entire purpose of the lottery.  TWO:  Lotteries employ a certain range of possibilities, played over a certain population, which USUALLY results in a win a couple of draws later.  MILLIONS of people play random and chosen numbers.  The numbers are drawn RANDOMLY hence...no formula can determine an outcome.  Each player has their own idiosyncrasies; one might say they have a formula, or one might claim they have magic powers, another may claim it's complete luck...maybe even another claims their particular god had something to do with it.  For some reason, most people get behind the "formula" myth.  I think it's the most "credible" myth because it's quasimathmatical and doesn't exclude people by religion or other demographic.  A good way to think of playing the lottery is that you are picking a handful of numbers out of a pool of a HUNDRED MILLION numbers.  That is your number.

I agree. A random system will play out the odds. Mathematics is a rock in this respect. Non-random lotteries (i.e. rigged systems and faulty) can be predicted. People who claim life is easy, lunch is free and money falls from the sky in plenty are selling something. Please, don't be a sucker, have fun and play wisely.

So they played the same numbers four times. There was a guy from Wisconsin a while back that did the same thing. I don't understand this. They should know how the payouts work for Supercash. Supercash will payout up to 20 winning tickets!!!!! That's $7,000,000. You get two plays for a buck. So these people spent $2. If you feel that strongly about a set of numbers to play them multiple times, why not just splurge and spend $8 more and buy the maximum of 20 tickets to multiply the amount of your winnings by a factor of five while spending only a few more bucks to do it. Congrats to them but understand how these games work people.

Let me get this straight.  He said he has a formula.  She says they have been playing the same numbers for years.  Which one is it?

Oh, I know now!  Her numbers range from 1 to 39.

I tend to believe him more than her solely because I want to believe him. 

 As to a way he can make money with a system, he uses his "formula" to find 7 numbers that have a good chance of being drawn.  These 7 numbers will translate into 21 possible combinations (lines, for those of you old-timers).  If I remember correctly, there will be at a minimum 4 combinations out of the 21 with three or more numbers.  Tennessee pays approximately $9 for three numbers.

9 x 4 = 28

Now take your five plays slips and travel around, playing all 21 at different stores in the area.  The more stores, the better.  After the draw, go back to those stores and collect.  He will stay under the Lotto and IRS radar.

Sadly, all that is required to bring his world crashing down is to be wrong three times in a row.  LOL.

They are doing their best to capitalize on this win too.  It's now the headliner on Yahoo News.   It says something like "couple has formula to win lottery" and that "they won the lottery 4 times" but they only won once!  I think the person who won $50 million or $100 million using birthdays or buying a QP is better off, but I'll take any win.   I think it's great when anyone wins, but I wouldn't want my name all over the internet.  Not that $1.4 million isn't a nice prize, but I would want my privacy. 

Hey Jack - I think you are mistaken.

I have a Powerball 'formula' - and I bet most of us on here do as well, for whatever game they play.

This does not mean our 'formula' is going to pick the correct numbers for us, for example: my 'formula' helps me decide how to configure distinct pools of numbers to choose from, and it also eliminate a bunch of numbers based on other criteria. None of this means I'm going to choose the correct numbers, I still think it takes a lot of luck for things to fall into place in order to win.

Look at the three numbers that have gone on the longest without being hit - currently this is 38, 27 and 30. What are the odds two or all three of them will hit next ?  Not likely.  If you want to play one, which one do you play ?   You research it and devise a 'formula', and you will either get lucky - or not. Eventually you will.   BUT even if you did in this respect, that's only one number you have nailed, you need more.

I have hit 4x5 in PB eleven times, and I have missed out on two 5x5's - both of those I had all the correct numbers in my pools, in both of these cases I had four numbers to choose from, the number that hit was in that pool, but I chose the wrong one.  So why didn't I wheel it, you ask ?  Because I have X numbers in four different pools - I can't wheel everything.

I keep trying to tell folks - you can do more good in devising a system to ELIMINATE numbers to choose from possibly much much better than trying to devise a system to pick the winners.  This may not make any sense to some, but it's something I fully understand.

I hope they get their patent on their 'formula' I would certainly buy it.

I think im missing something..They had all four tickets to the winning jackpot..obviously all the tickets had the same numbers, so why would they drive to 4 different stores?...especially if "he" has a formula..

Perhaps to eliminate the chances that the clerk would go "hmm..." and play those exact same numbers once the winners left?

I know I'm perceptive enough to recognize odd behavior...and playing a set of numbers multiple times would arouse my suspicions enough to prompt me to throw my own dollar down on the set as well.

I see what you are saying, but are you a clerk in a store that sells tickets?  Where I go, the people are too busy to bother.  I suppose if I told someone to run a number 4 times, it would be different.  Otherwise, a person would need to have a photographic memory to remember 6 numbers.

If I could find a total of 7 numbers (hence 21 combinations)  and knew for a fact three numbers will be drawn, I would only run all 21 combinations thru one store, and then drive to another store for my second purchase.  And so on.

First and foremost, I would not wish to draw attention to myself as having a "formula" that consistantly won.  Once word got out, I don't think my life would be worth a Zimbabwe dollar. 

This couple made a huge mistake.  I can see it now.  Some convict, about to get out on parole, has already made plans to kidnap this man, learn his "formula" and, to silence a potential witness, well.......you know what will happen next.

That's why I would drive to several different stores.  I have no idea why the man in the article did.

Of course, being paranoid helps.  Remeber, the question is not "Are you paranoid?"  The question is "Are you paranoid enough?"

I agree. Most store clerks probably see a hundreds of numbers and lines a day. Why would they pick out one person and take their numbers. Odds are they don't care what numbers you pick.

thats the thing with patents , they have to work before you can patent them.

When David Sneath of Livonia,Michigan won his $135M MegaMillion jackpot on his 60th birthday back in April, he picked his own numbers too, but from an old QP tickets and as far as I know he hasn't set a trend. 

 I doubt when I win my first MM jackpot using my system if anyone will be interested in using it even if I do it again.   Most lottery players are not convinced that any fore thought or planning will improve their odds of winning. 

I don't see what the buzz is about. The guy played the same numbers for the SAME drawing. If he won the jackpot from separate drawings, then he would have something to talk about. He didn't win the lottery 4 times.

1. Bear in mind their payout is fixed I think, always 350K or that multiplied by the Doubler (too bad no doubler huh?) up to a certain # of winners, so the store clerk copying their #s might not have mattered. Sometimes they ask "are you sure you meant to play the same set 4 times?" but it probably is he plays his set each time he visits a store for whatever reason that has Lottery.

2. My best algorithms so far have matched 3 of 6 on the same drawing. It could also have been an "optimized" set. A set of numbers that has a good chance to come out together "sometime" but not necessarily on the next drawing. I will run calculations to see if there was such a set. Such a combination can be played for months or years but will often match nothing. So far I don't see much special about half of the numbers in that set.

He did win in the past, smaller amounts, but the question being that until this jackpot was he making any profit or just waiting on a big jackpot. Could the same system win again? Could it win other than in WI?

The key again is BACKTEST everything!

The reason that I would buy the system is so I can have a better chance to figure out what the strategy was. Even if it was really a fluke and just coincidence I want to know how another person calculated numbers vs. how I do.

If you assume each winning combination could have been pick by an algorithm then you'll find 10-15% of them have enough similarities to have been picked by the same algorithm.  Then it's just a matter of reducing the possible combinations to an affordable amount because 10% of 300-400 past drawings are still 40 lines and there are probably another 10 thousands or so lines that could still have been picked.

Sorry but I have to ask something.. when did the format change to 39 numbers for SuperCash? I notice that the few highest numbers must have been added relatively recently. Was he aware of the extra numbers? Usually format changes can render the best system impotent until the new format is out for a while to build new data. This is especially so in ball drawings where there are now a few more flying around in the bin knocking around the original balls! Be very wary of a system that spans across a format change.

When I generated an "optimized set" it gave me this:

SUPERCASH

 10 27 31 35 38 39

it included the 38 and 39, but use at your own risk, as it used the entire database.

Other thing to consider: did he write a program? Not many of us are programmers, so if he did this by hand then the algorithm can't be that complicated, can it?

After hearing the Adamsons were "exploring patent protection" for their equation, Steven Post, a mathematics professor at Edgewood College in Madison, wasn't buying it. He said there is no way to devise a strategy for finding the winning numbers in a game that uses randomly generated numbers to determine the winning combination.

He said, the only strategy would be to "buy all the tickets". 

He said there is no way to devise a strategy for finding the winning numbers in a game that uses randomly generated numbers to determine the winning combination.

I agree... there are millions of gamblers over the years who have tried to devise a system to win the lottery.  If such a system were found we would have heard about it by now.

The lottery drawings are not mathematical equations that can be decoded.  

Believe me i wish they were.

RJOH, I am sure there would be tons of people from here that would be begging for your system if you won. Your inbox will be full of requests.

I just quoted the Professor words but I never said I believed them.  He wouldn't be first person of knowledge who stated what seems like a simple truth that was later proved wrong. 

Besides, if anyone ever devised such a system it wouldn't be talked about publicly , the lotteries would have to discover it and they would just change something in the game to make it harder for such a system to work.

Original Post by four4me

"If such a system were found we would have heard about it by now."

You "hear about it" in the form of matrix changes and games being dropped.

Just like in the casinos where they have changed the rules over the years and ban people not necessarily for cheating, the lotteries have changed the games, too.

I've heard casinos consider it almost criminal for anyone to devise ways of beating their games even if no laws are broken and are not hesitant to band them from their establishment.   I don't think any state would go that far even if they suspected someone was regularly beating the odds of one of its game and it probably wouldn't discuss it publicly, it would just change or replace the game.

The other thing about patents is that you can only get one for something that can be patented, and you can't patent a  mathematical formula. They could write about it and get a copyright (only on that specific written work), but that wouldn't prevent other people from writing about it and selling (or simply giving away) a competing work.

@RJOh - One of the most intelligent statements I've read on this board regarding systems. 

Although I don't believe there is any type of proven system, I agree with you.  So, knowing that a game would surely be discontinued, changed or investigated if you really had a winning system, why would anyone go public with it?  (obviously for profit or maybe some ego stroking)

Let's say I came up with a system and began winning regularly.  Even if I won a few jackpot games in a short time and the Lottery became suspicious, the burden would be on the Lottery (not me) to prove it.  I would just say "I got lucky" or "I'm using birthdays and anniversaries."  (or license plates I see on the interstate!  LOL)   How would they prove otherwise? 

If you do a search on MIT blackjack team, you'll get a good feel of the lengths the casinos have gone to.

There's even a documentary about it.

With our jackpot games, we can only put 5 combinations on one play slip so when I was playing a 20 combination wheel, I had to fill out four. Most clerks don't check the tickets to see if they ran the same play slip twice and missed one of them so I made sure that lowest number on the first combination on each play slip was different and it was easy for me to check the tickets.

At the bottom of the pick-3 and pick-4 play slips there is box with the number of times we want to play the ticket and we can play the same combination multiple times. A clerk probably notices the combinations but even if they played them, there would be no affect on the player's winnings. Many people play the same combination multiple times and the clerks can't play them all.

In the higher jackpot games it might raise an eyebrow if somebody played the same combo multiple times, but the wife said she had been playing the same numbers for years and would mean nothing to a clerk if that was her usual bet. If they had played the same combinations on four play slips and played at one store, the Adamsons could have saved time and gas by doing that instead of going to four different stores every drawing for many years.

Stack,

Remember the guy that played one Buckeye5 combination twenty times every drawing?  Everything was fine until he matched 5 and learned that Ohio paid $100K for each winning ticket up to a maximum of $1M and then all winning tickets shared the $1M.

There was another winning ticket and he only got 20/21 of $1M instead of the $2M he thought he deserved.  He sued the state and the retailer claiming the disclaimer on the back of the play slip was never point out to him to read.  He lost the case.

It looks like October 2005 was when the matrix changed to 6/39.

For all we know, there could be a MIT lottery team operating now.  With jackpots of $50M+, I certainly wouldn't be surprised to hear it has at least been considered.  When lottery jackpots are claimed by a trust, we have no idea who the winners are.

In Blackjack there are 52 cards and someone with a great memory can figure out what's left in the deck.  Each time a card is dealt, that card is eliminated from future picks.  Not so with the lottery. Each game has the same odds as the previous one.  The casinos kept adding decks to keep people who mastered the system from beating the house and to make it more difficult to count the cards as they were dealt. 

There was a book written about the MIT Blackjack team.  However, I doubt if anyone at MIT would create a lottery team since it's random & not a science.   Blackjack isn't random.  The more decks in the sleeve, the more unlikely a player can count the cards and/or predict what will come next, but it's still possible.  However, let's say there are as many as 6 decks being used.  24 aces have been dealt, so you know there are no more aces left.  But after a lottery drawing, all the balls are put back into play!  How can anyone say determining the picks for these 2 games is similar? 

One other thing everyone keeps missing is the fact that there are pre-tests.   A Florida spokesperson recently commented that they have 6 pre-tests before a drawing.  So how can someone base a system on past drawings without knowing the results? 

Adding decks to blackjack games doesn't make it any more difficult to count the cards, it just reduces the percentage you can gain over the house by knowing what is left in the deck.  Mainly, because the casinos use 8 deck shoes now and re-shuffle after 6 have been played (leaving 2 decks not used).  Since you have an edge (while counting cards) when the number of cards in the shoe is lessened, this hurts the maximum edge the players can gain. Besides that, in order to make any money you have to varry your bet large amounts.  You play the table minimum until the count is in your favor, then raise your bet 10-15 times what it previously was.  Now casinos take note of any player varrying their bet more than 8 tmies the initial amount, this tells them you are a potential card counter (if it repeats for a while).  The MIT team used a number of players all working together, good plan they had there.  The book is "Bringing Down the House", definitely a much better read than the movie they turned it into.  Lots of interesting info in the book as well.

Adding decks to blackjack games doesn't make it any more difficult to count the cards, it just reduces the percentage you can gain over the house by knowing what is left in the deck. 

Isn't that what counting cards is all about?

You play the table minimum until the count is in your favor, then raise your bet 10-15 times what it previously was. 

Where the heck did you learn this?  I think some casino managers made it up and started spreading the news around Vegas so all the tourists would lose their vacation money.  It's the easiest way to go broke!  What if you get 15 or 20 losing hands and you keep doubling your bet? Not likely, but definitely possible.  I suppose if you had a lot of money to lose, you could eventually win it back, but don't most casinos have maximum bets?

"One other thing everyone keeps missing is the fact that there arepre-tests.   A Florida spokesperson recently commented that they have 6pre-tests before a drawing.  So how can someone base a system onpast drawings without knowing the results?

1) Not everyone lives in Florida.

2) Not everyone uses the same kind of system.

How can one predict the overall path of a hurricane without knowing the vector and temperature of every molecule?

@ time*treat

Meteorology is a science - not always an exact science - but it's still based on atmospheric physics.   I took a course on meteorology & physics but I don't ever remember hearing about a course on playing the lottery.  Maybe your college had a different curriculum. 

Judging from the traffic, I thought everyone DID live in Florida!  lol

Seriously, what states do not have pre-tests before a drawing?  Do you know? 

@Stew - my bad.   I probably shouldn't have mentioned the MIT students in the first place.  A review in the Boston Globe says that most of the story was fabricated, even some of the characters.  MIT students who were interviewed confirm that the book was written to make money off of the "Reality Show" junkies who will believe anything if someone writes it or it's on TV. 

Hmm, I think you have to dig state-by-state for pre-draw info.

To that end, the Ohio lottery website links to all the other state lottery sites.

I've done some modeling of day-day vs. day-eve systems (which, in a way, mimics pre-draws). The results say don't worry about pre-drawings. Now, if you don't believe a system can work, you'd have no interest in pre-drawings (unless you saw the number you played ... show up there. )

Re: Card counting.

As a former casino worker I have to say some of the input here is quite entertaining.

Some things folks should know:

The casinos teach their supervisors card counting. They've even sent them to card counting schools (some become degenerate gamblers themselves, partly due to this).

So many times inside the pit you will hear conversations like, "The guy on BJ 12 thinks he's a good counter but that's as far as it goes."

Card counting is only half of it for a good counter. Sometimes they have to be disguise artists, and they also have to be able to concentrate while being distracted. Floor supervisors are told to "go get that guy in a conversation", just to brak his or her focus.

Varying bets is a giveaway, but only one of many.

Bob stupak used to invite card counters to his casino. His philosophy was that you may know the deck is rich in high or low cards, you may know that there is a King and a four left in the deck. Only God knows which one is going to be dealt first.

For the MIT people, yes, they worked in teams and were very high tech. They got it on for a while. I seriously doubt if anyhting like that will happen again. Casino surveillance has come a long, long way since the days of guys up in catwalks with binouclars.

And I'm prety sure some of these "Beat the house" programs being aired on the Travel Channel and others are silently sponsored by the casinos. Convince them they can come out and beat the house and they'll come out.

No different than people (who have never hit a lottery jackpot) selling books and systems about how to hit a lottery jackpot.

Well 'counting' cards is just keeping track of what percentage of cards in the deck are in your favor, it all depends on what you do with that info!

It takes money to make money!  To win big money using card counting methods any big BlackJack player will tell you that you need to start with a decent amount of money to ride out the lows.  You won't see anyone walking in with $20 to start counting cards seriously! Counting cards only gives you a few percent advantage (if done properly), the whole idea is to take as much advantage of each favorable situation as you can (big bets).

If the system was developed using only the posted results, then the pre-draw information shouldn't be a factor.

More food for thought:

- Nothing in nature is purely random, just so complicated that it can be difficult or impossible to predict.

- Let's say you have a Powerball system that provides a 1% edge. It's not much, but it's better than QP and if you win with numbers you picked you feel more like you "earned it" and deserve more recognition. You'll have quite a few new friends even w/o even giving them actual money!

- The matrix of SuperCash did seem to change Oct. 23, 2005, because they announced a bigger jackpot and introduced the Doubler feature, and the higher numbers began appearing soon after. My question is, did this person's algorithm span across this matrix change, which would have disfavored some higher numbers, since the winning set was low numbers, that's what helped him? If he was doing this penci/paper then it's not likely he went that far back unless it was a very simple freq. analysis but that type only seems to give 3 of 6 at most.

- A thorough backtest will prove or disprove if an algorithm has merit. It can show either that it has no effect, or a slight advantage not enough to overcome the takeout, or so good that it makes profit. I have never seen the third type, but some of mine hover around breakeven.

- I still wonder if he used some kind of computer program or pencil/paper, and if any of it was partly randomized, like filtering out bad #s then QPing the good ones. Or how many he played.

- My suggestion to you if you are worried about pre-draws clouding the stats, use the History QP method. Generate a random X number the width of the drawing (6 for SuperCash) and a random Y number however far back you want to use the history. Do this enough times to get 6 or whatever unique numbers, and play those. You are thus emulating how the drawings are done and also more likely to be the only one winner.

In meantime though I will as soon as I can try to determine what was so special about that set of numbers. I'm thinking maybe hot/cold/due, but since he liked math puzzles he could have been using math instead.

I won't believe them unless they can return with a first prize again within 6 months.

I threw the WI history in my app here for sh*ts and giggles, and checked a few basic methods.

With a pool size of 1025 drawings (back to the matrix change), we get these statistics.

ACTUAL RESULT: 1,5,8,13,24,26

If we look at the HOT numbers ranked from HOT to COLD, 5 were decently close to the top. 

 HOT number ranks that hit were: Rank # 4,5,6,7,10,25

If we look at the DUE numbers with a pool size of 1025, this is the ranking.

 DUE ranks that hit were: Rank # 2,4,13,16,23,34

Note: My 'DUE' calculation is based on the (total hits/hit count) = avg hits, then number of draws out compared to the avg. (i.e., a ball that averages once per 9 draws and was drawn 8 drawings ago is 'due'). 

If we look at the COLD numbers (longest since they hit), this is the ranking:

 COLD ranks were: Rank # 3,9,17,18,25,33

Interesting spread on those COLD numbers, eh? Almost symmetrical.

Those should be the basic stats using the maximum pool size before the matrix change.  Of course, even if he was using the same basic methods his pool size could be completely different.

I wonder if you scan past the matrix change? Or less? Also 1000-something drawings would require either a computer program or a very simple algorithm. A simple "hot/cold/due" tally can be done by rewriting the frequencies each drawing. It's possible he QP'd the top however-many but the "1" is weird. Maybe his due calc. is different OR maybe there is a bug in his system as I have sometimes in mine. He wants to patent his system which sounds like it's compex and/or a program because you probably can't patent "frequency count" method or "hot-cold-due" because those are used by a lot of people. I strongly doubt his method is as simple as frequency; there'd have been many other winners.

What we know is 4 winning tickets were turned in purchased from different locations.

The Wisc SuperCash 6/39 game pays up to 20 fixed jackpots of $350,000. each.  After that a pool of $7 million is divided among winners.

Tickets are 2 for a dollar.

The game is computer drawn.

Just because 4 winning tickets were presented to the lottery, there may have also been lower tier prizes paid in cash if a wheel was used.

The winners may have had the experience of winning multiple 4 and 5 number prizes on one ticket they had to turn in and pay taxes on, hence the desire to break up the plays.

Or, they may have wanted to make sure the plays were viewed as totally independent of each other, by the lottery.  It is impossible to judge the thinking of people who may be guessing what the optimal strategy of dealing with planning to present the lottery with four winning tickets.

There may not be any such thing as a winning formula, but there certainly are traps that can be laid for the lottery to fall into if you're willing to wait long enough, like playing $10. on 5-5-5-5 every day.

BobP
 

Really, it's computer-drawn?

A game that is computerized has to be approached much differently than a ball-drawing. Computerized games are purely numeric-based. They said he is a fan of math puzzles. It would mean his system is probably limited to computerized games then, but I'd still want to look at it. Think of it, if the system is good then it can foil those pesky computerized games...maybe now the Lotteries would have to ditch them! Isn't that what we want? Also with computerized, it doesn't much matter about pre-tests. This encourages me to develop some math-based algorithms for computerized games like PA Treasure Hunt and Hot Lotto.

Why Quad 5? Why not 7-8-9-0 or something? It would be costing $140 a week just for that one play, and when it did win they take taxes so I'd hope the 5555 comes out four times as often as any other 4-digit. Unless that # is special you'll wait an average 15 or 30 years before you win.