Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 6, 2016, 11:05 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Fooled by Randomness

Topic closed. 297 replies. Last post 6 years ago by jimmy4164.

Page 3 of 20
42
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 9, 2010, 1:55 pm - IP Logged

Had I played the previous number for $1 in 5400 drawings and hit 6 times, I would have lost $2400 because the lotteries have a statistical payoff edge over any pick-3 bet. There probably are money management methods where betting the same number could show a slight profit, but realistically it's better to find something with a higher statistical probability than slightly better than average.

Basically you found something in the past that statistically exceeded the average for that time period without any guarantee it will continue into the future.

Stack47,

In state lotteries, you are not going to do any better than this.  Correction: MO "Claims" to pay out 63.7% at their website, but my calculations on their payouts don't agree.  I find them closer to 50%.  It's a moot point anyway; to end up with 64 Cents  for a dollar is a losing proposition too!

It should be no surprise that the number (308) had to appear [nearly] TWICE as many times (23) as probability would expect (11.6) in order for it to basically BREAK EVEN.  A simple way to see this is to observe that PA keeps 1/2 (0.5) of the gross take every day for State program funding.  The other half is payed to the winners.  A little more theoretical way to see it is to note that a Straight $1 ticket ONLY pays $500 in PA, and the mathematical odds of winning it are 1:1000.  The Expected Value of a Wager (EV) is the Probability of Winning PROB(W) multipled by the Payoff (P) IF you Win.  In this case:

EV = PROB(W) *  P

EV = 0.001 * 500

EV = 0.50

The Expected Value of a $1 Straight Win ticket in this lottery is Fifty Cents.

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

In PA, Boxed Tickets pay as follows ($1 Plays):

Three unique digits (Example 123)    $80

Pair                         (Example 811)    $160

Trips                        (Example 444)     Not Sold

Using these Payouts and the Expected Value calculation above as a guide,  please calculate the EV for each of the 2 Boxed ticket types.

--Jimmy

P.S. Please excuse the pedagogy; in another life I was a part time teacher. Big Smile  I found that exercises like these help in the understanding of principals.  If this is old stuff for you, don't be insulted - look for my mistakes!  Smile

P.S.S.  The value of the big Jackpot games to me is that from the time you buy your ticket until they "spin the wheel," you can dream!  It doesn't bother me to know that UNLESS I Hit the Jackpot, I will lose 1/2 of my investment over time, because I don't "Invest" too much!


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 9, 2010, 5:35 pm - IP Logged

    The PA evening pick-3 drawing is and has always been done by live ball drawings.

    There is much more to probability than assuming each number should be drawn one time every 1000 drawings and the results show this. Looking at the last 1000 PA evening drawings, the digit 9 appeared 81 times in the first position meaning it was impossible for for at least 19 numbers starting with the digit 9 to be drawn in those 1000 drawings. The digit 2 was drawn 91 times and 6 was drawn 92 giving another 17 numbers. In the second digit position there were 5 digits failing to be drawn 100 times so add at least another 34 numbers. The third position had at least another 33 numbers for a total of at least 103 numbers (10%) that had no chance of being drawn.

    Simply put, any digit in any position must be drawn at least 100 times before all 100 numbers using that digit can be drawn. It's cause and affect because if one digit in any position is drawn more than average at least one other digit will be drawn less than average meaning it's impossible for at least one 3 digit number to be drawn.

    Comparing PA's live ball drawing results to TN RNG drawing, PA had at least 103 impossible numbers and TN had 111. To get the best comparison we would need to compare all the live ball drawing with all the RNG drawings, but for now comparing two is should be sufficient because of the time it would take.

    Stack47,

    I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying.  There were more or less single digits in a particular collumn NOT because some other collumn was making it impossible for them to appear, but because they just happened to emerge from the machine when they did.  Your comment seems to imply there is some sort of communication among the balls in different machines.  I put a lot of effort into the posts above, the ones displaying the 33+ year results.  I thought what I posted would dispel some of the myths like numbers that are "due," etc.

    "Simply put, any digit in any position must be drawn at least 100 times before all 100 numbers using that digit can be drawn."

    This is what is called a Truism, but it doesn't tell us a thing!  During the course of the drawings, there was nothing impossible about ANY ball emerging from ANY machine at ANY time, as long as the balls/machines were fair.  Once it's all over, the results just ARE!

    I've said this before here, and I'm not being sarcastic.  If there is concern that particular ball sets or machines are being rigged, high frame/second recordings of the drawings from an HD TV signal can expose them easily.

      --Jimmy

      RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

      United States
      Member #59354
      March 13, 2008
      3966 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 10, 2010, 3:47 am - IP Logged

      Jimmy

      Very nice workup but I am still having a little trouble understanding what you are seeking.

      I would think that the law of large numbers would prove that any lottery that has been 

      around for any lenth of time would fit this finding.  I still think that all the data produced with

      this type of analsys falls into the "blinded by the masses" folder.  Let me explain, if you apply

      and look for any certian event within the entire draw history then the smaller events are averaged

      into the whole and cannot be seen.

      Most players of pick-3 games often look for runs of certian numbers or patterens that may last

      for only a few sets.  Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run 

      ends.  Some of the findings here are remarkable if only for a short time.   If one used a much

      smaller sample of data and looked for anomalies I would think this could improve ones play.

      The idea of searching for these anomalies and adjusting how or what one plays could give

      some sort of an advantage but would be very hard to prove if tested against the entire history

      of the game as the averages would conceal it.   If one seeks to find a one solution fits all method

      of play than yes, your analsys would prove that this cannot be done, However it does not allow for

      the player that adjust his or her play on a regular basis according to the short term findings.

       

      Just trying to understand.

      RL

      Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

      I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

      they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

      USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

        US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:59 pm - IP Logged

        Jimmy

        Very nice workup but I am still having a little trouble understanding what you are seeking.

        I would think that the law of large numbers would prove that any lottery that has been 

        around for any lenth of time would fit this finding.  I still think that all the data produced with

        this type of analsys falls into the "blinded by the masses" folder.  Let me explain, if you apply

        and look for any certian event within the entire draw history then the smaller events are averaged

        into the whole and cannot be seen.

        Most players of pick-3 games often look for runs of certian numbers or patterens that may last

        for only a few sets.  Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run 

        ends.  Some of the findings here are remarkable if only for a short time.   If one used a much

        smaller sample of data and looked for anomalies I would think this could improve ones play.

        The idea of searching for these anomalies and adjusting how or what one plays could give

        some sort of an advantage but would be very hard to prove if tested against the entire history

        of the game as the averages would conceal it.   If one seeks to find a one solution fits all method

        of play than yes, your analsys would prove that this cannot be done, However it does not allow for

        the player that adjust his or her play on a regular basis according to the short term findings.

         

        Just trying to understand.

        RL

        RL,

        Thanks for your questions.  You may have noticed that I take a slower, pedagogical approach to these issues.  Bear with me.

        Sorry, but I must first reply with a question.  You said:

        "Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run ends."

        In your opinion, if you are in the middle of a "run," what factors, events, or causes must occur "before the run ends?"

        --Jimmy

          Avatar
          Kentucky
          United States
          Member #32652
          February 14, 2006
          7308 Posts
          Online
          Posted: August 10, 2010, 1:23 pm - IP Logged

          Stack47,

          In state lotteries, you are not going to do any better than this.  Correction: MO "Claims" to pay out 63.7% at their website, but my calculations on their payouts don't agree.  I find them closer to 50%.  It's a moot point anyway; to end up with 64 Cents  for a dollar is a losing proposition too!

          It should be no surprise that the number (308) had to appear [nearly] TWICE as many times (23) as probability would expect (11.6) in order for it to basically BREAK EVEN.  A simple way to see this is to observe that PA keeps 1/2 (0.5) of the gross take every day for State program funding.  The other half is payed to the winners.  A little more theoretical way to see it is to note that a Straight $1 ticket ONLY pays $500 in PA, and the mathematical odds of winning it are 1:1000.  The Expected Value of a Wager (EV) is the Probability of Winning PROB(W) multipled by the Payoff (P) IF you Win.  In this case:

          EV = PROB(W) *  P

          EV = 0.001 * 500

          EV = 0.50

          The Expected Value of a $1 Straight Win ticket in this lottery is Fifty Cents.

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

          In PA, Boxed Tickets pay as follows ($1 Plays):

          Three unique digits (Example 123)    $80

          Pair                         (Example 811)    $160

          Trips                        (Example 444)     Not Sold

          Using these Payouts and the Expected Value calculation above as a guide,  please calculate the EV for each of the 2 Boxed ticket types.

          --Jimmy

          P.S. Please excuse the pedagogy; in another life I was a part time teacher. Big Smile  I found that exercises like these help in the understanding of principals.  If this is old stuff for you, don't be insulted - look for my mistakes!  Smile

          P.S.S.  The value of the big Jackpot games to me is that from the time you buy your ticket until they "spin the wheel," you can dream!  It doesn't bother me to know that UNLESS I Hit the Jackpot, I will lose 1/2 of my investment over time, because I don't "Invest" too much!

          Lots of states payout up to 65% on their scratch-off tickets but quickly erase that on their terminal games. Most pick-3 games have a slightly more than 50% house edge because of their payoff structure. Knowing the odds against are 999 to 1 and the payoff odds are $499 to $1 (they keep the buck you bet so the most you can win is $499), it's easy to see the 50% house edge. The house edge is even higher in boxed bets because lotteries round off the payoffs in their favor. $500 divided by 6 equals $83.33 and some lotteries keep the 33 cents adding to their edge. Other lotteries pay $80 adding another $3.33 to their edge and the extra edge stays consistent in 3-way boxes too.

          In Kentucky the pick-3 pays $600 to $1 and the box bets pay proportionally to the straight payoffs; $100 for 6-way and $200 for 3-ways. While a house edge of 40% isn't that much better, at least we know it doesn't get higher by betting other ways on the same game.

          The next step is to find betting strategies to lower the house edge where making a profit is possible.

            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

            United States
            Member #59354
            March 13, 2008
            3966 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 10, 2010, 4:58 pm - IP Logged

            RL,

            Thanks for your questions.  You may have noticed that I take a slower, pedagogical approach to these issues.  Bear with me.

            Sorry, but I must first reply with a question.  You said:

            "Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run ends."

            In your opinion, if you are in the middle of a "run," what factors, events, or causes must occur "before the run ends?"

            --Jimmy

            Jimmy

            If I had identified what I though was good data then I would give it one to three

            draws to hit and if it did not come up I would move on.  I once became interested

            in the P-3 game and tried to come up with a winning method and the best I could

            do is below.

             

            I could be wrong here as I am going from memory as it has been a few years.

            There are 64 different patterns that can be gotten from Low/HI and Odd/Even.

            The fewest sets produced from these patterns equal 8 and the highest = 27

            I only played on days when I though one of the patterns that produced 8 sets

            would come up.  I built many test DB's using 5000 random generated sets and

            tracked the SD's for each of the 64 patterns.  When I found a run of data from the

            p-3 game that matched very closely the data gotten from the groups of random

            DB's then I would watch all the patterns that would be drawn over several days. 

            If several of the patterns drawn matched the predicted patterns from the data

            gotten from the random DB's Then I would play the one set from the group of

            predicted patterns that I thought would hit next. 

            This method required a lot of wait and see and many times nothing would line up. 

            I gave up on this because of the time involved.  I never purchased tickets durning

            this time and played only on paper.   I was going to build smaller DB's and use the

            SD data from these thinking that before the LLN took over I could get better data

            but got tired of messing with it.  I still think that this could be useful to someone 

            that really liked the game.

            RL

            Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

            I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

            they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

            USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

              US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

              Avatar
              NASHVILLE, TENN
              United States
              Member #33372
              February 20, 2006
              1044 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 10, 2010, 5:38 pm - IP Logged

              R-L

              You seem to have a good handle on statistics.  While statistical theories will tell you if a lottery is random or not, statistics will not produce a profitable system.  All those tests will only tell you what happened; they will never tell you what will happen.

              Knowing what happened in the past is all we have. There are some, and I count myself among them, that think what happened in the past will happen in the future.

              I salute you in your endeavors.  Keep up the good work.

              One definition of "skewed" can be "Not conforming to the norm or to theory".  I am sure you have seen charts that were not bell curves but rather skewed to the right or the left. This was the method some lotto players used to determine that Tennessee's RNG was deliberately excluding triples and quads.  The Tennessee RNG did not conform to the norm; their results were skewed.

                Avatar
                Kentucky
                United States
                Member #32652
                February 14, 2006
                7308 Posts
                Online
                Posted: August 10, 2010, 7:03 pm - IP Logged

                Stack47,

                I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying.  There were more or less single digits in a particular collumn NOT because some other collumn was making it impossible for them to appear, but because they just happened to emerge from the machine when they did.  Your comment seems to imply there is some sort of communication among the balls in different machines.  I put a lot of effort into the posts above, the ones displaying the 33+ year results.  I thought what I posted would dispel some of the myths like numbers that are "due," etc.

                "Simply put, any digit in any position must be drawn at least 100 times before all 100 numbers using that digit can be drawn."

                This is what is called a Truism, but it doesn't tell us a thing!  During the course of the drawings, there was nothing impossible about ANY ball emerging from ANY machine at ANY time, as long as the balls/machines were fair.  Once it's all over, the results just ARE!

                I've said this before here, and I'm not being sarcastic.  If there is concern that particular ball sets or machines are being rigged, high frame/second recordings of the drawings from an HD TV signal can expose them easily.

                  --Jimmy

                "I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying."

                If any digit in any position is drawn more than 100 times in 1000 drawings it has to effect one or more of the other digits because they will be drawn less than 100 times. In the example I gave, the digit 9 in the first position was only drawn 81 times in the past 1000 drawings. Since there are 100 three digit numbers using the digit 9 (900 to 999), we know for a fact at least 19 three digit numbers were not drawn in those 1000 drawings.

                Take a look at the last 10 drawings and count the number of digits drawn in each position and I'll bet you'll notice one digit or more of the digits hitting more than once and a couple of digits not hitting at all. When you look at 100 drawings you see digits in each position not drawn 10, less than 100 in 1000 drawings and less than 1000 times in 10,000 drawings. So how many times each digit is drawn does have an effect how many three digit containing that digit can be drawn.


                  United States
                  Member #93947
                  July 10, 2010
                  2180 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 11, 2010, 12:15 am - IP Logged

                  Jimmy

                  If I had identified what I though was good data then I would give it one to three

                  draws to hit and if it did not come up I would move on.  I once became interested

                  in the P-3 game and tried to come up with a winning method and the best I could

                  do is below.

                   

                  I could be wrong here as I am going from memory as it has been a few years.

                  There are 64 different patterns that can be gotten from Low/HI and Odd/Even.

                  The fewest sets produced from these patterns equal 8 and the highest = 27

                  I only played on days when I though one of the patterns that produced 8 sets

                  would come up.  I built many test DB's using 5000 random generated sets and

                  tracked the SD's for each of the 64 patterns.  When I found a run of data from the

                  p-3 game that matched very closely the data gotten from the groups of random

                  DB's then I would watch all the patterns that would be drawn over several days. 

                  If several of the patterns drawn matched the predicted patterns from the data

                  gotten from the random DB's Then I would play the one set from the group of

                  predicted patterns that I thought would hit next. 

                  This method required a lot of wait and see and many times nothing would line up. 

                  I gave up on this because of the time involved.  I never purchased tickets durning

                  this time and played only on paper.   I was going to build smaller DB's and use the

                  SD data from these thinking that before the LLN took over I could get better data

                  but got tired of messing with it.  I still think that this could be useful to someone 

                  that really liked the game.

                  RL

                  RL,

                  I don't feel your response answered my question.  If you addressed it at all, it was to suggest that observations of previous runs or patterns tended to have a limited duration, prompting you to prepare to "pull the trigger" when one of those extremes approached, without a hint of what might, precisely, cause an end to it. 

                  ---------Again, here is my question----------

                  RL,

                  Thanks for your questions.  You may have noticed that I take a slower, pedagogical approach to these issues.  Bear with me.

                  Sorry, but I must first reply with a question.  You said:

                  "Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run ends."

                  In your opinion, if you are in the middle of a "run," what factors, events, or causes must occur "before the run ends?"

                  --Jimmy

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

                  When you talk about hurrying to take advantage of something before it ends, you must have some thought in your mind regarding just WHAT might cause IT to end.  I can only conjecture what you think that might be, since you don't really say.  What I believe your words most strongly suggest is that you suspect, possibly subconciously, that RANDOM PROCESSES are at work!  In the case of my P3 data, these processes are machine air currents and surface friction, and ball weight and diameter.

                  --Jimmy


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 11, 2010, 1:32 am - IP Logged

                    "I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying."

                    If any digit in any position is drawn more than 100 times in 1000 drawings it has to effect one or more of the other digits because they will be drawn less than 100 times. In the example I gave, the digit 9 in the first position was only drawn 81 times in the past 1000 drawings. Since there are 100 three digit numbers using the digit 9 (900 to 999), we know for a fact at least 19 three digit numbers were not drawn in those 1000 drawings.

                    Take a look at the last 10 drawings and count the number of digits drawn in each position and I'll bet you'll notice one digit or more of the digits hitting more than once and a couple of digits not hitting at all. When you look at 100 drawings you see digits in each position not drawn 10, less than 100 in 1000 drawings and less than 1000 times in 10,000 drawings. So how many times each digit is drawn does have an effect how many three digit containing that digit can be drawn.

                    Stack47,

                    You have just paraphrased your previous post.

                    The key to understanding your logical error is to realize that you are basing your statements on an analysis of a string of digits that were drawn in the past.  History.  The fact that elementary arithmetic allows you to correctly assert things like, "There are no more than 981 unique 3 digit numbers in this set of 1000," after only observing a deficiency of the digit 9 in the first collumn, is of no consequence, a Truism.  It definitely does NOT support the assertion of any sort of cause and effect relationship among any of the things we're discussing here!

                    Imagine you are sitting on the floor in front of the 3 ping pong ball machines of some state lottery that are about to be used to draw the night's P-3.  Let's assume for the sake of discussion that by some stroke of luck, or the correct allignment of the planets, or whatever, the last 999 numbers drawn by this lottery were unique, the only one not yet drawn being, say, 102.  Now, in this case, you would have already observed that there were only 99 occurences of the digit 1 in the first position.  If all you knew about was this shortage, you could have said, "There is at least one number in the 100s missing from the last 999!"  Big deal!  Of what value to a P-3 player is this FACTOID, or TRUISM?  I contend that it is of absolutley NO VALUE, and notwithstanding the fact that 102 has not been drawn for at least 2 years and 9 months, the chances of 102 being the number drawn that night are simply, 1:1000.

                    --Jimmy


                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 11, 2010, 2:40 am - IP Logged

                      Current Effort to Write a Computerized Backtest of a Popular P-3 System

                      Go here to read a request I made to twedk about 24 hours ago.  It's too soon to speculate whether he or she is willing to cooperate; I will wait a few days before giving up.  twedk last posted on the 8th.  Not being familiar with notation many here may understand, I wasn't able to glean enough info to start writing the module.  This link will explain what I would like to do.

                      http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/207517/1737462

                      Comments?

                      --Jimmy4164

                      p.s.  I didn't forget about further results promised above.  I'm still waiting for some good feedback on what I've reported already.  I really like specificity!

                        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                        United States
                        Member #59354
                        March 13, 2008
                        3966 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 11, 2010, 5:15 am - IP Logged

                        RL,

                        I don't feel your response answered my question.  If you addressed it at all, it was to suggest that observations of previous runs or patterns tended to have a limited duration, prompting you to prepare to "pull the trigger" when one of those extremes approached, without a hint of what might, precisely, cause an end to it. 

                        ---------Again, here is my question----------

                        RL,

                        Thanks for your questions.  You may have noticed that I take a slower, pedagogical approach to these issues.  Bear with me.

                        Sorry, but I must first reply with a question.  You said:

                        "Some of these repeat but one must find and utilize them before the run ends."

                        In your opinion, if you are in the middle of a "run," what factors, events, or causes must occur "before the run ends?"

                        --Jimmy

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

                        When you talk about hurrying to take advantage of something before it ends, you must have some thought in your mind regarding just WHAT might cause IT to end.  I can only conjecture what you think that might be, since you don't really say.  What I believe your words most strongly suggest is that you suspect, possibly subconciously, that RANDOM PROCESSES are at work!  In the case of my P3 data, these processes are machine air currents and surface friction, and ball weight and diameter.

                        --Jimmy

                        Jimmy

                        Guerrilla warfare.  Plan, Strike, and then Get the Hell out of there.  I did answer the questions

                        just not in the way you expected.  When I find the data matches = start,  When the data starts to

                        converge = play, and after I play = end .  I then start looking for my next target and the process

                        starts again.   The P-3 game is only as random as 1000 sets can be random.  Each draw has 3

                        balls and each must be drawn from a group of 10, (0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9)  Selecting 1 from 10

                        gives 1 in 10 odds times 3 = 10X10X10 = 1000.  Because there are only 1000 possible sets

                        that can be drawn and given the LLN will always, if it is fair, converge to a very predictable

                        outcome.  If I begin with odds of 1 in 64  or if I play two patterns that gives 1 in 32 odds then

                        I think that my odds have improved.   Any real play in my opinion requires a base or foundation

                        from which all decisions must be made.  If I select at random then the first set has 1 in999,

                        the second has 1 in 998  and so on.  Lets say that you play 16 random sets equal to 2 of

                        the lower set producing patterns of the O/E-H/L .  16/1000 = .016 and I play 2 patterns from

                        the 64 total O/E-H/L patterns 2/64=1/32 = .03125 my odds of hitting would be twice as good

                        as picking random sets.  This may be a play on math but it works.  If I am wrong, I am wrong but

                        If I am right then I win.  Both plays cost $16.00.      

                         

                        RL  

                        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                          JonnyBgood07's avatar - Patriots logo1.jpg
                          Connecticut
                          United States
                          Member #61623
                          May 29, 2008
                          20581 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 11, 2010, 5:46 am - IP Logged

                          when random is clean,you will see scenarios in which a given position is 1 more than a recent Play4..example..it was no mystery to me the middle digit in NC last night had to be an 8..notice how it cleanly is one more than the recent P4

                           

                          Drawing DatePick 3Pick 4
                          MiddayEveningMiddayEvening
                          Tue, Aug 10, 20101-8-54-8-56-8-4-8
                          Mon, Aug 9, 20107-2-18-0-10-0-3-4
                          Sun, Aug 8, 2010xxxx5-0-1
                          Sat, Aug 7, 20107-7-35-3-03-8-3-1
                          Fri, Aug 6, 20107-7-43-0-62-2-2-4
                          Thu, Aug 5, 20100-6-52-5-12-9-9-7

                          "No matter how bad things may get, I'd like to thank my middle finger

                          for always sticking up for me.."

                           


                            Avatar
                            Kentucky
                            United States
                            Member #32652
                            February 14, 2006
                            7308 Posts
                            Online
                            Posted: August 11, 2010, 11:04 am - IP Logged

                            Stack47,

                            You have just paraphrased your previous post.

                            The key to understanding your logical error is to realize that you are basing your statements on an analysis of a string of digits that were drawn in the past.  History.  The fact that elementary arithmetic allows you to correctly assert things like, "There are no more than 981 unique 3 digit numbers in this set of 1000," after only observing a deficiency of the digit 9 in the first collumn, is of no consequence, a Truism.  It definitely does NOT support the assertion of any sort of cause and effect relationship among any of the things we're discussing here!

                            Imagine you are sitting on the floor in front of the 3 ping pong ball machines of some state lottery that are about to be used to draw the night's P-3.  Let's assume for the sake of discussion that by some stroke of luck, or the correct allignment of the planets, or whatever, the last 999 numbers drawn by this lottery were unique, the only one not yet drawn being, say, 102.  Now, in this case, you would have already observed that there were only 99 occurences of the digit 1 in the first position.  If all you knew about was this shortage, you could have said, "There is at least one number in the 100s missing from the last 999!"  Big deal!  Of what value to a P-3 player is this FACTOID, or TRUISM?  I contend that it is of absolutley NO VALUE, and notwithstanding the fact that 102 has not been drawn for at least 2 years and 9 months, the chances of 102 being the number drawn that night are simply, 1:1000.

                            --Jimmy

                            "I see says the blind man"

                            "It definitely does NOT support the assertion of any sort of cause and effect relationship among any of the things we're discussing here!"

                            Because the same probability applies had the poll asked how many times should 811 or any other three digit number be drawn in the last 33 years and based on some of the replies, I wrong assumed you were going in that direction.  And I should have known better because of what I was talking about in the other thread.

                            How many three digit numbers repeated within the next three drawings?


                              United States
                              Member #93947
                              July 10, 2010
                              2180 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 11, 2010, 9:12 pm - IP Logged

                              Jimmy

                              Guerrilla warfare.  Plan, Strike, and then Get the Hell out of there.  I did answer the questions

                              just not in the way you expected.  When I find the data matches = start,  When the data starts to

                              converge = play, and after I play = end .  I then start looking for my next target and the process

                              starts again.   The P-3 game is only as random as 1000 sets can be random.  Each draw has 3

                              balls and each must be drawn from a group of 10, (0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9)  Selecting 1 from 10

                              gives 1 in 10 odds times 3 = 10X10X10 = 1000.  Because there are only 1000 possible sets

                              that can be drawn and given the LLN will always, if it is fair, converge to a very predictable

                              outcome.  If I begin with odds of 1 in 64  or if I play two patterns that gives 1 in 32 odds then

                              I think that my odds have improved.   Any real play in my opinion requires a base or foundation

                              from which all decisions must be made.  If I select at random then the first set has 1 in999,

                              the second has 1 in 998  and so on.  Lets say that you play 16 random sets equal to 2 of

                              the lower set producing patterns of the O/E-H/L .  16/1000 = .016 and I play 2 patterns from

                              the 64 total O/E-H/L patterns 2/64=1/32 = .03125 my odds of hitting would be twice as good

                              as picking random sets.  This may be a play on math but it works.  If I am wrong, I am wrong but

                              If I am right then I win.  Both plays cost $16.00.      

                               

                              RL  

                              RL,

                              "If I begin with odds of 1 in 64  or if I play two patterns that gives 1 in 32 odds..."

                              You don't "begin" with odds of 1:64 when you throw out 936 possibilities; the odds are still 1:1000.

                              Your fallacy in asserting 1:64 odds is based on the erroneous assumption that the probability is 1.0

                              that the winning number is NOT in the discarded set.     Get it?

                               

                              "...then I think that my odds have improved."

                              I don't think so.


                              --Jimmy4164


                                 
                                Page 3 of 20