Welcome Guest
You last visited May 25, 2018, 4:33 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Odds on Misinformation

Topic closed. 60 replies. Last post 6 years ago by nickbrownsfan.

 Page 3 of 5
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

New Member
Ventura California
United States
Member #124382
March 12, 2012
12 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 14, 2012, 11:20 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

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
2408 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 7:46 am - IP Logged

Hello, cautions, if you split a lotto 49/6 into 4 parts or 4 sections, or four groups, Statistics show that in 87% of all sweepstakes, you can simulate billions of sweepstakes That in 87% of the six numbers will be distributed in three sectors, one sector (groups of 12 numbers) only 13% of the sweepstakes, I prefer to play in 87% than 13%, the largest eating less, even in lower premiums need not be numbers, other symbols can take 49 The sequence is used to filter only within the matrix, and also multiple, ie cautions, The game is random, but keeps certain positions, because in mathematics, can only predict   To an extent then it is random, you can see and prove, the repetition of certain positions   Within the matrix 49/6, and not repeat sequences group, the frequency of repetition of certain distances between the number of the game, this is because a greater number of competing 1,2,3 example, next to give only the number 4 has a number against 46 others, 1,2,3 (4) = one number) 1,2,3 (any of 46 numbers), and so with another sequence, and still has the quest to balance the output of numbers gave sweepstakes, you can   This pick3 the draw, the sequences 1,2,3 etc, leaving very little, which is only three digits Cautions then after that, it is a fact, we do not see sequence in order, but see sequences, (riding groups) certain positions more likely to be the opposite ous output

Economy class
Belgium
Member #123700
February 27, 2012
4035 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 10:55 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.

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.

What do you mean? Explain yourself.

Economy class
Belgium
Member #123700
February 27, 2012
4035 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 10:58 am - IP Logged

Hello, cautions, if you split a lotto 49/6 into 4 parts or 4 sections, or four groups, Statistics show that in 87% of all sweepstakes, you can simulate billions of sweepstakes That in 87% of the six numbers will be distributed in three sectors, one sector (groups of 12 numbers) only 13% of the sweepstakes, I prefer to play in 87% than 13%, the largest eating less, even in lower premiums need not be numbers, other symbols can take 49 The sequence is used to filter only within the matrix, and also multiple, ie cautions, The game is random, but keeps certain positions, because in mathematics, can only predict   To an extent then it is random, you can see and prove, the repetition of certain positions   Within the matrix 49/6, and not repeat sequences group, the frequency of repetition of certain distances between the number of the game, this is because a greater number of competing 1,2,3 example, next to give only the number 4 has a number against 46 others, 1,2,3 (4) = one number) 1,2,3 (any of 46 numbers), and so with another sequence, and still has the quest to balance the output of numbers gave sweepstakes, you can   This pick3 the draw, the sequences 1,2,3 etc, leaving very little, which is only three digits Cautions then after that, it is a fact, we do not see sequence in order, but see sequences, (riding groups) certain positions more likely to be the opposite ous output

You cannot split 49 in 4 equal parts.

New Member
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!

bgonÃ§alves
Brasil
Member #92564
June 9, 2010
2408 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 1:26 pm - IP Logged

sergen= 12   12    12  13  = 3 grups 87%

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7723 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 1:59 pm - IP Logged

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

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.

There is more going on here than innumeracy.

Economy class
Belgium
Member #123700
February 27, 2012
4035 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 3:06 pm - IP Logged

sergen= 12   12    12  13  = 3 grups 87%

7*7 = 7 groups of 14%

1-7-49

You have to use to much math for irregular parts, that is a bad system.

bgonÃ§alves
Brasil
Member #92564
June 9, 2010
2408 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 4:00 pm - IP Logged

Hello sergem, a lottery of 49/6 have 4 groups
12,12,12,13, sergem, you can see the database of sweepstakes
Either 49/6, of the groups or have zero or a number
And one of the groups is 100% in two or more numbers. I know that a group
It has 13 numbers, but it does not matter what matters, the division by 4
Example you can see units (a number) pairs and trios, each of the four
Groups because doing statistics divided into 4 parts, the weather gets better
Forecast I say, is 80/20 of course you do not know which group has zero
Or an amount of 100% of the drawing and which group has 2 or more to 100%
Draw, you can make a billion simulations sweepstakes, where
Does this factor in 80/20 Draw, the big secret is how to achieve
A rotation system of units, pairs and trios of each group, eg
A trio with a pair of hot conbina another group cold, as in the four groups of DNA
Genetic means

Appleton, Wi
United States
Member #118178
October 24, 2011
199 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 8:25 pm - 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.

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.

.....................................................

Here is a "sums chart" for a drop ball Lottery Game using 9 balls. 2/9 odds 1:36. The sums chart list all 36 combinations.

Choose 2 different numbers from 1 through 9

SUMS CHART for 2/9 lottery

3           4           5           6           7           8           9          10          11          12          13

1-2         1-3       1-4        1-5        1-6        1-7        1-8       1-9         2-9         3-9        4-9

2-3        2-4        2-5        2-6        2-7       2-8         3-8         4-8        5-8

3-4        3-5        3-6       3-7         4-7         5-7        6-7

4-5       4-6         5-6

14          15          16          17

5-9         6-9         7-9         8-9

6-8         7-8

If this lottery could be won by "rolling a 10", any one of the 4 combinations would be a winner.

Why can't Lottery Games be more like dice games?

Just a few thoughts,

BlueDuck

Economy class
Belgium
Member #123700
February 27, 2012
4035 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 9:08 pm - IP Logged

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.

.....................................................

Here is a "sums chart" for a drop ball Lottery Game using 9 balls. 2/9 odds 1:36. The sums chart list all 36 combinations.

Choose 2 different numbers from 1 through 9

SUMS CHART for 2/9 lottery

3           4           5           6           7           8           9          10          11          12          13

1-2         1-3       1-4        1-5        1-6        1-7        1-8       1-9         2-9         3-9        4-9

2-3        2-4        2-5        2-6        2-7       2-8         3-8         4-8        5-8

3-4        3-5        3-6       3-7         4-7         5-7        6-7

4-5       4-6         5-6

14          15          16          17

5-9         6-9         7-9         8-9

6-8         7-8

If this lottery could be won by "rolling a 10", any one of the 4 combinations would be a winner.

Why can't Lottery Games be more like dice games?

Just a few thoughts,

BlueDuck

There are also odds for the order of appearance.

bgonÃ§alves
Brasil
Member #92564
June 9, 2010
2408 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 15, 2012, 9:38 pm - IP Logged

Hello, it's just a suggestion, the rl randonic, example of a lottery 49/6
Studying the digits separated from the front digits 0-4 and the final digits of 0 a9
But to hit 4 of 6 numbers drawn
We have 15 positions =
1,2,3,4 1,2,3,5 1,2,3,6 3,4,5,6 = up to 15 positions are
Leaving only two numbers to hit at each position
All conditions from 0000 to 4444, 100% of the draws of course is a part of the system
Lack endings from 0000 to 9999, but this part would be for later
Although part of the digits of the front formations have only peers and only odd
Example par = 2222 2244 ..... or only odd = 1111,11,33,1113 ....
Hitting the condition of four of six numbers drawn. example provided
3,4,5,6, the two random numbers will be in position 1 st and 2 nd in the limit from 01 to 17 ...
You can see it? rl randonic

 Page 3 of 5