Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 24, 2017, 10:05 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

MADDOG'S Powerball Challenges (Discussion)

Topic closed. 82 replies. Last post 6 years ago by jimmy4164.

Page 3 of 6
PrintE-mailLink
RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19904 Posts
Offline
Posted: January 8, 2011, 4:35 pm - IP Logged

 combination size             5
 basic pool size              59
 (B) Bonus pool size          39
 smallest match no (B) number 3
 largest match with bonus     5
 smallest match with bonus    0
 tickets or chances per draw  3168
  possible combos of 5/59 + 1/39 numbers = 195249054
 MATCHES   ODDS              WINNING COMBOS    EXPECTED WINNERS    PAYOUTS
  5/5+B  1 : 195249054        1                        0.00
  5/5+0  1 : 5138133          38                       0.00
  4/5+B  1 : 723145           270                      0.00
  4/5+0  1 : 19030            10260                    0.17        $ 17.0
  3/5+B  1 : 13644            14310                    0.23          23.0
  3/5+0  1 : 359              543780                   8.82          61.7   
  2/5+B  1 : 787              248040                   4.02          28.1
  1/5+B  1 : 123              1581255                 25.66         102.6
  0/5+B  1 : 62               3162510                 51.31         153.9
 ______________________________________________________________________________
 overall odds are 1 : 35.1                            90.2 total expected winners
 5560464 winning combos = 2.84 % of possible combos

 * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
   
             Evil Looking       

    Avatar
    Kentucky
    United States
    Member #32652
    February 14, 2006
    7344 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: January 8, 2011, 9:12 pm - IP Logged

    Stack47,

    You said,  "Do you really need to see a years worth of Challenge statistics to know that had players individually or collectively spent $3168 per drawing playing only 12 wps with only 4 bonus numbers they would have lost lots of money?"  This rhetorical question implies that you believe that had players been able to use their $3168 to buy 3168 Powerball tickets twice a week without the constraints of MadDog's Powerball Challenge, they would have lost less money, or maybe even come out ahead over the year's play.  Inasmuch as the 137 players pretty much won/lost what is to be expected theoretically by chance, I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw.  Of course, I don't expect you to give up any trade secrets; just impress us by estimating how much better you would do.

    Let me do some of the mundane calculating for you.  3168 tickets/draw times 52 weeks times 2 draws/week results in an "investment" of $329,472 over a year.  Assuming you don't hit the Jackpot (A fairly reasonable assumption, don't you think?), the table below tells ME that your expected winnings for the year would be 0.174 times $329,472 or $57,328.  I would say that your expected losses of (329472-57328) $272,144 should not necessarily be considered losses, but the price you would have to pay for 329,472 chances to win the Jackpot.  Come on, at least give us a ballpark hint as to how much better you would do with all that money to bet.

    --Jimmy4164

    P.S.  Some related and interesting reading:

    http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

    http://catlin.casinocitytimes.com/article/lottery-nonsense-8694

     

            MadDog's Powerball Challenge
                     2010/12/29

            01/02/2010  Thru  12/29/2010

                All Draws for 2010

                 137 Participants

        Total Ticket Costs         $8,271,258
        Total Winnings             $1,772,590  

        Overall Gain/Loss         -$6,498,668
     
                     Expected      Actual
             Category       #Wins        ROI*     #Wins     ROI*
     
             0 WB + PB     133991       0.049    124791    0.045
             1 WB + PB      66990       0.032     64153    0.031
             2 WB + PB      10508       0.009      9275    0.008
             3 WB           23037       0.019     27240    0.023
             3 WB + PB        606       0.007       432    0.005
             4 WB             435       0.005       428    0.005
             4 WB + PB         11.438   0.014         0    0.000
             5 WB               1.610   0.039         4    0.097
                                        -----              -----
             Total (Excl Jackpot)       0.174              0.214
     
             JACKPOT            0.042   0.325         0    0.000
     
           * ROI is The Amount Won Per Dollar Spent on Tickets.

    "This rhetorical question implies that you believe that had players been able to use their $3168 to buy 3168 Powerball tickets twice a week without the constraints of MadDog's Powerball Challenge, they would have lost less money, or maybe even come out ahead over the year's play."

    I was clear when I said "they would have lost lots of money". How much money is irrelevant when it's imaginary money.

    "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw."

    If it's all imaginary money, why not make it $10 million?

    Nobody cares how I'd wager imaginary money and I'm the only one that cares about how I wager real money.

    "3168 tickets/draw times 52 weeks times 2 draws/week results in an "investment" of $329,472 over a year."

    Did you forget Maddog has a Mega Millions Challenge too?

    And it's obvious you don't understand how the scoring system works. There has never been even a suggestion of how Challenge players would wager on there Challenge picks. Simply put, wagering imaginary or real money is not part of it.

    "Assuming you don't hit the Jackpot (A fairly reasonable assumption, don't you think?)"

    Are you talking about an imaginary jackpot because that's all you'll ever win wagering imaginary money.

    "I would say that your expected losses of (329472-57328) $272,144 should not necessarily be considered losses,"

    Hopefully you're finally beginning to understand the meaning of "imaginary wagers". If you don't wager real money, you can't win or lose real money. I'm assuming you either don't gamble or haven't done much because if you ever spent a day in Vegas, you'll find out they don't accept imaginary money at the tables or in the slot machines. You have to actually have real cash and that huge difference on how you wager.

    "Come on, at least give us a ballpark hint as to how much better you would do with all that money to bet. "

    Send me the real Benjamins and I'll show you.


      United States
      Member #93947
      July 10, 2010
      2180 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: January 9, 2011, 12:41 am - IP Logged

       combination size             5
       basic pool size              59
       (B) Bonus pool size          39
       smallest match no (B) number 3
       largest match with bonus     5
       smallest match with bonus    0
       tickets or chances per draw  3168
        possible combos of 5/59 + 1/39 numbers = 195249054
       MATCHES   ODDS              WINNING COMBOS    EXPECTED WINNERS    PAYOUTS
        5/5+B  1 : 195249054        1                        0.00
        5/5+0  1 : 5138133          38                       0.00
        4/5+B  1 : 723145           270                      0.00
        4/5+0  1 : 19030            10260                    0.17        $ 17.0
        3/5+B  1 : 13644            14310                    0.23          23.0
        3/5+0  1 : 359              543780                   8.82          61.7   
        2/5+B  1 : 787              248040                   4.02          28.1
        1/5+B  1 : 123              1581255                 25.66         102.6
        0/5+B  1 : 62               3162510                 51.31         153.9
       ______________________________________________________________________________
       overall odds are 1 : 35.1                            90.2 total expected winners
       5560464 winning combos = 2.84 % of possible combos

      So why did you bother posting your table?  I didn't check your math,

      but it looks like the equivalent of the "Expected" side of mine.

      You have claimed that it's possible to increase your odds of winning.

      What I'm trying to elicit from you is an estimate of how much better

      than this you think you can do with your methods.

      ?


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: January 9, 2011, 12:57 am - IP Logged

        "This rhetorical question implies that you believe that had players been able to use their $3168 to buy 3168 Powerball tickets twice a week without the constraints of MadDog's Powerball Challenge, they would have lost less money, or maybe even come out ahead over the year's play."

        I was clear when I said "they would have lost lots of money". How much money is irrelevant when it's imaginary money.

        "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw."

        If it's all imaginary money, why not make it $10 million?

        Nobody cares how I'd wager imaginary money and I'm the only one that cares about how I wager real money.

        "3168 tickets/draw times 52 weeks times 2 draws/week results in an "investment" of $329,472 over a year."

        Did you forget Maddog has a Mega Millions Challenge too?

        And it's obvious you don't understand how the scoring system works. There has never been even a suggestion of how Challenge players would wager on there Challenge picks. Simply put, wagering imaginary or real money is not part of it.

        "Assuming you don't hit the Jackpot (A fairly reasonable assumption, don't you think?)"

        Are you talking about an imaginary jackpot because that's all you'll ever win wagering imaginary money.

        "I would say that your expected losses of (329472-57328) $272,144 should not necessarily be considered losses,"

        Hopefully you're finally beginning to understand the meaning of "imaginary wagers". If you don't wager real money, you can't win or lose real money. I'm assuming you either don't gamble or haven't done much because if you ever spent a day in Vegas, you'll find out they don't accept imaginary money at the tables or in the slot machines. You have to actually have real cash and that huge difference on how you wager.

        "Come on, at least give us a ballpark hint as to how much better you would do with all that money to bet. "

        Send me the real Benjamins and I'll show you.

        Oops!  You forgot the rest of my quote!

        Jimmy4164 said, "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw.  Of course, I don't expect you to give up any trade secrets; just impress us by estimating how much better you would do."

        Stack47 said,"Send me the real Benjamins and I'll show you."

        C'mon Stack, are you telling us you want to be paid to

        merely tell us to what extent you think you can beat chance?

        Please read my request above again...

          Avatar
          Kentucky
          United States
          Member #32652
          February 14, 2006
          7344 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: January 9, 2011, 2:25 pm - IP Logged

          Oops!  You forgot the rest of my quote!

          Jimmy4164 said, "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw.  Of course, I don't expect you to give up any trade secrets; just impress us by estimating how much better you would do."

          Stack47 said,"Send me the real Benjamins and I'll show you."

          C'mon Stack, are you telling us you want to be paid to

          merely tell us to what extent you think you can beat chance?

          Please read my request above again...

          I wonder how many people showed up at their state lottery headquarters trying to validate their imaginary winning tickets after the record breaking MM jackpot? Jimmy probably tried to validate his in a state that doesn't even play MM.

          I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one. You don't understand the concept behind the Challenges and suggesting we have a contest using imaginary money is as useless as your statistics. You could be told thousands of times the Challenges are about how many numbers players could pick in the confines of 12 WPs and 4 bonus numbers and it still wouldn't sink in.

          I was talking about real money wagers; something you can't grasp. Even if you sent me $3168 to wager on PB, from my point of view it would still be an imaginary wager unless I could keep whatever I won. But even then I wouldn't care if I impressed anyone.

          With two PB and two MM drawings a week there probably are many players wagering over $3168 a year but nobody would make that large a wager 4 times a week for entire year within the confines of the Challenges. I've already made the point since nobody would wager $3168 four times a week on the Challenges, your statistics are worthless. It's your time, you can waste any way you chose.

          You're just grasping at straws because your Challenge statistics are useless. You can keep trying to put lipstick on your pig but it will always be a pig.

            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
            mid-Ohio
            United States
            Member #9
            March 24, 2001
            19904 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: January 9, 2011, 3:05 pm - IP Logged

            So why did you bother posting your table?  I didn't check your math,

            but it looks like the equivalent of the "Expected" side of mine.

            You have claimed that it's possible to increase your odds of winning.

            What I'm trying to elicit from you is an estimate of how much better

            than this you think you can do with your methods.

            ?

            So why did you bother posting all that information?  I didn't check your math,

            but it looks like the equivalent of the "Expected Winners" side of mine and mine is simpler with payouts.

             * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
               
                         Evil Looking       


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: January 9, 2011, 4:32 pm - IP Logged

              I wonder how many people showed up at their state lottery headquarters trying to validate their imaginary winning tickets after the record breaking MM jackpot? Jimmy probably tried to validate his in a state that doesn't even play MM.

              I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one. You don't understand the concept behind the Challenges and suggesting we have a contest using imaginary money is as useless as your statistics. You could be told thousands of times the Challenges are about how many numbers players could pick in the confines of 12 WPs and 4 bonus numbers and it still wouldn't sink in.

              I was talking about real money wagers; something you can't grasp. Even if you sent me $3168 to wager on PB, from my point of view it would still be an imaginary wager unless I could keep whatever I won. But even then I wouldn't care if I impressed anyone.

              With two PB and two MM drawings a week there probably are many players wagering over $3168 a year but nobody would make that large a wager 4 times a week for entire year within the confines of the Challenges. I've already made the point since nobody would wager $3168 four times a week on the Challenges, your statistics are worthless. It's your time, you can waste any way you chose.

              You're just grasping at straws because your Challenge statistics are useless. You can keep trying to put lipstick on your pig but it will always be a pig.

              TO: Stack47

              CC: RJOh

              Stack47 says, "I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one."

              Oh, OK.

              I'm sorry that your abstract reasoning skills are hindering your ability to make the connection between what you call "Imaginary" wagers and "real money" wagers.  Unfortunately, this is not a skill you can easily improve through study.  You want us to believe that the reason you don't participate in the Challenges is because your "imaginary" bets would be no better than chance but that we should trust that your [secret] "real money" bets are quite profitable for you.  You and RJOh are suffering from what is referred to by psychologists as the Illusion of Control.  You are so desperate to maintain full control over every aspect of your lives that you can't even admit to yourselves that lottery draws are Random Processes, and as such, are not predictable, and consequently, not controllable by you.  I'm not willing to spend much more time here trying to help you see this.  If you showed even the slightest willingness to face the fact that mathematicians have known for centuries that what you believe is false, I might.  It would also help if you were not so rude to a "messenger" presenting you with information that challenges your beliefs.

              I've noticed that with all the scribblings you've been making here, you have never once addressed the scientific research studies by psychologists that I've posted.  It just occured to me that in one case, the reason could be that the Parental Control settings of your virus protection software could be keeping you from getting through to the UK.  Much of this is explained well there, so here are excerpts:

              It is principally at games of chance that a multitude of illusions
              support hope and sustain it against unfavourable chances.
              (Laplace, 1796)

              The idea that beliefs about probability show systematic
              biases is somewhat older than experimental psychology.
              Throughout his “Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités,”
              Laplace (1796) was concerned with errors of judgment
              and even included a chapter concerning “illusions
              in the estimation of probabilities.

              http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

              I hope you make the effort to thoroughly absorb this study and its conclusions, rather than quickly fire back an unsupported and meaningless reply.

              --Jimmy4164


                United States
                Member #93947
                July 10, 2010
                2180 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: January 9, 2011, 4:51 pm - IP Logged

                So why did you bother posting all that information?  I didn't check your math,

                but it looks like the equivalent of the "Expected Winners" side of mine and mine is simpler with payouts.

                I'm surprised RJ.  I'm surprised you would ask this question.

                The fact that you and Stack47 both reject statistical information

                as meaningless should tell you WHY.  At least the data derived

                from the Challenge was based on live LP members' selections,

                rather than QPs, which you REALLY have disgust for.  And BTW,

                your table was a probability compilation, not statistics.

                http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/223792/1910544

                  Avatar
                  Kentucky
                  United States
                  Member #32652
                  February 14, 2006
                  7344 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: January 10, 2011, 12:59 pm - IP Logged

                  So why did you bother posting all that information?  I didn't check your math,

                  but it looks like the equivalent of the "Expected Winners" side of mine and mine is simpler with payouts.

                  We don't have to make 4 imaginary $3168 bets each week for a year to know what the expected results should be. Even without your data it's easy to understand we have to match 4+1 every week or lose our shirts. Maybe one of days Jimmy will figure out we already know it would be a bad bet.

                  The amount of his imaginary wagers alone should be enough to prove to him any statistics from them are useless information.

                    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                    mid-Ohio
                    United States
                    Member #9
                    March 24, 2001
                    19904 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: January 10, 2011, 1:03 pm - IP Logged

                    I'm surprised RJ.  I'm surprised you would ask this question.

                    The fact that you and Stack47 both reject statistical information

                    as meaningless should tell you WHY.  At least the data derived

                    from the Challenge was based on live LP members' selections,

                    rather than QPs, which you REALLY have disgust for.  And BTW,

                    your table was a probability compilation, not statistics.

                    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/223792/1910544

                    Jimmy, I was just as surprised when you asked me that question so I asked it of you figuring that when you answered you would have a answer.  As I've said before, I maintain updated data for all the games I play and can develop any statistics I need and don't need the statistics of others to decide how I play.

                     * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
                       
                                 Evil Looking       


                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: January 10, 2011, 2:07 pm - IP Logged

                      TO: Stack47

                      CC: RJOh

                      Stack47 says, "I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one."

                      Oh, OK.

                      I'm sorry that your abstract reasoning skills are hindering your ability to make the connection between what you call "Imaginary" wagers and "real money" wagers.  Unfortunately, this is not a skill you can easily improve through study.  You want us to believe that the reason you don't participate in the Challenges is because your "imaginary" bets would be no better than chance but that we should trust that your [secret] "real money" bets are quite profitable for you.  You and RJOh are suffering from what is referred to by psychologists as the Illusion of Control.  You are so desperate to maintain full control over every aspect of your lives that you can't even admit to yourselves that lottery draws are Random Processes, and as such, are not predictable, and consequently, not controllable by you.  I'm not willing to spend much more time here trying to help you see this.  If you showed even the slightest willingness to face the fact that mathematicians have known for centuries that what you believe is false, I might.  It would also help if you were not so rude to a "messenger" presenting you with information that challenges your beliefs.

                      I've noticed that with all the scribblings you've been making here, you have never once addressed the scientific research studies by psychologists that I've posted.  It just occured to me that in one case, the reason could be that the Parental Control settings of your virus protection software could be keeping you from getting through to the UK.  Much of this is explained well there, so here are excerpts:

                      It is principally at games of chance that a multitude of illusions
                      support hope and sustain it against unfavourable chances.
                      (Laplace, 1796)

                      The idea that beliefs about probability show systematic
                      biases is somewhat older than experimental psychology.
                      Throughout his “Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités,”
                      Laplace (1796) was concerned with errors of judgment
                      and even included a chapter concerning “illusions
                      in the estimation of probabilities.

                      http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

                      I hope you make the effort to thoroughly absorb this study and its conclusions, rather than quickly fire back an unsupported and meaningless reply.

                      --Jimmy4164

                      Stack47, RJOh,

                      You must think I am the only one who will notice that you are [not so] cleverly evading the questions posed above.

                      I think not.

                      You must also think your prior claims that you can beat the odds will be forgotten.

                      I think not.

                      I made the request, "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw.  Of course, I don't expect you to give up any trade secrets; just impress us by estimating how much better you would do."

                      I hope you surprise us and admit that when faced with the work of bigger minds than all of ours, you finally see the light and now understand that your previous errors in thinking were the result of the illusions discussed in the study pointed to HERE.
                      (I presume you're still reading it.)

                      I sincerely hope you do not take the path that Dean Esmay would probably predict for you based on your most recent statements.

                      http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/000013.html

                       

                      It is principally at games of chance that a multitude of illusions
                      support hope and sustain it against unfavourable chances.
                      (Laplace, 1796)

                      The idea that beliefs about probability show systematic
                      biases is somewhat older than experimental psychology.
                      Throughout his “Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités,”
                      Laplace (1796) was concerned with errors of judgment
                      and even included a chapter concerning “illusions
                      in the estimation of probabilities.

                      http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

                      I hope you make the effort to thoroughly absorb this study and its conclusions, rather than quickly fire back an unsupported and meaningless reply.

                      --Jimmy4164


                        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                        mid-Ohio
                        United States
                        Member #9
                        March 24, 2001
                        19904 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: January 10, 2011, 3:21 pm - IP Logged

                        Stack47, RJOh,

                        You must think I am the only one who will notice that you are [not so] cleverly evading the questions posed above.

                        I think not.

                        You must also think your prior claims that you can beat the odds will be forgotten.

                        I think not.

                        I made the request, "I'm sure I am not the only one who would be fascinated to read just how YOU would spend $3168 on one Powerball draw.  Of course, I don't expect you to give up any trade secrets; just impress us by estimating how much better you would do."

                        I hope you surprise us and admit that when faced with the work of bigger minds than all of ours, you finally see the light and now understand that your previous errors in thinking were the result of the illusions discussed in the study pointed to HERE.
                        (I presume you're still reading it.)

                        I sincerely hope you do not take the path that Dean Esmay would probably predict for you based on your most recent statements.

                        http://www.deanesmay.com/posts/000013.html

                         

                        It is principally at games of chance that a multitude of illusions
                        support hope and sustain it against unfavourable chances.
                        (Laplace, 1796)

                        The idea that beliefs about probability show systematic
                        biases is somewhat older than experimental psychology.
                        Throughout his “Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités,”
                        Laplace (1796) was concerned with errors of judgment
                        and even included a chapter concerning “illusions
                        in the estimation of probabilities.

                        http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

                        I hope you make the effort to thoroughly absorb this study and its conclusions, rather than quickly fire back an unsupported and meaningless reply.

                        --Jimmy4164


                        Jimmy,

                        You're are responding as if Stack47 and RJOh are the same member.  I can't speak for Stack47 and all I've ever said is I prefer picking my own numbers because I have control over which numbers I play.  I believe I can do no worst than QP's and chances are I will do better based on my experiences.  If anyone is interested in how I'm doing, I've been posting a sampling of the combinations I play on the prediction board for years.

                        I'm sure you would be fascinated to read how I would spend $3168 on one PowerBall drawing, but it's never going to happen because that's more than I spend on all the games I play in a year and I consider myself a big spender.   The most I've ever dreamt of spending on a lottery drawing is $200 but in reality the most I've ever actually spent was $50 years ago when I went in with nine other co-workers to buy $500 worth of tickets for Ohio Super Lotto.  Right after I retired, MegaMillions and PowerBall weren't played in Ohio so some of my former co-worker gave me $550 to drive to Indiana to buy some PowerBall QP tickets for them.  That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

                        Playing lotteries is entertainment for me so all those articles you post links to are of little interest to me.  Hopefully someone else may have some interest in them, after all LP is about sharing ideas.

                         * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
                           
                                     Evil Looking       

                          Avatar
                          Kentucky
                          United States
                          Member #32652
                          February 14, 2006
                          7344 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: January 10, 2011, 7:01 pm - IP Logged

                          Jimmy,

                          You're are responding as if Stack47 and RJOh are the same member.  I can't speak for Stack47 and all I've ever said is I prefer picking my own numbers because I have control over which numbers I play.  I believe I can do no worst than QP's and chances are I will do better based on my experiences.  If anyone is interested in how I'm doing, I've been posting a sampling of the combinations I play on the prediction board for years.

                          I'm sure you would be fascinated to read how I would spend $3168 on one PowerBall drawing, but it's never going to happen because that's more than I spend on all the games I play in a year and I consider myself a big spender.   The most I've ever dreamt of spending on a lottery drawing is $200 but in reality the most I've ever actually spent was $50 years ago when I went in with nine other co-workers to buy $500 worth of tickets for Ohio Super Lotto.  Right after I retired, MegaMillions and PowerBall weren't played in Ohio so some of my former co-worker gave me $550 to drive to Indiana to buy some PowerBall QP tickets for them.  That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

                          Playing lotteries is entertainment for me so all those articles you post links to are of little interest to me.  Hopefully someone else may have some interest in them, after all LP is about sharing ideas.

                          Jimmy doesn't understand what "I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one." or "all I've ever said is I prefer picking my own numbers because I have control over which numbers I play." means because he has no statistics and can't find someone to quote with alphabet letters behind their names to explain it to him.

                          I too played in pools that bought up to $500 worth of tickets for Super Lotto when the jackpot was high but never thought about buying that many tickets myself. The most I ever spent playing Rolling Cash 5 was $50.

                          I hope the player buying $3168 worth of lottery tickets isn't standing in front of me in the lottery line.

                            time*treat's avatar - radar

                            United States
                            Member #13130
                            March 30, 2005
                            2171 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: January 10, 2011, 7:15 pm - IP Logged

                            Jimmy doesn't understand what "I never claimed I could do better making imaginary wagers or feel the need to impress anyone by making one." or "all I've ever said is I prefer picking my own numbers because I have control over which numbers I play." means because he has no statistics and can't find someone to quote with alphabet letters behind their names to explain it to him.

                            I too played in pools that bought up to $500 worth of tickets for Super Lotto when the jackpot was high but never thought about buying that many tickets myself. The most I ever spent playing Rolling Cash 5 was $50.

                            I hope the player buying $3168 worth of lottery tickets isn't standing in front of me in the lottery line.

                            I hope the player buying $3168 worth of lottery tickets isn't standing in front of me in the lottery line.

                            They're more likely to be in line in front of me ... and calling out their picks, 1 .. combo .. at a .. time. Thud

                            In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
                            Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.

                              time*treat's avatar - radar

                              United States
                              Member #13130
                              March 30, 2005
                              2171 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: January 11, 2011, 8:38 am - IP Logged

                              Isn't it amazing how those imaginary 3,168 bets, the ones that I'm told by "informed"  players should surely be avoided, somehow manage to result in an overall return that so closely approximates what mathematicians predict? Smiley

                              --Jimmy4164


                              P.S.  Some related and interesting reading:

                              http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/~sj361/p1369.pdf

                              http://catlin.casinocitytimes.com/article/lottery-nonsense-8694

                               

                               

                               

                                      MadDog's Powerball Challenge
                                               2010/12/29

                                      01/02/2010  Thru  12/29/2010

                                          All Draws for 2010

                                           137 Participants

                                  Total Ticket Costs         $8,271,258
                                  Total Winnings             $1,772,590  

                                  Overall Gain/Loss         -$6,498,668
                               
                                               Expected      Actual
                                       Category       #Wins        ROI*     #Wins     ROI*
                               
                                       0 WB + PB     133991       0.049    124791    0.045
                                       1 WB + PB      66990       0.032     64153    0.031
                                       2 WB + PB      10508       0.009      9275    0.008
                                       3 WB           23037       0.019     27240    0.023
                                       3 WB + PB        606       0.007       432    0.005
                                       4 WB             435       0.005       428    0.005
                                       4 WB + PB         11.438   0.014         0    0.000
                                       5 WB               1.610   0.039         4    0.097
                                                                  -----              -----
                                       Total (Excl Jackpot)       0.174              0.214
                               
                                       JACKPOT            0.042   0.325         0    0.000
                               
                                     * ROI is The Amount Won Per Dollar Spent on Tickets.

                              How far from Expected values would Actual values have to be before they were considered useful?

                              In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
                              Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.