cleveland ohio United States Member #65897 October 9, 2008 275 Posts Offline

Posted: March 14, 2012, 9:27 pm - IP Logged

I may have missed your point (although I totally understand it) and I think you understood my point perfectly. The numbers I gave you I just make up as I posted it. No reason from them nothing just put them into a group and said ok lets see who wins more. You know I will hit more times on smaller prizes unless the unthinkable happens and either of our numbers comes out and hit the big prize. Hence why I said 1 win to 1 play.

You can look at sums and think Ok I created a good sum number (not sure if that is even true) but as players we are not A just playing 1 set of numbers usually we creating sets of numbers that have the most chance of (wait for it, its coming......) Winning a prize.

Yes each play has the same odds of winning the big prize but other sets of numbers have a much better chance of winning "A" prize be it $10 etc. and hence why you would have no interest in taking me up on a challenge of my numbers against yours in a 1 bet per win.

Your numbers although having the same chance of hitting the big prize as my numbers stata dictate yours will hit other prizes alot less often thus mine are stats wise better numbers to play to again "Win a PRIZE".

Now I could go on about how in a pick ?/?? game the groupings of numbers do yield a better area of play statistacly across multiple draws but again as you said if "your playing only 1 set of numbers for only 1 draw" then your out of the game forever, your statement is correct.

Also to a later point the most profitable place to play if your looking at not sharing prizes is numbers over 31 grouped together in a ticket. The reason why is people create tickets based on birthdays (day and month, age of children etc) so higher numbers are less played.

EDIT todays Rolling Cash numbers 5-8-17-26-37 Your numbers 1-2-3-4-5 1 number no winner my numbers 4-16-27-32-36 no numbers no winner score 0-0 on winners you 1 me 0 on hit numbers. My ticket was more exciting though

Ventura California United States Member #124382 March 12, 2012 12 Posts Offline

Posted: March 14, 2012, 11:20 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by nickbrownsfan on March 14, 2012

I may have missed your point (although I totally understand it) and I think you understood my point perfectly. The numbers I gave you I just make up as I posted it. No reason from them nothing just put them into a group and said ok lets see who wins more. You know I will hit more times on smaller prizes unless the unthinkable happens and either of our numbers comes out and hit the big prize. Hence why I said 1 win to 1 play.

You can look at sums and think Ok I created a good sum number (not sure if that is even true) but as players we are not A just playing 1 set of numbers usually we creating sets of numbers that have the most chance of (wait for it, its coming......) Winning a prize.

Yes each play has the same odds of winning the big prize but other sets of numbers have a much better chance of winning "A" prize be it $10 etc. and hence why you would have no interest in taking me up on a challenge of my numbers against yours in a 1 bet per win.

Your numbers although having the same chance of hitting the big prize as my numbers stata dictate yours will hit other prizes alot less often thus mine are stats wise better numbers to play to again "Win a PRIZE".

Now I could go on about how in a pick ?/?? game the groupings of numbers do yield a better area of play statistacly across multiple draws but again as you said if "your playing only 1 set of numbers for only 1 draw" then your out of the game forever, your statement is correct.

Also to a later point the most profitable place to play if your looking at not sharing prizes is numbers over 31 grouped together in a ticket. The reason why is people create tickets based on birthdays (day and month, age of children etc) so higher numbers are less played.

EDIT todays Rolling Cash numbers 5-8-17-26-37 Your numbers 1-2-3-4-5 1 number no winner my numbers 4-16-27-32-36 no numbers no winner score 0-0 on winners you 1 me 0 on hit numbers. My ticket was more exciting though

Thanks for your response nickbrownsfan.

1) Knowing what numbers are being played a lot is good info to have. No sense betting on numbers that will likely produce sharing of the pot. In my first post I suggested that, from what some players had told me, they don't bet on sequenced numbers because they believed the odds were worse and sequences never hit. Of course we all know the odds are the same for sequenced and unsequenced numbers. But my sample of people saying they don't play sequenced numbers was small and so this info was not a good basis for betting. My rule would be, if you actually know some numbers (sequences, birthdays, etc) that are frequently played, don't play them.

2) Here's where I disagree with you; I do not know that you'll hit more times on smaller prizes than any other numbers will. I say that's not possible over the long term, unless a fix is in. All numbers have an equal chance (odds) of winning. Over the long term all combinations better come out winning about the same number of times, or there's someone cheating or something is broke. The only logical argument you have for winning more with your numbers than 1,2,3,4,5 is that you have evidence that 1,2,3,4,5 are often played and would lead to a splitting of the pot, giving your numbers an advantage in total $$$ wins - over the long term.

3) I still don't see your justification for claiming that one set of numbers will win more prizes over a period of time than another set. I think you may be falling into the false argument that says because there are fewer seqenced plays than nonsequenced plays, any specific nonsequenced play will win more often. This is false. Lotto does not pay different $$ based on which numbers win. That's because the odds are all the same for every possible combination, sequenced or not. You can believe they know what they're doing when it comes to payouts. Look at slot machines if you want an example were the odds and payout change based on what you play.

4) I never suggested that I was talking about one set of numbers or 1 play. I'm talking about any number of plays you want. The same odds hold for every play no matter how many you make. If the odds of winning a prize are 1 in X, then if you make two plays you have a 2 in X chance of winning, buying 3 plays yields a 3 in X chance, etc. If you buy X plays (each different) you are certain to win because you've covered all possibilities (unfortunately it will cost you more than the prize, and then you may need to share the prize with other winners).

cleveland ohio United States Member #65897 October 9, 2008 275 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 12:46 am - IP Logged

I love math.. flip a coin you should have 50-50 chance right? the Farther you go out the closer you will get yet the more you will lose. This is a fact. Do the math.

bgonÃ§alves Brasil Member #92564 June 9, 2010 2122 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 7:46 am - IP Logged

Hello,cautions,if yousplit alotto49/6into 4 partsor 4sections, orfourgroups,Statistics showthat in 87%of allsweepstakes,you can simulatebillions ofsweepstakesThat in 87% of thesixnumberswill bedistributed inthreesectors,onesector (groups of 12numbers)only 13%of the sweepstakes, Iprefer to playin 87%than 13%, the largesteatingless,even inlower premiumsneed not benumbers,other symbolscan take49The sequenceis used to filteronlywithin the matrix,and alsomultiple, iecautions,The gameis random,but keepscertain positions, becausein mathematics,can onlypredictTo an extentthen it israndom, youcan seeand prove,the repetition of certainpositionsWithin thematrix49/6, andnot repeatsequencesgroup, the frequency ofrepetition of certaindistances between thenumberof the game,this is becausea greater numberofcompeting1,2,3example, nextto giveonlythe number4has anumberagainst46others,1,2,3(4)=onenumber)1,2,3(any of46numbers),and so withanother sequence,and still hasthe questto balancethe outputofnumbersgavesweepstakes,you canThispick3the draw,the sequences1,2,3etc,leavingvery little, whichisonly three digitsCautionsthenafter that,it isa fact,wedo notseesequencein order,but seesequences,(ridinggroups)certain positionsmorelikely tobethe oppositeousoutput

Economy class Belgium Member #123700 February 27, 2012 4035 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 10:55 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by nickbrownsfan on March 15, 2012

I love math.. flip a coin you should have 50-50 chance right? the Farther you go out the closer you will get yet the more you will lose. This is a fact. Do the math.

Coin flip: p(face) = 0.5

I love math.. flip a coin you should have 50-50 chance right? the Farther you go out the closer you will get yet the more you will lose. This is a fact. Do the math.

Economy class Belgium Member #123700 February 27, 2012 4035 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 10:58 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dr san on March 15, 2012

Hello,cautions,if yousplit alotto49/6into 4 partsor 4sections, orfourgroups,Statistics showthat in 87%of allsweepstakes,you can simulatebillions ofsweepstakesThat in 87% of thesixnumberswill bedistributed inthreesectors,onesector (groups of 12numbers)only 13%of the sweepstakes, Iprefer to playin 87%than 13%, the largesteatingless,even inlower premiumsneed not benumbers,other symbolscan take49The sequenceis used to filteronlywithin the matrix,and alsomultiple, iecautions,The gameis random,but keepscertain positions, becausein mathematics,can onlypredictTo an extentthen it israndom, youcan seeand prove,the repetition of certainpositionsWithin thematrix49/6, andnot repeatsequencesgroup, the frequency ofrepetition of certaindistances between thenumberof the game,this is becausea greater numberofcompeting1,2,3example, nextto giveonlythe number4has anumberagainst46others,1,2,3(4)=onenumber)1,2,3(any of46numbers),and so withanother sequence,and still hasthe questto balancethe outputofnumbersgavesweepstakes,you canThispick3the draw,the sequences1,2,3etc,leavingvery little, whichisonly three digitsCautionsthenafter that,it isa fact,wedo notseesequencein order,but seesequences,(ridinggroups)certain positionsmorelikely tobethe oppositeousoutput

Ventura California United States Member #124382 March 12, 2012 12 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 12:57 pm - IP Logged

I think everyone knows that if you start looking for numbers that have resulted in wins in the past you are on the wrong track.

Let's again use the MM as an example: Odds of winning with any numbers are 1 in 175,711,536. That means there are approximately 176 million plays you could make. If I check the winners in previous games winning numbers will be only a tiny portion of all those 176 million possibilities - because we haven't played 176 million games yet. Does this mean those previous winning numbers/plays are more likely than the rest of those 175,711,536 plays to win the next time? Absolutely not!

Kentucky United States Member #32652 February 14, 2006 7302 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 1:59 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Cautious on March 14, 2012

Stack47. Thank you. I agree with the first part of your post.

Knowing that some numbers are often played, we could avioid those numbers and have a better chance of not having to split the pot if we do win. Does anyone have a list of the most popular plays?

Re your comment that "Nobody is saying any other one combo has better odds of winning". I think you'll find in this chain at least one posting saying that one number combo has better odds, for example nickbrownsfan post below. He sure sounds like he thinks a sequence of numbers is less likely to win than his pick. I guess he also doesn't understand that the results of a few draws will not prove anything, if he won or I won.

Here lets make this more interesting Ill bet you 1 free play on the Ohio Rolling cash 5 its a 5/39 game no bonus.

You get the numbers 1-2-3-4-5

I get the numbers 4-16-27-32-36

Odds are the same we should win close to the same amount so if you end up ahead after a years draws Ill buy you the ticket 1-2-3-4-5 in the amount of draws you are ahead of me by.

If I end up ahead you pay me the amount Im over you by or buy me the tickets and we get to keep the winnings.

"I think you'll find in this chain at least one posting saying that one number combo has better odds"

Because we have members who also believe two or even ten chances of winning are not better than one chance, I should have said "Nobody should be saying any other one combo has better odds of winning". Players exchange QPs because "the numbers don't look right". Instead of saying odds, it's probably better to say "more likely to be drawn because of the statistics". I only have the last 2500 Rolling Cash 5 results ending 12/25/11 and five consecutive numbers were never drawn in that period, but 7 drawings did have four consecutive numbers.

The results (0 to 7) and probability (35 to 1190) show it's more likely for a combination with only four consecutive numbers than one with 5 to be drawn, but there are other probabilities which can change the conclusion.

Using 1-2-3-4-5 compared to 4-16-27-32-36 as an example, there are 194,940 combos with 2 even and 3 odd numbers and 77,520 combos with 4 even and 1 odd number. Since it's more likely a combo with 2 even numbers will be drawn, it's logical to conclude it's more likely 1-2-3-4-5 will be drawn. By using decades (1-9, 30-39, etc.) we can logically conclude the opposite; 40500 combos have 1 number in three decades and two in the 30s and only 882 have all five numbers in the decade 1-9. Now we can logically conclude it's more likely 4-16-27-32-36 will be drawn. If we use the probably of 2 or 3 even numbers will be drawn, the likelihood of 1-2-3-4-5 is even better.

When comparing one combo to another, possibility should be used and they both only have one so their chances of being drawn are the same.

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 2:10 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Cautious on March 12, 2012

Much misinformation has been posted about the odds of winning the lotto with specific strategies. A common mistake, seen many times, promotes the false idea that the odds of winning the lotto by selecting a sequence of numbers (2, 3, 4, 5, 6; 7) is lower than selecting non-sequenced numbers (8, 15, 24, 31, 48; 5). This idea is false. Any numbers you pick, sequenced or not, have exactly the same probability of winning. This statistical fact seems to be counter intuitive to many people. I’ve seen posts on lotto websites claiming that you will not see a sequence of numbers win the lotto in your life time. That is true, but it’s also true for any non-sequenced set of numbers – the odds are exactly the same.

Let’s look at this issue another way. Suppose the lottery was based on a set of pictures of things. Each number would be replaced by a picture. To play, you’d pick pictures instead of numbers. With pictures of things there would be no illusion of any sequences being somehow special and unlikely to win, so I guess most people would understand that all picture picks would have exactly the same odds of winning. Now consider that the numbers we use to play lotto are just symbols; they have no numeric value as far as the lottery process is concerned. The lottery would work exactly the same with any symbols or pictures. The lottery selection of a winner wouldn’t operate any differently if we used pictures of trees, people, animals, dots, dashes, or other symbols; and there’s no difference when we use those marks that we see as mathematic symbols. Those marks that we see as numbers could just as well be chicken scratchings as far as the lottery process is concerned – for lottery purposes there’s no sequence to those numbers, they’re all just random pictures.

I hope you have better luck in your endeavor than I did.

bgonÃ§alves Brasil Member #92564 June 9, 2010 2122 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 4:00 pm - IP Logged

Hellosergem,alottery of49/6have 4groups 12,12,12,13,sergem,you can seethe database ofsweepstakes Either49/6,of the groups orhave zero ora number And one of thegroups is100%intwoor morenumbers.I knowthat a group It has 13numbers, butit does not matterwhat matters, the division by4 Exampleyou can seeunits(anumber)pairs andtrios,each of thefour Groups becausedoingstatisticsdivided into4 parts,the weathergets better ForecastI say,is80/20of courseyou do not knowwhich grouphas zero Or anamountof 100% ofthedrawing andwhichgroup has 2or moreto 100% Draw,youcan makeabillionsimulationssweepstakes, where Does thisfactorin80/20Draw,the big secretis how to achieve A rotation systemofunits,pairs and trios ofeach group,eg A triowith a pairofhotconbinaanother groupcold,as in thefourgroupsof DNA Geneticmeans

Appleton, Wi United States Member #118178 October 24, 2011 199 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 8:25 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by nickbrownsfan on March 15, 2012

I love math.. flip a coin you should have 50-50 chance right? the Farther you go out the closer you will get yet the more you will lose. This is a fact. Do the math.

Dice Game and Lottery Game Comparison

same odds 1:36

or

Why to choose or not to choose 1-2-3-. . . in Lottery

Here is a "sums chart" for a Dice Game using two die, one white and one red. The sums chart list all 36 combinations.

SUMS CHART for dice game

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 2-6 3-6 4-6 5-6 6-6

2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3-5 4-5 5-5 6-5

3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 4-4 5-4 6-4

4-1 4-2 4-3 5-3 6-3

5-1 5-2 6-2

6-1

Any of the 36 combinations has the same chance of being rolled. 1-1, 6-6, or 3-4 can all hit and they all have the same chance.

...but the object of the dice game is to roll a seven or eleven, to win. Many chances (eight) for the right winning combination to pop up.

Why can't lotteries be like that?

It is my hope that I can prove to myself, at another time, that "7"s hit more times in dice for the same reason, that "sums combinations" of 150 hit more times in a 6/49 Lottery.

Economy class Belgium Member #123700 February 27, 2012 4035 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 9:08 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by BlueDuck on March 15, 2012

Dice Game and Lottery Game Comparison

same odds 1:36

or

Why to choose or not to choose 1-2-3-. . . in Lottery

Here is a "sums chart" for a Dice Game using two die, one white and one red. The sums chart list all 36 combinations.

SUMS CHART for dice game

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 2-6 3-6 4-6 5-6 6-6

2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3-5 4-5 5-5 6-5

3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 4-4 5-4 6-4

4-1 4-2 4-3 5-3 6-3

5-1 5-2 6-2

6-1

Any of the 36 combinations has the same chance of being rolled. 1-1, 6-6, or 3-4 can all hit and they all have the same chance.

...but the object of the dice game is to roll a seven or eleven, to win. Many chances (eight) for the right winning combination to pop up.

Why can't lotteries be like that?

It is my hope that I can prove to myself, at another time, that "7"s hit more times in dice for the same reason, that "sums combinations" of 150 hit more times in a 6/49 Lottery.

bgonÃ§alves Brasil Member #92564 June 9, 2010 2122 Posts Offline

Posted: March 15, 2012, 9:38 pm - IP Logged

Hello, it's justasuggestion,therlrandonic,example ofa lottery49/6 Studyingthe digitsseparatedfrom the frontdigits0-4andthe final digitsof 0a9 Butto hit4of6numbersdrawn We have15positions= 1,2,3,41,2,3,51,2,3,63,4,5,6=up to15positionsare Leaving onlytwo numbersto hitat each position All conditionsfrom 0000 to 4444,100%of the drawsof courseisapart of the system Lackendingsfrom 0000 to 9999,but this partwould befor later Althoughpartof the digitsof the frontformationshaveonlypeers and onlyodd Examplepar =2222 2244.....or onlyodd=1111,11,33,1113.... Hittingthe condition offourofsixnumbersdrawn.exampleprovided 3,4,5,6, the tworandom numberswill bein position 1st and 2 ndin the limitfrom 01 to 17... You cansee it?rlrandonic