Welcome Guest
You last visited December 5, 2016, 9:46 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Why Do Mathematicians Consider The Lottery Random

Topic closed. 261 replies. Last post 5 years ago by Boney526.

 Page 4 of 18
Harbinger
D.C./MD.
United States
Member #44103
July 30, 2006
5583 Posts
Online
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 8:58 pm - IP Logged

Lol.

Your best hope to winning a JP is to just buy a ticket, Self Pick or Quick Pick and hope you win.

Actually - I could argue that the only reason self picks can be better is because you can make sure that you don't get a combination someone else was more likely to choose - like one where all the digits are under 31, or sequential or something.

So go ahead, use your systems, I do sometimes, too.  Just for fun, to pick the numbers sometimes I'll use a system b/c they don't have a DISadvantage, and I don't always like getting QPs.

Thanks.  At minimum,  w/o having to think,  buying a Quick Pig is an excellent choice in the jackpot games because you are at least in the game and cranking up the jackpot.  No ticket no hope.

And you are also correct in writing that using any system or methodology doesn't lessen one's chance of winning.  I think it improves your chances though,  because the human mind can think abstractly and  "out of the box".

The odds/probabilty of hitting a jackpot prize are described using math.  Just a guess,  but I think to get the powerball odds down to Pick 4 straight hit odds 10000 to 1  you would have to purchase roughly 20000 tickets.

To get your odds down to close 20 to 1 in Pick 4 you need about 24 different box combos.   To get your odds down to 20 to 1 for a straight hit in Pick 4 you have to buy 500 different numbers.

United States
Member #75358
June 1, 2009
5345 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 9:08 pm - IP Logged

Actually, you are completely wrong.  Like totally.  Every single one of these systems has been tested against computer simulations totalling in the 100s of millions or billions of results, and guess what happens.

Every single time, no matter what system is used, the amount of money LOST is almost equal to the House Edge of any pariticular game, multiplied by the total amount bet.  So it's not just me saying it because the odds say it's so, or because some texy book told me to.  I have studied Statistics, and it taught me nothing about Lottery, or gambling, unless you want to count HOW I would go about calculating the Variance, Standard Deviations of expected winnings, etc.  But other mathemticians have done the analysis, and I'm sorry - unless you want to argue that mathemetics is completely wrong - and that there's some undiscovered sort of unexplainable force that allows random events from the past to influence random events in the future, then you pretty much have to actually look up these studies, or just stop trying to say that they aren't correct.

And you example is just nonsense completely, even if your math is right (I'll assume it is, I haven't checked) that has nothing to do with the past influencing the future.  1+1=2 does not come before 2+2=4 in time just as 4+4=16 does not happen after 2+2=4 in time.  That just makes no sense.  I can see a pattern, but it has nothing to do with past and present, and it certainly isn't even a random event.

So basically you just posted a pattern of numbers and said the gambling results aren't random.

Here I'll post something similar to what you said, and you tell me how ridiculous it sounds.  1 comes before , comes before 3, comes before 5 comes before 7 comes before 9 comes before 13.  But we're missing one.  Simple logic tells us it's an 11.  Slot machines aren't random because there was a pattern formed in my sequence, therefore, you should watch a slot machine until someone loses a bunch of times and you should win.

Do you see how ridulous that is?

Proffessional Gamblers include people who play Poker, and occasionally Blacjack, the former of which should be obvious as to how it is possible to be a proffesional at, and in blackjack, things can be done to make it a positive expectation game, although probably only a couple of hundred people have the Bankroll, Discipline, and Skill to make that a reality.  The only other thing that allows that to make a profit is simply LUCK.  So to make that more clear, Blackjack can be turned into a game with a 1.05 percent return, if you can count cards, and play perfectly.  But that's very hard, and has huge fluctuations, so it will only show over time.  (Actually, I was reading an analysis of it which found that out of - I think 200 - hands played at a baseline 50 dollar bet, the expected return was that you'd profit 500 dollars, with a Standard Deviation of 14000 dollars.  That means 67 percent of players using this strategy will be between -13,500 and +14,500)  So without a giant bankroll to sustain that, it's only realistic for a few players to expect to make money playing blackjack.

You can't really explain to someone what luck is if they think a random event comes down to some sort of skill, of number placement, or whatever, because when they do win, they'll attribute it their system, not the random event that occured.  I have a system which I thought did pretty well in the Pick 3, but then I realized I was just getting lucky, because in the LONG RUN I lost about half the money I played.  I did a little better because I won every day for a week one of the two draws box, but that was just ridulous dumb luck.  I don't think it was my system that got me those wins (even though it told me to play the numbers which happend to show) I think it was the fact that I got ballsy - played a bunch of numbers - and happened to hit with my 6-12 percent chance (10 or 20 6 way boxes) a few times in a row.

Here we go, another know it all.

Every single one of these systems have been tested? What system are you talking about?...I didn't even mention the system because I don't completely understand it myself, the one with Koycerin wagering method I mean...

There are professionals who go to slot machines looking for RNDs to occur and make a living off of it, whether you believe it or not. Do you even know what an RND is? I don't care how many computer simulations you've heard about, you haven't heard about this one cause no one explained it here on the LP yet except for me, and I didn't do it justice. No one even heard of this guy. So maybe you should think before you write.

The example I wrote with the 2+2 and so on, was an extremely simplified example to just give you an idea, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the crux of the system.

Eventually I'm going to find someone smarter than I who can understand Koycerin's method better than me and put it into a easy to use program. Then I can test it to see If it works or not, but until then I'm not gonna listen to the same so called expert know-it-alls who think they have the end all to everything.

I would like to send the whole booklet for you to read but I believe it won't do any good because in order to understand it you'd have to have an open mind, and by what I've read so far, you don't.  It's like religious people who are so fixated on the religion they've been indoctrinated to believe as written in stone, and everyone else is wrong but them.  No open minds, just Myna birds repeating what they've heard over and over.

Wagering system theories are just like science. It's always being updated, and If you're happy to be in your safety zone and  don't try learning new ideas that surpass the contemporary ones, you'll get left behind.

Oh BTW, just like I told Jimmy, I know someone who's made a fortune playing the P-4 online in the last 10 months or so. Probably about 900,000 bucks by now.  But this person plays a lot of combos, about \$3,000 when this person plays a draw, doesn't play every draw, but 8 out of 10.......Go ahead and tell him it's all luck!

United States
Member #75358
June 1, 2009
5345 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 9:11 pm - IP Logged

Wait, what?

Where did he say that?

Maybe you don't really understand math at all, and therefore ignore the people who can use real math, and claim lottery math is real?

You're right, maybe I don't understand math that much, but I'll tell you what, I can spot a big headed wannabe brainiac who thinks he's seen everything a mile away.

Do me a favor and go and stick your head back in the sand where it belongs. You know too much already....

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 11:46 pm - IP Logged

I meant all sorts of wagering systems.  Like just about every one, not literally every single system ever created.  But there's never been a wagering system that allowed somebody to beat the house edge, in the long run, except finding bias roulette wheels and counting cards - all things which change probability, and the house edge.

I don't mean to say that wagering systems are useless - but they don't give you any sort of edge.  Like my example, if you want to win 25 bucks - odds are that using martingale would get you it in a low house edge game.  But you've got a chance you'll lose everything you buy in with to do so.  And the sum of all the probabilities give the house an edge in the long run.  They might lose a day or two a week, or something like that - but in the end they win more than they lose.  Almost every other wagering system has been tested - and failed horribly.  There's a few people who offer a wager, if you can put up a betting system that will beat them in a computer similuation over X draws, they pay you 10000 if you lose you pay them 1000, it was originally offered by Michael Shackleford, "The Wizard of Odds", a mathemetician who has tested all of these systems.  One person took the bet, and lost, although his system kept him positive for a few hundred thousand draws.

And your friend is just getting lucky.  That's the thing - there will always be that person who does very well - and then it gets attributed to skill, not luck.  If what you're saying is true, about your friend, then he's just lucky enough to be in the top percentile, or top few percentile, of players.

It's like what that guy who won (I think it was 15?) millions in Atlantic City playing Blackjack said, I'm paraphrasing here, "Eventually someone was gonna win big, I'm just glad it was me"

Like I said I've studied systems, and used to use them regularly on the Pick 3.  It's just that - over thousands of draws, they don't pan out to a higher win ratio on average.  So, yes, you CAN win, but it all comes down to luck.

You asked why Mathemiticians consider the Lottery random - and it's the same reason that they consider roulette random.  Because, unless there is some fault in the mechanical side (or possibly in the RNG, if it is a computer drawn game) then it IS random, at least according to all the math that's ever been done on the subject.

You're free to believe what you want.  But part of math is that unlikely things can happen, and I've been guilty of confirmation bias too many times, so now I look at things more realistically.  I'm far from a mathemtician though, I've just taken a couple of statisitics courses, in fact, most of my projects were on lottery related events.  But every credible mathemitician I've ever seen has confirmed these realities - betting systems don't beat a house edge, they just change your wagers.  In the end, it's all the same for the house, they'd just make money quicker if everyone used a system like martingale.

As for the Koycerin's RND thing, no I don't know what it is - Google has nothing on it, and you didn't explain what it is.

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 11:51 pm - IP Logged

I didn't mean to sound so obnoxious - it's just that there's math behind things, and subjective observations shouldn't be the idealogy behind any sort of way to "beat the odds" reliably.

The only examples of people who have beaten Casinos consistently with their house edges between 1-6 percent are people who change the probabilities in their favor, or their wagers according to the probabilities that present themselves - sometimes putting themselves at a higher risk.  But nobody has been able to consistently beat the odds over tens of thousands of plays in other circumstances their, so why would it be differnet for a lottery?

I'm actually interested in seeing what you're talking about now, I doubt it has much credibillity to it, but what is an RND?

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 22, 2011, 11:54 pm - IP Logged

I've got t make a correction to myself again.

A betting system as simple as martingale can work over any amount of time given two conditions.

1) Unlimted bank roll

2) No Betting Limits

United States
Member #75358
June 1, 2009
5345 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 12:04 am - IP Logged

Yeah, my friend has been lucky for 10 months straight playing 8 out of 10 draws for 10 months in a row. In that case, he must be the luckiest person on Earth for all time....and needs to be in the Guiness Book of world records,........Looney Tunes man...Looney Tunes...

I don't know why I even bother writing anything at all here. Just never mind anything I wrote, it's futile....

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 12:08 am - IP Logged

Yeah, my friend has been lucky for 10 months straight playing 8 out of 10 draws for 10 months in a row. In that case, he must be the luckiest person on Earth for all time....and needs to be in the Guiness Book of world records,........Looney Tunes man...Looney Tunes...

I don't know why I even bother writing anything at all here. Just never mind anything I wrote, it's futile....

By that logic, nobody has ever won the Mega Millions by Luck.

I'd say that the odds of it happening are comparable, but still.  You can believe what you want - and go ahead and work at it.  Hell if you prove me mathemiticans wrong then you'll end up rich as hell, but if you believe it's like a science then you have to PROVE it, not just state that you've observed it.

mississippi
United States
Member #34478
March 3, 2006
5903 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 9:17 am - IP Logged

Well I will let some of you in on a little secret, some of you already know...some will SWEAR up and down it is not possible..but you can find the future output of RANDOM OCCURANCES...all it is, its just a repeating field is all..If you compress anything to its smallest part you can find anything..

EXAMPLE..Car wrecks

UNITED STATES...everywhere

Compressed to just Mississippi..then has to be compressed even further to CITY, BY CITY

Now with  all that data, I could tell you what vehicle is going to have a wreck..the color..and time of day..sounds like a pile of SH\$T right...well you are wrong..all it is, is data that belongs to LARGE NUMERICAL FIELD and that is where I am at home at...I think I have made it clear on more than one occasion that I use MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF DATA from the past to give me the future...and once you learn how to generate those large numerical fields, it will give you the future and not 1 year or 2 years out more of the 1 month 2 month out range..but you really have to know what you are doing..you have to understand how Random works...all of it..not piece here and there...like I said ..I have solved 85%...and that is as far as I can go because not only are the fields expanding..but the last 10% cant be solved...that is the NATURAL ORDER OF ARRANGEMENT OF ALL THE VARIABLES..

You know the old saying MONEY TALKS, BULLSH\$T WALKS....well I can back up anything I post!!!!!1

You might want to check this pic 4 field I ran for a friend in South Carolina..so dont ever TELL ME YOU cant solve for the FUTURE before it happens..because you can!!!!1..now check that list since June 30th and see what it has done..and this is nothing new..I have run these for LP MEMBERS NUMEROUS TIMES!!!!!1

Sent By: lotterybraker
Sent: June 30, 2011, 6:54 pm Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

1. 0024 0025 0034 0035 0124 0125 0134 0135 1124 1125 1134 1135

2. 0268 0269 0278 0279 0368 0369 0378 0379 1268 1269 1278 1279 1368 1369 1378 1379

3. 0224 0225 0234 0235 0334 0335 1224 1225 1234 1235 1334 1335

4. 0046 0047 0056 0057 0146 0147 0156 0157 1146 1147 1156 1157

5. 2246 2247 2256 2257 2346 2347 2356 2357 3346 3347 3356 3357

6. 0248 0249 0258 0259 0348 0349 0358 0359 1248 1249 1258 1259 1348 1349 1358 1359

7. 0026 0027 0036 0037 0126 0127 0136 0137 1126 1127 1136 1137

8. 2466 2467 2477 2566 2567 2577 3466 3467 3477 3566 3567 3577

9. 0468 0469 0478 0479 0568 0569 0578 0579 1468 1469 1478 1479 1568 1569 1578 1579

10. 0244 0245 0255 0344 0345 0355 1244 1245 1255 1344 1345 1355

11. 0246 0247 0256 0257 0346 0347 0356 0357 1246 1247 1256 1257 1346 1347 1356 1357

12. 0266 0267 0277 0366 0367 0377 1266 1267 1277 1366 1367 1377

13. 0446 0456 0556 0447 0457 0557 1446 1447 1456 1457 1556 1557

14. 2446 2447 2456 2457 2556 2557 3446 3447 3456 3457 3556 3557

15. 0226 0227 0236 0237 0336 0337 1226 1227 1236 1237 1336 1337

16. 2468 2469 2478 2479 2568 2569 2578 2579 3468 3469 3478 3479 3568 3569 3578 3579

17. 0466 0467 0477 0566 0567 0577 1466 1467 1477 1566 1567 1577

"Attention all Mathematicians: Check your degree at the door because when it comes to whole numbers you are the Amateur"

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 10:38 am - IP Logged

Yes you can make a list of numbers, and they'll hit, but you ignore when it doesn't hit.  Or rather, you notice more when it does.

This post asks why mathemeticians consider the lottery random.  And that's because all of the actual PROOF shows that it is.

You're welcome to believe what you want, but if you don't have proof, you're not going to be considered correct.

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 10:42 am - IP Logged

Thanks.  At minimum,  w/o having to think,  buying a Quick Pig is an excellent choice in the jackpot games because you are at least in the game and cranking up the jackpot.  No ticket no hope.

And you are also correct in writing that using any system or methodology doesn't lessen one's chance of winning.  I think it improves your chances though,  because the human mind can think abstractly and  "out of the box".

The odds/probabilty of hitting a jackpot prize are described using math.  Just a guess,  but I think to get the powerball odds down to Pick 4 straight hit odds 10000 to 1  you would have to purchase roughly 20000 tickets.

To get your odds down to close 20 to 1 in Pick 4 you need about 24 different box combos.   To get your odds down to 20 to 1 for a straight hit in Pick 4 you have to buy 500 different numbers.

Sure humans can think abstractly, but don't mistake that for being able to predict events that have no relation to any other event, that's derived from something like ping pong balls floating around in a cylinder.  As long as each ball has the same odds of showing up (they aren't tampered with) then it's completely random, you can't change your expected return, except for by picking a good assortment of numbers (non-sequential, some numbers above 31, etc.)

I actually usually get self picks, for PB and MM, but that's just the one line I like to play.  For other games, I play 1 or 2 self picks and 1-3 QPs.

Harbinger
D.C./MD.
United States
Member #44103
July 30, 2006
5583 Posts
Online
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 11:07 am - IP Logged

Sure humans can think abstractly, but don't mistake that for being able to predict events that have no relation to any other event, that's derived from something like ping pong balls floating around in a cylinder.  As long as each ball has the same odds of showing up (they aren't tampered with) then it's completely random, you can't change your expected return, except for by picking a good assortment of numbers (non-sequential, some numbers above 31, etc.)

I actually usually get self picks, for PB and MM, but that's just the one line I like to play.  For other games, I play 1 or 2 self picks and 1-3 QPs.

No,  no mistake.   And you still don't understand what is being written.  I, you, everybody do not understand physics and the laws of nature COMPLETELY.

Mathematicians will say something is random/unpredictable because they don't COMPLETELY understand the underlying physics.

Remember there is no conclusive unifying theory.,   look it up.  Time,  space we haven't even touched the surface.

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 3:30 pm - IP Logged

This is true - that we don't have a unified code of physics - but the reason it's considered random is because you can't know the variables that will be in place to make those balls come out of the machine.

The physics are understood, it's just that you can't plug in X, Y, Z etc into whatever complicated equations until you see all of those variables, or put more simply, you can only calculate the result if you're a supercomputer watching the draw, by which point, you can't place a bet.

Actually there was one guy who tried to place a 5000 dollar roulette bet on a single number to show, attempting to use the physics of the ball/wheel to predict where it would land.  The Casino allowed him a few seconds to place his bet, and he was actually just one slot off.  So given certain conditions like that, it's theoritically possible to predict the result, but because we aren't in such a position - it's not.

So we don't have a unifying theory, but the theories we DO have show that the Lottery is random, in the sense that when placing the bet, no system can give you an advantage - this has been tested over the long term.

I do understand what you're saying - it's just not based on reason, it's based on faith.  Like I said in a previous post, all accepted science has proven that it's random, you have to prove that science wrong, or prove your science correct in order to say it's real - especially when it's so far out compared to what is accepted science.

If you're arguing that because it's a physical process, there are things that influence it, so it's not completely random, then fine, I suppose you're right.  But those things that influence it, are either tampering - or random given that you don't have that information - which nobody does until the draw is occuring.

mississippi
United States
Member #34478
March 3, 2006
5903 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 4:00 pm - IP Logged

Yes you can make a list of numbers, and they'll hit, but you ignore when it doesn't hit.  Or rather, you notice more when it does.

This post asks why mathemeticians consider the lottery random.  And that's because all of the actual PROOF shows that it is.

You're welcome to believe what you want, but if you don't have proof, you're not going to be considered correct.

Heh I dont ignore Sh\$t Boney..and yes it is RANDOM..noone ever said the lottery wasnt RANDOM..allI said is you can find the future by using the past...you are WAY OUT OF YOUR LEAGUE HERE BUDDY!!!!!1

"Attention all Mathematicians: Check your degree at the door because when it comes to whole numbers you are the Amateur"

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 23, 2011, 4:13 pm - IP Logged

Heh I dont ignore Sh\$t Boney..and yes it is RANDOM..noone ever said the lottery wasnt RANDOM..allI said is you can find the future by using the past...you are WAY OUT OF YOUR LEAGUE HERE BUDDY!!!!!1

OK I'm not here to make any body angry, so whatever I'm done.

I'm not gonna keep on trying to explain anything slightly mathemtical - even though this is the math forum.

 Page 4 of 18