Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 11:14 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

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

Topic closed. 104 replies. Last post 6 years ago by Hermanus104.

Page 4 of 7
51
PrintE-mailLink

From Quick Picks to Winning Numbers, Are We Getting Truly Random Numbers from the Various Lotteries?

Yes [ 29 ]  [29.59%]
No [ 52 ]  [53.06%]
Don't know/Don't care/Doesn't matter to me [ 11 ]  [11.22%]
Other [ 6 ]  [6.12%]
Total Valid Votes [ 98 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 1 ]  
Avatar
United States
United States
Member #60097
April 5, 2008
3957 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 9, 2010, 1:55 pm - IP Logged

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

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

06/06/20101   0   6                Payout
03/15/20091   0   6                Payout
02/19/20091   0   6                Payout
02/10/20091   0   6                Payout
01/28/20091   0   6                Payout
09/05/20081   0   6                Payout
02/18/20101   6   2                Payout
11/11/20091   6   2                Payout
02/24/20091   6   2                Payout
01/13/20091   6   2                Payout
01/02/20091   6   2                Payout
02/20/20081   6   2                Payout
07/31/20041   4   6                Payout
06/29/20041   4   6                Payout
02/06/20041   4   6                Payout
11/01/20031   4   6                Payout
09/13/20031   4   6                Payout

 

11/18/20095   5   1                Payout
09/23/20095   5   1                Payout
06/25/20095   5   1                Payout
03/19/20095   5   1                Payout
02/13/20095   5   1                Payout

Big Wins For All!


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 9, 2010, 5:00 pm - IP Logged

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

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

    06/06/20101   0   6                Payout
    03/15/20091   0   6                Payout
    02/19/20091   0   6                Payout
    02/10/20091   0   6                Payout
    01/28/20091   0   6                Payout
    09/05/20081   0   6                Payout
    02/18/20101   6   2                Payout
    11/11/20091   6   2                Payout
    02/24/20091   6   2                Payout
    01/13/20091   6   2                Payout
    01/02/20091   6   2                Payout
    02/20/20081   6   2                Payout
    07/31/20041   4   6                Payout
    06/29/20041   4   6                Payout
    02/06/20041   4   6                Payout
    11/01/20031   4   6                Payout
    09/13/20031   4   6                Payout

     

    11/18/20095   5   1                Payout
    09/23/20095   5   1                Payout
    06/25/20095   5   1                Payout
    03/19/20095   5   1                Payout
    02/13/20095   5   1                Payout

    Keystone,

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

    Go here:

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

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

    --Jimmy


      United States
      Member #93947
      July 10, 2010
      2180 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 9, 2010, 6:01 pm - IP Logged

      The Texas lottery website has a feature where any Pick 5 combination ready for play can be compared to all prior drawings where
      the winning combination has 2 or more hits.

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

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

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

      analysis they are conducting.

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

      bobby623,

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

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

      See my Thread here for further discussion and demonstration of this topic.

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

      --Jimmy

        jarasan's avatar - new patrick.gif
        Harbinger
        D.C./MD.
        United States
        Member #44103
        July 30, 2006
        5583 Posts
        Online
        Posted: August 9, 2010, 6:51 pm - IP Logged

        Random Number Generator = Rigged Number Generator(S)

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

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

          truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
          Michigan
          United States
          Member #22395
          September 24, 2005
          1583 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 9, 2010, 7:01 pm - IP Logged

          Random Number Generator = Rigged Number Generator(S)

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

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

          I Agree!

          Man has come this far with balls - let it continue!

            psykomo's avatar - animal shark.jpg

            United States
            Member #4877
            May 30, 2004
            5115 Posts
            Online
            Posted: August 10, 2010, 1:39 am - IP Logged

            Seems to be a lot of controversy about this question.

            Let's see what the majority says.

            Please explain.

            rdgrnr:

            I voted>>>>>>>>>>Jack-in-the-BoxBig Grin AngelBig Grin AngelWhite BounceWhite BounceBanana(LET>>>U>>Know>>$JACKPOT$!!!!!!}

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

            named>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"LOTTERY POST".......................$!!!!!!}

            a Corvette will pick U^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@@@@@@@@>>DOCK (lp)!


              Avatar
              NY
              United States
              Member #23835
              October 16, 2005
              3474 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 10, 2010, 2:20 am - IP Logged

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

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

              The next question is what damage you suffered and how much they owe you as compensation, and that's the problematic part. Whatever the deal is with the RNG, when it spits out the ticket there is no winning number for it to match. Once the winning numbers are selected there's a chance it will match the numbers on your ticket regardless of how few of the possible combinations the RNG could have given you. You'll never be able to prove that you would have won something if the RNG could have generated combinations from a larger pool, so your maximum loss is limited to the cost of the ticket(s) you bought.

              About the only realistic possibility I see would be if you shared a parimutuel prize with an unexpectedly large number of winners because a significant percentage of the RNG's only generated a limited set of the possible combinations. In that case probability would demonstrate the amount of the damage. You'd still have to prove that the lottery had failed to meet some obligation to you. In the past, NY advertised benefits of playing QP's. I believe one of th eclaimed benefits was that  the comb9inations played would be more random (no concentration of birthday numbers, for example) and that jackpots would be less likely to be shared. If they made that promise and failed to deliver you might have a good case. Note that you would have to prove the RNGs were defective, not just that there were more winners than suggested by probability.

              *Note that the numbers aren't ever truly random, in that they are limited to those that are used in the game. Obviously the RNG shouldn't randomly spit out numbers that aren't in the matrix. If an RNG was programmed so that it could only generate 20% of the possible combiantions it could still generate randomly from within that 20%. What is an advertiser actually promising you if they simply say you'll get a combination that is random?

                truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                Michigan
                United States
                Member #22395
                September 24, 2005
                1583 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 10, 2010, 2:40 am - IP Logged

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

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

                The next question is what damage you suffered and how much they owe you as compensation, and that's the problematic part. Whatever the deal is with the RNG, when it spits out the ticket there is no winning number for it to match. Once the winning numbers are selected there's a chance it will match the numbers on your ticket regardless of how few of the possible combinations the RNG could have given you. You'll never be able to prove that you would have won something if the RNG could have generated combinations from a larger pool, so your maximum loss is limited to the cost of the ticket(s) you bought.

                About the only realistic possibility I see would be if you shared a parimutuel prize with an unexpectedly large number of winners because a significant percentage of the RNG's only generated a limited set of the possible combinations. In that case probability would demonstrate the amount of the damage. You'd still have to prove that the lottery had failed to meet some obligation to you. In the past, NY advertised benefits of playing QP's. I believe one of th eclaimed benefits was that  the comb9inations played would be more random (no concentration of birthday numbers, for example) and that jackpots would be less likely to be shared. If they made that promise and failed to deliver you might have a good case. Note that you would have to prove the RNGs were defective, not just that there were more winners than suggested by probability.

                *Note that the numbers aren't ever truly random, in that they are limited to those that are used in the game. Obviously the RNG shouldn't randomly spit out numbers that aren't in the matrix. If an RNG was programmed so that it could only generate 20% of the possible combiantions it could still generate randomly from within that 20%. What is an advertiser actually promising you if they simply say you'll get a combination that is random?

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

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

                  rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                  Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                  United States
                  Member #73904
                  April 28, 2009
                  14903 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 10, 2010, 4:10 am - IP Logged

                  rdgrnr:

                  I voted>>>>>>>>>>Jack-in-the-BoxBig Grin AngelBig Grin AngelWhite BounceWhite BounceBanana(LET>>>U>>Know>>$JACKPOT$!!!!!!}

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

                  named>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"LOTTERY POST".......................$!!!!!!}

                  a Corvette will pick U^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@@@@@@@@>>DOCK (lp)!


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


                                                               
                                       
                                                           

                   

                   

                   

                   

                                                                                                                     

                  "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                              --Edmund Burke

                   

                   

                    bobby623's avatar - abstract
                    San Angelo, Texas
                    United States
                    Member #1097
                    January 31, 2003
                    1394 Posts
                    Online
                    Posted: August 10, 2010, 11:07 am - IP Logged

                    jimmy4164

                    Thanks for the thread.

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

                    Not sure what I would do with any information suggesting a game, which is still in play, is biased one way or another.
                    If elected officials in Tennessee couldn't get rid of computer drawings, I doubt I could convince Texas lottery folks that
                    their games are not fair, if I thought I had information justifying the charge.

                    Personally, I believe the Texas lotteries are 'sufficiently random.' Otherwise, I'd spend my recreation and entertainment funds on
                    something else.

                    I have a workout I use to generate numbers for play. I've never encountered a situation where the data suggested a
                    game is being manipulated.  If I did, I'd probably try and take advantage of it.

                    I said in my initial post that this topic involves 'circular arguments,' ie, global warming. There are no definitive answers.

                    All of the lotteries offer games. We don't have to play.


                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:46 pm - IP Logged

                      jimmy4164

                      Thanks for the thread.

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

                      Not sure what I would do with any information suggesting a game, which is still in play, is biased one way or another.
                      If elected officials in Tennessee couldn't get rid of computer drawings, I doubt I could convince Texas lottery folks that
                      their games are not fair, if I thought I had information justifying the charge.

                      Personally, I believe the Texas lotteries are 'sufficiently random.' Otherwise, I'd spend my recreation and entertainment funds on
                      something else.

                      I have a workout I use to generate numbers for play. I've never encountered a situation where the data suggested a
                      game is being manipulated.  If I did, I'd probably try and take advantage of it.

                      I said in my initial post that this topic involves 'circular arguments,' ie, global warming. There are no definitive answers.

                      All of the lotteries offer games. We don't have to play.

                      bobby523,

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

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

                      --Jimmy

                        bobby623's avatar - abstract
                        San Angelo, Texas
                        United States
                        Member #1097
                        January 31, 2003
                        1394 Posts
                        Online
                        Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:56 pm - IP Logged

                        bobby523,

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

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

                        --Jimmy

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


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 11, 2010, 1:42 am - IP Logged

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

                          The data is public information.

                          Statistical software is available.

                          Probability & Statistics textbooks abound!

                          Be my guest...


                            United States
                            Member #81843
                            October 31, 2009
                            856 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 11, 2010, 4:14 am - IP Logged

                            After 22 years studying chaos, it's apparent to me that there is no "one" definition for chaos and randomness. It has it's ebbs and flows. It has unlikely outcomes. It has harmony from time to time. It has too many variables.

                            Not that it CAN'T be predicted, but it will win in the long run if the person observing doesn't pick up on the nuances along the way. It's ever morphing, like the tides. The same combination of gasses in a given environment will never be the same. No two finger prints will ever match.

                            There is hope. Despite the gloom and doom, one can, and has, enable themselves with tools that can overcome chaos. After 22 years, yesterday i found the best version of the tools needed in the p-3. It was worth every penny of the 50 bucks I spent on getting that info, and I'm excited. It's been a while since I've been so excited about a p-3 system.

                            No matter what the officials do to throw the flow of numbers into a wild and seemingly unpredictable frame of reasoning, one thing will always overcome it. That is knowledge. Steve Player proved that right a while back, and so did the latest contender. The system which I endowed myself with yesterday.

                            Even manipulated machines have limits. Know how to exploit them, and chaos is irrelevant.

                            There will always be bias in all areas of life. Just have to spot the biases.

                             

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

                            Best to you,

                            DD

                              Avatar
                              NY
                              United States
                              Member #23835
                              October 16, 2005
                              3474 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 11, 2010, 12:09 pm - IP Logged

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

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

                              Imagine the winning numbers were drawn before sales started and kept secret until sales ended, and the RNG only chose from 20% of the possible combinations. If the winning numbers weren't in that 20% you'd have a valid argument that the ticket was invalid and had no chance of winning. OTOH, if the winning numbers were in that 20% you'd be 5 times as likely to win. As a practical matter we could expect the winning numbers to be in that 20% 1 out of 5 times, and being 5 times as likely to win in 20% of the drawings would balance the 0% chance in the other 80%. There might be instances where there were more winners of parimutuel prizes than expected by probability, but overall the chances of winning would be exactly the same as when the RNG uses all of the possible combinations.

                              Unfortunately for the hypothetical lawsuit the winning combination doesn't exist until after all of the tickets have been sold. Winning the lottery isn't a case of buying a ticket that matches the winning combination. It's a matter of having them draw a winning combination that matches your ticket. Regardless of what percentage of the combinations might turn up on your QP, once you buy it the chance that the winning combination will match your ticket is determined solely by  the odds of the game. That means that every ticket is valid, and the lottery advertising accurately stated your odds of winning.