Tampa, FL United States Member #121764 January 16, 2012 188 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 9:40 pm - IP Logged

Although any numbers are possible to come up because the balls of the Powerball lottery are drawn completely randomly, I was very disappointed in one of the rows I was given on a QP for tomorrow's drawing. It was a waste of $2. The odds coming from the history of all previous Powerball draws since 1997 go against this collection of numbers. My first # is 40... There has never been a drawing where the lowest drawn ball is above 39. What luck! Ugh! Who knows, maybe this drawing will be the first time that it ever happens.. Everyone will see the numbers all above 40 and think, "No one would EVER pick those, this jackpot is rolling over...". Perhaps I'm the lucky holder of the unthinkable #s....sigh I am trying to cheer myself up here for wasting $2 on a QP. At least I have 4 other rows of #s I chose and 2 other decent quick pick rows..

Tampa, FL United States Member #121764 January 16, 2012 188 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 9:51 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Nikkicute on April 24, 2012

Quick Picks have helped many win millions, you never know what numbers might come up!

I'd keep those numbers and play them if I were you, they just might come in and you'll be the only

winner! Lot's of people don't like sharing the jackpot lol Good luck!!

well of course I am keeping them! lol I would certainly not throw my $2 away AGAIN, I already did that once when I first purchased the ticket. Yes as THRIFTY would be sure to inform everyone, the Powerball website says that 70% of jackpot winners win the jackpots 70% of the time. That's exactly why I throw a few quick picks on my tickets in addition to my statistically chosen numbers. Sometimes you need the quirky, out-of-the-box insane combinations of numbers to hit the jackpot and be the only winner. I would definitely approve of these numbers then! It's just highly improbable. Oh well. We shall see what happens tomorrow night! Good luck to you as well!

DFW, Texas United States Member #78628 August 18, 2009 134 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 10:11 pm - IP Logged

I'd point out that they don't actually draw numbers, they draw balls. The number that happens to be attached to the ball is what needs to match the ticket. The only reason they've never drawn all high numbers is because of how few combinations of such numbers there are, compared with the entire set, and because of how few drawings have taken place. If they go long enough, they will some day pick a set with all numbers above 39.

What's bothering you is that there your numbers have a discernible pattern that's never been drawn before. There are many combinations that have never been drawn, but that's only because of how many combinations there are and how few drawings have taken place. Don't worry about this at all; your set of numbers is exactly as likely be drawn as the last set that was drawn. Also, any ticket is most likely a waste of $2 regardless of what the numbers are.

Tampa, FL United States Member #121764 January 16, 2012 188 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 10:16 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Longarm on April 24, 2012

I'd point out that they don't actually draw numbers, they draw balls. The number that happens to be attached to the ball is what needs to match the ticket. The only reason they've never drawn all high numbers is because of how few combinations of such numbers there are, compared with the entire set, and because of how few drawings have taken place. If they go long enough, they will some day pick a set with all numbers above 39.

What's bothering you is that there your numbers have a discernible pattern that's never been drawn before. There are many combinations that have never been drawn, but that's only because of how many combinations there are and how few drawings have taken place. Don't worry about this at all; your set of numbers is exactly as likely be drawn as the last set that was drawn. Also, any ticket is most likely a waste of $2 regardless of what the numbers are.

HAHA thanks for the reply Longarm. You are very correct. I am sure there are some laws and theories and stuff dealing with statistics and the drawing of numerical data over time. Since every ball has a 1 in 59 chance of coming up and every combination should have a 1 in 170 whatever million chance of coming up, in theory, every combination will eventually come up. However, for a pool of possible combinations that big, it would take centuries. And yes, any ticket is likely a waste of $2 regardless of what the numbers are (unless its the winning ticket or you have a weird interest in collecting losing tickets).

DFW, Texas United States Member #78628 August 18, 2009 134 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 10:25 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by LottoNick56 on April 24, 2012

HAHA thanks for the reply Longarm. You are very correct. I am sure there are some laws and theories and stuff dealing with statistics and the drawing of numerical data over time. Since every ball has a 1 in 59 chance of coming up and every combination should have a 1 in 170 whatever million chance of coming up, in theory, every combination will eventually come up. However, for a pool of possible combinations that big, it would take centuries. And yes, any ticket is likely a waste of $2 regardless of what the numbers are (unless its the winning ticket or you have a weird interest in collecting losing tickets).

I think what happens is that people are discouraged by identifiable patterns. If your quick pick had 1 2 3 4 5 PB 6, you'd probably hate it. They've never drawn all consecutive numbers, but the fact that it's an identifiable pattern makes no difference at all. There's no difference between that and 17 20 24 30 48 PB 18 (which I'm just assuming has never been drawn). The second set seems more random, while the first is all consecutive. But you don't win for having the most random numbers, you win for matching the numbers on the balls drawn.

I bring this up because I discussed this with my cousin some time back and he disliked the idea of playing 1 2 3 4 5 6. He said those numbers won't be drawn. I agree they probably won't, but a seemingly random set is just as likely not to be drawn. The identifiable pattern makes it feel different, but it doesn't make any difference to the math, or to the results.

Tampa, FL United States Member #121764 January 16, 2012 188 Posts Offline

Posted: April 24, 2012, 10:30 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Longarm on April 24, 2012

I think what happens is that people are discouraged by identifiable patterns. If your quick pick had 1 2 3 4 5 PB 6, you'd probably hate it. They've never drawn all consecutive numbers, but the fact that it's an identifiable pattern makes no difference at all. There's no difference between that and 17 20 24 30 48 PB 18 (which I'm just assuming has never been drawn). The second set seems more random, while the first is all consecutive. But you don't win for having the most random numbers, you win for matching the numbers on the balls drawn.

I bring this up because I discussed this with my cousin some time back and he disliked the idea of playing 1 2 3 4 5 6. He said those numbers won't be drawn. I agree they probably won't, but a seemingly random set is just as likely not to be drawn. The identifiable pattern makes it feel different, but it doesn't make any difference to the math, or to the results.

You couldn't be more right. But I will personally stick to playing the more random sets until this lottery completely shocks me with a 1 2 3 4 5 6..I wonder if anyone actually wastes the money playing that set of consecutive numbers every drawing insisting that one day it'll hit. Probably would have to share that one with a lot of people. A random set of numbers is more like to be drawn, only simply because there are more combinations of random numbers vs. consecutive numbers. I finally played numbers I envisioned in a dream a while ago. Who knows, maybe I am the chosen one!

San Diego United States Member #126687 April 14, 2012 3 Posts Offline

Posted: April 25, 2012, 1:18 am - IP Logged

The split is the real reason to avoid these numbers. More people play patterns, sequences, etc... so you would most likely be staring at an ugly win with this set. This is also why you want to avoid using just calendar numbers, as they have much heavier play than the rest. For MM, the non calendar numbers make up about 45% of the matrix, so it doesn't hurt to grab a couple numbers from that end of the pool. This advice goes for the numbers that appear in pop culture, like "The Numbers" from Lost.

Tampa, FL United States Member #121764 January 16, 2012 188 Posts Offline

Posted: April 25, 2012, 3:05 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by RedStang on April 25, 2012

You should also look at the small picture. Maybe you could hit 3+1 for a decent prize.

I thought about this last night while lying in bed, unable to sleep, thinking about the powerball jackpot for tonight. Maybe those "bad" numbers will yield a decent prize none-the-less. Thanks for the optimism RedStang

United States Member #24439 October 22, 2005 638 Posts Offline

Posted: April 25, 2012, 5:24 pm - IP Logged

I think QP have a 6th sense of picking cold and unexpected numbers drawn from my experience if you don't give them your own numbers first, then they will drawn numbers similar to your losing picks. But if the winning numbers include 40, two numbers below 40 and two numbers above 40, you can see the advantage in that kind of pick. You are guaranteed to miss two numbers and you have 4 in 18 chances of matching the other two numbers. It's all about how the numbers are spread. Good luck.

NY United States Member #23835 October 16, 2005 3502 Posts Offline

Posted: April 26, 2012, 1:30 am - IP Logged

"I wonder if anyone actually wastes the money playing that set of consecutive numbers every drawing insisting that one day it'll hit."

I once worked with a guy who played 1,2,3,4,5,6 (in a state game) on the theory that nobody else would play them. He was wrong about that. It's a very popular combination because for every person who thinks a "special" combination like that won't be drawn there's somebody who thinks it will be drawn because it's a"special" combination. The real reason to avoid it is that you hope to be the only person whose numbers match the winning combination.

It's also worth noting that many years ago (might have been when QP first became available) the NY lottery ran ads telling people not to play obvious patterns. In most (probably all) games the most commonly played combination is the one you get by filling in the numbers that run diagonally from top left. The second most common is the one starting at the top right. For multi-state games those may represent multiple combinations because the bet slips may be laid out differently in different states. If you looked at the slip instead of simply looking at the numbers you'd probably lump those combinations in with 1,2,3,4,5,6 and other consecutive numbers as having similar signifigance.

" A random set of numbers is more like to be drawn, only simply because there are more combinations of random numbers vs. consecutive numbers. "

You're right, except that consecutive numbers are also random in terms of how they are drawn. They could just as easily put a series of random numbers on the balls insteadd of consecutive numbers. Using consecutive numbers starting with 1 is just what's easiest for the human mind to work with. The hardware doesn't care how the individual selections are identified.

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

Posted: April 26, 2012, 10:20 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on April 26, 2012

"I wonder if anyone actually wastes the money playing that set of consecutive numbers every drawing insisting that one day it'll hit."

I once worked with a guy who played 1,2,3,4,5,6 (in a state game) on the theory that nobody else would play them. He was wrong about that. It's a very popular combination because for every person who thinks a "special" combination like that won't be drawn there's somebody who thinks it will be drawn because it's a"special" combination. The real reason to avoid it is that you hope to be the only person whose numbers match the winning combination.

It's also worth noting that many years ago (might have been when QP first became available) the NY lottery ran ads telling people not to play obvious patterns. In most (probably all) games the most commonly played combination is the one you get by filling in the numbers that run diagonally from top left. The second most common is the one starting at the top right. For multi-state games those may represent multiple combinations because the bet slips may be laid out differently in different states. If you looked at the slip instead of simply looking at the numbers you'd probably lump those combinations in with 1,2,3,4,5,6 and other consecutive numbers as having similar signifigance.

" A random set of numbers is more like to be drawn, only simply because there are more combinations of random numbers vs. consecutive numbers. "

You're right, except that consecutive numbers are also random in terms of how they are drawn. They could just as easily put a series of random numbers on the balls insteadd of consecutive numbers. Using consecutive numbers starting with 1 is just what's easiest for the human mind to work with. The hardware doesn't care how the individual selections are identified.

KY Floyd,

"The hardware doesn't care how the individual selections are identified."

Beginning to think it is very, very, very hard (impossible) to produce random numbers with machines.

Here are the results from "A Very Small Lottery Game". 2/9, odds 1:36. Marked nine pennies 1 to 9. Used a plastic Tupperware container with cover and made 100 random drawings, picking out two marked pennies and writing down the results.

Numbers "3" to "17" is the "Range of Sums Number".

Conclusion: My "logical" mind tells me putting a "7" or an "8" on an item doesn't give it luck or any special powers. But believing that my "experiment" has been conducted 1000 times before by 1000 different people in hundreds of different countries would seem to prove otherwise.

NY United States Member #23835 October 16, 2005 3502 Posts Offline

Posted: April 26, 2012, 6:05 pm - IP Logged

I counted 24 instances of 7 and 19 of 8. Did I miss any? With 9 coins all having an equal probability of being drawn you would "expect" that any given coin would be drawn 1 out of every 9 times. Out of 200 total draws that would be 22.22 times (which obviously can't happen). 24 and 19 are both fairly close to what we would expect. I get 28 instances of 5, which is substantialy higher than the average, but you didn't mention that, so I'm not sure exactly what you're seeing (or looking for) that made you single out 7 and 8.

Unless you think there's a reason to draw multiple coins I'd simply draw a single coin, or at least record them as individual selections instead of sums. There are more combinations that add up to 9 than 2 and 17, but sums don't win.

I put "expect" in quotes, because it's just a theoretical result. Probability says that with a completely random selection each has an equal chance of being drawn, but it doesn't say that each should be drawn an equal number of times. In fact, there would be something seriously suspicious if that did happen. Think about what happens when the selection is perfectly random. Select 1 of the 9 pennies 10 times. Whichever one is selected the first time has a 1 in 9 chance of being selected in subsequent selections, so you would "expect" it to be selected again in selections 2 through 10. If that happens it will have been drawn twice in 10 tries, and we'd "expect" it to be selected again in selections 11 through 18. We could then expect that whatever coins are selected in the first couple of tries have been selected more times when it's all done, but there's no guarantee.

If you look at the past results for MM and PB at USAMega you'll see that some numbers have been drawn much more often and some have been drawn much less often than the average. If you were to graph how many numbers were drawn each number of times you'd get a bell curve. I didn't look at your results above thoroughly, but with a fairly modest number of tests you've got a very rough bell curve, though a few points are above or below the curve.

Finally, what makes you think the experiment has been conducted thousands of times with the same results? I'd guess that most times it may have been done the results had a pattern that was similar to yours, though the individual numbers would be different.

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

Posted: April 27, 2012, 8:34 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on April 26, 2012

I counted 24 instances of 7 and 19 of 8. Did I miss any? With 9 coins all having an equal probability of being drawn you would "expect" that any given coin would be drawn 1 out of every 9 times. Out of 200 total draws that would be 22.22 times (which obviously can't happen). 24 and 19 are both fairly close to what we would expect. I get 28 instances of 5, which is substantialy higher than the average, but you didn't mention that, so I'm not sure exactly what you're seeing (or looking for) that made you single out 7 and 8.

Unless you think there's a reason to draw multiple coins I'd simply draw a single coin, or at least record them as individual selections instead of sums. There are more combinations that add up to 9 than 2 and 17, but sums don't win.

I put "expect" in quotes, because it's just a theoretical result. Probability says that with a completely random selection each has an equal chance of being drawn, but it doesn't say that each should be drawn an equal number of times. In fact, there would be something seriously suspicious if that did happen. Think about what happens when the selection is perfectly random. Select 1 of the 9 pennies 10 times. Whichever one is selected the first time has a 1 in 9 chance of being selected in subsequent selections, so you would "expect" it to be selected again in selections 2 through 10. If that happens it will have been drawn twice in 10 tries, and we'd "expect" it to be selected again in selections 11 through 18. We could then expect that whatever coins are selected in the first couple of tries have been selected more times when it's all done, but there's no guarantee.

If you look at the past results for MM and PB at USAMega you'll see that some numbers have been drawn much more often and some have been drawn much less often than the average. If you were to graph how many numbers were drawn each number of times you'd get a bell curve. I didn't look at your results above thoroughly, but with a fairly modest number of tests you've got a very rough bell curve, though a few points are above or below the curve.

Finally, what makes you think the experiment has been conducted thousands of times with the same results? I'd guess that most times it may have been done the results had a pattern that was similar to yours, though the individual numbers would be different.

correction: an extra "5-8" listed under "13".

KY Floyd,

Thanks for reply and analysis to post.

I counted 24 instances of 7 and 19 of 8. Did I miss any?

Coin Count after corrections.

1. 18

2. 19

3. 27

4. 27

5. 27

6. 24

7. 24

8. 18

9. 16

Unless you think there's a reason to draw multiple coins I'd simply draw a single coin, or at least record them as individual selections instead of sums. There are more combinations that add up to 9 than 2 and 17, but sums don't win.

I listed the draws as combinations or sums to see if any unusual patterns occured. Sums don't win but if the machine has a bias, the bias may produce more combinations with a sum of "10" in this 2/9 lottery or more combinations closer to "143" in a 5/56 lottery.

Whichever one is selected the first time has a 1 in 9 chance of being selected in subsequent selections, so you would "expect" it to be selected again in selections 2 through 10.

OK. What happened last has just as much chance happening again.

Finally, what makes you think the experiment has been conducted thousands of times with the same results? I'd guess that most times it may have been done the results had a pattern that was similar to yours, though the individual numbers would be different.

My hyperbole. "7" is lucky in the West, "8" is lucky in the East. Just wondering how all that got started.

Opinion: Lottery Ball Drop Machines may be at their physical limits when producing five number lottery combinations such as 1-2-3-4-5 or 52-53-54-55-56. A machine with average abilities can produce combinations near the middle of "range of sums" with little problem. Better design machines can produce combinations near the low-end and high-end of the range of sums easier.