Welcome Guest
You last visited January 18, 2017, 3:03 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Do some number combinations have better odds?

Topic closed. 5280 replies. Last post 4 years ago by rdgrnr.

 Page 180 of 353

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 14, 2012, 6:12 pm - IP Logged

Boney526

Probability and statistics define very well certain aspects of game theory but like anything else who is to say

if it's complete.  Newton defined what we thought for many years and was later proven wrong and that is the

nature of discovery.  I have no problem with probability it's just that most don't know how to ues it.  Chance

is a word that covers so much that any win can be defined by it.  It's possible that the same set of numbers

could appear for twenty games in a row and the drawing could still be fair.  There is a chance that this could

happen although it is not very probable.  While the in a single drawing every number has the same exact odds

of showing this makes some to believe that self picks are tom foolery.  Lets say that the numbers drawn in the

next power ball drawing are 1-2-3-4-5 BB=6.  This set has the same exact odds of being drawn as any other

set in the matrix and I think most all of us know this.  However over several draws we would not expect it to

show several times because the drawing is random.  Some people get all excited and like to mention balls bouncing

around inside a hopper as proof that we cannot predict the next set no matter how hard we try.  Let's consider the

game of blackjack for a moment.  Most people consider it possible to win at this game if they follow a few rules and

make larger bets at the right time.   It still envolves chance because they cannot know for sure that the cards will

fall in their favor.   The game of black jack can be exploited because we know how many of each suite and value are

in the deck.  If we count the cards then we can calculate the probability for what the next card might be.  Once the

card is delt then it is certain.   Now back to the lottery,  If we consider only that each number has the exact same

changes of being drawn then we would be foolish to think that we could make any kind of calculation that might

prove better than another.   So in order to increase our chances we must dig a little deeper and consider a few other

options.  It does not matter how they select the numbers as lond as the selection process is not rigged in some

manner which would effect the set produced.  Regardless of which numbers are drawn the full set of numbers already

exist within the matrix and the drawing is nothing more than taking a random sample from the whole.  The thing with

random samples are that  we are almost certain that two random samples wiill return two different items or sets of

numbers in this case.  Fill your bathtub with marbles and try to pick the same one twice in a row blindfolded.  Now

lets take a little different look at the sets of numbers and not the numbers themselves.  Not all sets have the same

exact properities.  If you study random sampling you will find out that by taking a small sample from a much larger

pool you can often define the pool by the samples taken.  This is common practice in manufacturing al over the world

as a means to measure the number of defects within a process.   If 10 out of every 100 random samples show a defect

then they can be almost certain that if they inspected every product that they would find that 10% were defective.

I view the lottery as taking random samples from a much larger pool.  Let say that I look at the last 100 drawings and

find that 40 of them had 3 odd numbers.  I might conclude that 3 odd numbers are hot hittters but if I know that around

40% of the sets in the matrix have 3 odd numbers then it makes sence.  While I cannot say that 3 odd numbers will apear

in the next drawing I do know that around 40% of all draws will.  If I choose to play only sets with 3 odd numbers then

I can expect to be correct around 40% of the time.  However if I play sets with 1 odd number then I could only expect to

be correct 12% of the time.  Because random sampling almost ensures that the samples will mimic the whole we now

have a bias for one value over another.  While I have no pre-knowledge that the next draw will be 3 odd I do know what

to expect over the next several draws.  In blackjack the cards are removed from the deck which creates a bias for some

values to be greater than others.  This gives the player an edge if he can make a few calculations and keep count of what

has been removed.  With the lottery the sets are returned to the deck so to say but the deck contains a bias for some

values over others.  This is what every system should try to exploit and it why many believe that a smarter set cand be

built and played.  The odds never change for the game but that does not mean that we cannot put ourselves in a better

position just like the blackjack player.  For any system to do better that chance is a wide wide wide world of meaningless

chatter because chance can be used to cover anything.  Even a 10 game winning streak can be charged to chance because

no matter how improbable it might be it is still possible.   All the self confessed staticians love to take bets and try to look

big but it's foolishness to me.  If I held my hand behind my back and asked how many fingers am I folding I could fool you

evry time because I could adjust them based on your answer.  If chance can cover every possible outcome then why would

anyone try to beat it.  If I win more than my share of prizes using my methods it could still fall within the realm of chance so

how would anyone know if it was my methods  or a product of mear chance or a mixture of both.  The bottom line here is that

a smarter set can be gotten building your own set than a QP but is is also possible that a QP could produce a set as smart

as a SP.   I have heard many different challenges made here at LP.  I have proven it to myself many times and we see it happen

many times right in front of our eyes.  If QP's are better than SP's then why did they have to sele over a billion of them before

someone hit a JP with only 175 million possibilities.  If I played as a system every possible combination within the matrix the

JP would be a sure thing.  However you could easily gerenate a billion combinations using a RNG and not match 5+1.   In all

my years of playing I cannot produce a JP ticket on demand but I win way more that anyone I know that plays QP's except

for the ones who by chance alone hit a JP.  Once we have anything to do with tha sets we play then who can say if it's a

mere matter of chance or we effected the outcome?

RL

I can say that I effected the outcome..........

Because I hit 5+0 or BETTER five times in less than 39 draws, which is five times BETTER than the overall odds for a group of 28 numbers............

Ronnie316 – 5+0 june 15, 2012---- 5+0 July 17, 2012 ---5+1 Aug. 10, 2012   5+0 Aug. 21, 2012   5+0 Sept. 7, 2012

The 5+1 match was posted (pre-draw) on page 45.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19897 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 14, 2012, 7:43 pm - IP Logged

The game is to be played by wheels or by numbers. Which way is up to the lottery.

The lottery can only control how the numbers are drawn but not how they're played, that's up to the players.

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

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4067 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 14, 2012, 9:47 pm - IP Logged

Boney526

Let me try to put it into a format you can understand.

If I place 10 marbles of different colors into a bag, let's say 5 are green, 3 are red, 1 blue and 1 yellow.

Next I select one marble at random from this bag without looking.  Each marble has the same exact odds

of being selected as long as the selection is not based on color.  While I might not be able to say with 100%

certainty that the next random sample I make will be one color or another I can with reasonable certainty

say that over so many attempts that 50% of the time the marble selected will be green.  If I select 5 numbers

from a pool of 59 then each numbers odds of showing can be calculated but regardless of which 5 balls are

drawn, the five that are have done better than the expected average.

The odds never change unless the matrix of the game changes.   Ronnie is changing the games matrix by playing

28 numbers.   Is he able to make the needed changes that increase his chances?   Just because something is not

probable it does not mean that it is impossible.   Ronnie's results could be considered to fall withing the realm of

chance even if he doubles or triples his his current wins.  Some would say that if he continues long enough that

he will wind up loosing more than he wins and that's a possibility but on the other hand he might not.   What I don't

understand is this.  You have made your case and I am sure Ronnie has considered it.  You have done your duty so

to say.  There are a few here that take the time to point out some flaw and show the math behind it then move on.

They are confident in the math and don't feel the need to defend it.  Whenever I see someone defending a well

defined mathematical law then I have to doubt the reasons they are posting.  I have read the same books and I

understand them.  If I choose to play a game where the odds of winning are in the millions then that should make

it clear that I have chosen to ignore the odds rather I play QP's or pick my own.  It's those that live by the law but

still play that I have a problem with.

RL

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7341 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 14, 2012, 11:37 pm - IP Logged

Yes, you would.  I really can't argue with you if you don't think you would need a proper understanding of the knowledge behind probability theory.  And the odds can't be blown away.  You can't just say things and have them be true.  That's be crazy.  You have to prove them before they are factual.

Which is actually really simple.  They teach you that in like 5th grade.  Of course, they don't go on to teach the other important aspects of statistic analysis, like Standard Deviation and Confidence Intervals, which is why you believe that people "blew the odds out of the water" which they didn't.

Probability isn't a theory nor are calculations written in stone when the results are made by a random selection. In 10,000 pick-3 drawings there is a probability that each digit in each digit position will be drawn 1000 times, but when you look at the results some digits are drawn more than 1000 times and others drawn less. The same is true of any group of 28 numbers; over time some will be drawn more than probability and some less.

"And the odds can't be blown away."

There is a 1 in 39 probability that any group of 28 numbers will match five numbers, but in the last 7 MM drawings, many 28 number groups matched all five numbers in seven consecutive drawings because only 27 numbers were drawn. At the most there can only be 25 different numbers be drawn in the next five drawings so there is a probability that billions of 28 number groups will match five numbers in five consecutive drawings and blow away the 1 in 39 odds.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 9:34 am - IP Logged

Set of 28 for MM. Fri. Dec. 14, 2012.

03 05 07 08 09 11 12 13 19 22 24 26 28 31 32 37 38 39 42 43 44 47 48 49 51 52 54 56

bonus ball 10

3 of 5 on this draw........

 Friday, December 14, 2012 11 · 28 · 33 · 41 · 43    + 41 4 \$35 Million

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 9:36 am - IP Logged

3 of 5 on this draw.......

1, 4, 8, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 35, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 46, 53, 54, 56  Not sure if you wanted me to use a bonus ball.  RNG says 45.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 10:46 am - IP Logged

Set of 39 for PB. Sat. Dec. 15, 2012.

01 02 03 04 06 07 08 10 11 13 15 17 20 24 25 26 27 30 32 33 34 35 38 39 40 41 42 43 47 48 49 51 52 53 54 55 56 58 59

bonus ball 12

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 10:49 am - IP Logged

Set of 12 for maddog PB chalenge Sat Dec. 15, 2012.

01 02 03 27 30 32 33 40 42 43 58 59

bonus ball 12

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 11:16 am - IP Logged

Wheel:  Pick 5 Key 4 if 5 of 12

Tickets:  20

Description:  Minimum 4-number match, if 5 numbers drawn fall within your set of 12 numbers.

Input:  30, 27, 40, 3, 58, 1, 33, 59, 32, 43, 42, 2

1. 03-27-30-40-58
2. 27-30-33-40-43
3. 01-27-30-33-59
4. 01-27-30-33-42
5. 01-27-30-32-43
6. 02-27-30-43-59
7. 02-27-30-32-42
8. 01-02-03-30-40
9. 03-30-32-40-59
10. 02-30-40-43-58
11. 01-30-32-40-42
12. 30-33-40-42-59
13. 03-30-42-58-59
14. 03-30-42-43-58
15. 02-03-30-32-33
16. 01-02-30-33-58
17. 01-30-32-58-59
18. 30-32-33-43-58
19. 01-30-33-43-59
20. 02-30-42-43-59

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 1:18 pm - IP Logged

Probability isn't a theory nor are calculations written in stone when the results are made by a random selection. In 10,000 pick-3 drawings there is a probability that each digit in each digit position will be drawn 1000 times, but when you look at the results some digits are drawn more than 1000 times and others drawn less. The same is true of any group of 28 numbers; over time some will be drawn more than probability and some less.

"And the odds can't be blown away."

There is a 1 in 39 probability that any group of 28 numbers will match five numbers, but in the last 7 MM drawings, many 28 number groups matched all five numbers in seven consecutive drawings because only 27 numbers were drawn. At the most there can only be 25 different numbers be drawn in the next five drawings so there is a probability that billions of 28 number groups will match five numbers in five consecutive drawings and blow away the 1 in 39 odds.

You seem not to understand that probability theory isn't simply "it will happen x out of y times."  It's closer to it should happen "X our of Y times with Z standard deviation."  And therefore, anything is possible, but certain things are more probable.

Of course you can go back and find a froup of 28 numbers which won the last 7 drawings.  I'm willing to bet you can't list 28 numbers which win the NEXT 7 drawings.  There's no such thing as blowing away the odds because every single possible event is contained within those odds.

Randomlogic, I will not read anything you write unless you format it in paragraphs.  I'm not going to scramble my head trying to decode your insane formatting, only to be told something about basic probability theory which is probably either wrong or just a simplified explanation of standard devation by somone who probably doesn't even know what standard deviation is.

Allow me to be clear - ANYBODY who tells me I'm wrong about probability theory is ignoring every shred of negative evidence the real world provides them with, and only counting the odd events in their lives.  There's simply no other answer except that you get lucky all the time.  But let's discount that.

EG: Back when I used to play Pick 3 and the Lottery people always thought I won a lot.  They didn't look at how much I SPENT though.  People always seem to see exactly what they want to.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19897 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 2:33 pm - IP Logged

You seem not to understand that probability theory isn't simply "it will happen x out of y times."  It's closer to it should happen "X our of Y times with Z standard deviation."  And therefore, anything is possible, but certain things are more probable.

Of course you can go back and find a froup of 28 numbers which won the last 7 drawings.  I'm willing to bet you can't list 28 numbers which win the NEXT 7 drawings.  There's no such thing as blowing away the odds because every single possible event is contained within those odds.

Randomlogic, I will not read anything you write unless you format it in paragraphs.  I'm not going to scramble my head trying to decode your insane formatting, only to be told something about basic probability theory which is probably either wrong or just a simplified explanation of standard devation by somone who probably doesn't even know what standard deviation is.

Allow me to be clear - ANYBODY who tells me I'm wrong about probability theory is ignoring every shred of negative evidence the real world provides them with, and only counting the odd events in their lives.  There's simply no other answer except that you get lucky all the time.  But let's discount that.

EG: Back when I used to play Pick 3 and the Lottery people always thought I won a lot.  They didn't look at how much I SPENT though.  People always seem to see exactly what they want to.

Now that you've shown you understand the theory of probability better than than most, can you shown how this knowledge help you develop a better strategy for winning a lottery?   If it can't do that, what is the point of knowing it?

After all, everyone who plays the lotteries have to come up with some combinations to play one way or another.

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

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 3:20 pm - IP Logged

Now that you've shown you understand the theory of probability better than than most, can you shown how this knowledge help you develop a better strategy for winning a lottery?   If it can't do that, what is the point of knowing it?

After all, everyone who plays the lotteries have to come up with some combinations to play one way or another.

Sadly, no you cannot.  I guess I can't rule out the possibility that there are still big developments to be made in probability theory - I just highly doubt it and am not a mathemetician.  I understand basic statistics for use in general gambling... because I like gambling.  Understanding probability can't change probability, but it can allow you to play other games at an advantage, like poker and blackjack.

(However at the end, I will re-iterate my plan of attack on lottery games)

Essentially my "journey" went like this.  I started out playing the lottery for fun.  I got pretty into it, I used this site for a while to try to beat the Pick 3.  Taking statistics opened my eyes to the realities of standard deviation and a better understanding of provable concepts.  I went to a casino once, and lost some decent amount of money playing blackjack, and won a little playing poker just getting dealt really nice hands.  I decided to read up on blackjack strategy.  Studying blackjack strategy led me to study gambling which led me to advantage gambling.  I'm still a novice as far as that goes - but I understand the underlying principles that make it possible.

You can count cards through a shoe of blackjack, for example.  I don't actually do this for money, I just learned it as a hobby which I rarely practice now.  I have run a fake bankroll of 12500 dollars into over 80000 over the course of a couple hundred shoes of blackjack.  This was far more than the average expectation, and I've also lost a couple of bankrolls, and overall I'm very close to the theoritical win.

I don't play blackjack b/c of the bankroll required, the fact that casinos don't want you to and that I think Poker as far more interesting and challenging.  That's something I'm trying to go for at the end of May.

As for my plan of attack on the Lottery, there are some useful statistics that would allow a player with good observations skills to lose less on average than other players.  Basically, you pick combinations of numbers that other self pick players are less likely to pick.  For most lottery games, this just very slightly increases your expected long term win, because it would only make it slightly less likely that you will share a Jackpot if you win it.  So, it's not very useful, but slightly in a game like MM.

But in a state like NJ which uses pari-mutual prizes, I've found that I can increase my average expected payback on a the Cash 5 from around 50% to around 80% if I only play when the jackpot is high, and I use groups of numbers which other players tend not to choose when self picking.  This is because the jackpot is less likely to be split AND the second and third tier prizes go up in value if you find these specific groups of combos.  It's still not an advantage bet, but there are essentially no available advantage bets that will allow you to win 100s of thousands or millions with a dollar... so I still play once in a while.  And when I do, that's how I play.  (If you were really very interested in the exact correlation I found, I can share it.  It's not that big of a deal to me.)

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19897 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 15, 2012, 4:28 pm - IP Logged

I have a different take on playing lotteries as I'm not so concerned about sharing a jackpot as I am about winning one. For me, sharing one is better than never having won one at all.  Besides, sharing one doesn't lessen my chances of winning another one out right.

Good luck to you.

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

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4067 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 16, 2012, 1:13 am - IP Logged

You seem not to understand that probability theory isn't simply "it will happen x out of y times."  It's closer to it should happen "X our of Y times with Z standard deviation."  And therefore, anything is possible, but certain things are more probable.

Of course you can go back and find a froup of 28 numbers which won the last 7 drawings.  I'm willing to bet you can't list 28 numbers which win the NEXT 7 drawings.  There's no such thing as blowing away the odds because every single possible event is contained within those odds.

Randomlogic, I will not read anything you write unless you format it in paragraphs.  I'm not going to scramble my head trying to decode your insane formatting, only to be told something about basic probability theory which is probably either wrong or just a simplified explanation of standard devation by somone who probably doesn't even know what standard deviation is.

Allow me to be clear - ANYBODY who tells me I'm wrong about probability theory is ignoring every shred of negative evidence the real world provides them with, and only counting the odd events in their lives.  There's simply no other answer except that you get lucky all the time.  But let's discount that.

EG: Back when I used to play Pick 3 and the Lottery people always thought I won a lot.  They didn't look at how much I SPENT though.  People always seem to see exactly what they want to.

Boney

Sorry for the simplified explanations but I felt it necessary in this case.  You can rest assured that I understand

the concept.  The problem here is not one of probability or deviations from the expected but more that you feel

the need to impose upon others your basic understanding.   I take it that the concept of standard deviation

is relatively new to you since you suggest that your past experiences with pick-3 left you with a few fallacious

notions about how well you were doing.

Sorry about the format but it's only partly my bad.  I use firefox and it double spaces for some reason and I never

took the time to see if it can be changed.  You have made it very plain that you believe that nothing can be done to

improve ones game and that's your opinion.  Chance can be used to cover almost any deviation from the expected so

unless you are one of those people who need to be patted on the back then I would say your job here is done.

Many here at LP love the game and some believe they can build smarter sets than a lottery terminal's RNG can provide.

to define a winning system from one that does no better than chance?  From past engages with others of the same mind

they seem to adjust the scales as it fits them.  The best methods I have ever seen are short term which rely on trends that

are spotted in time to take advantage of.   Most of these are short lived and many like your self love to backtest them using

the entire history of the game to prove them wrong.

If using a static process then I would expect any method to fail because the drawing is random.  If however small trends

happen every now and then which can be spotted and played successfully then while the trend may be a element of

chance it's the player observations that can make the difference.  You are by no means the first person here to attempt

to inform us of the error of our ways.  Maybe I should pick up a newer book on statistics as mine may be outdated.

PS. I think this has been mentioned already but "devation" is spelt deviation.  Not knocking your spelling as I make many

spelling and grammar errors myself.  Not writing a book here just conversing, just call me lazy for not hitting spell check.

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4067 Posts
Online
 Posted: December 16, 2012, 1:22 am - IP Logged

boney

PS.  Rest assured that no matter how uninterested you are in my babbling I am even less interested in yours.

RL

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

Trump / 2016 & 2020

 Page 180 of 353