Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 7, 2016, 10:55 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 213 of 353
4.820
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
Posted: January 2, 2013, 4:17 pm - IP Logged

Here is a new Challenge idea. Instead of hitting 5 of 5, lets see who can MISS 5 of 5 each draw.....What?

Here are my 12 losing numbers for tonight's PB draw.

01 08 11 12 15 21 24 44 45 48 51 59


    United States
    Member #116268
    September 7, 2011
    20244 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: January 2, 2013, 4:46 pm - IP Logged

       


      United States
      Member #93947
      July 10, 2010
      2180 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: January 2, 2013, 5:06 pm - IP Logged

      Here are my 12 losing numbers for tonight's PB draw.

      01 08 11 12 15 21 24 44 45 48 51 59

      Ronnie316,

      Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE.    When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!  And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.

      Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?

      --Jimmy4164

      P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."


        United States
        Member #116268
        September 7, 2011
        20244 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: January 2, 2013, 6:58 pm - IP Logged

        Ronnie316,

        Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE.    When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!  And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.

        Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?

        --Jimmy4164

        P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."

        Try Gauss-ex. http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/255184/2860318


          United States
          Member #116268
          September 7, 2011
          20244 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:08 pm - IP Logged

          Ronnie316,

          Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE.    When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!  And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.

          Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?

          --Jimmy4164

          P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."

          50%? You have sold me short Jimmy. Using 28 numbers has a 2.6% success rate, but because I can get 5 times BETTER ODDS with my extreme predictive abilities the 5 of 5 match will occur around every 8 draws.


            United States
            Member #116268
            September 7, 2011
            20244 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:18 pm - IP Logged

            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


              United States
              Member #116268
              September 7, 2011
              20244 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:26 pm - IP Logged

              The "weaker ones" among us can only hit every 15-20 draws but still have BETTER ODDS by double 2.6%.

              X1kosmic – 5+0 July 10, 2012 --  5+1 Sept. 18, 2012 


                United States
                Member #124493
                March 14, 2012
                7023 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:29 pm - IP Logged

                This can't be right.  I think I've seen you do this before accurately, so I'm guessing you coped and pasted the wrong thing or something, but I'm saying that it can't be right that there b/c you posted one winning combo when you use 12 numbers, when there should be 12*11*10*9*8/120=792.

                 

                 

                Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today - the odds of eliminating 12 numbers succesfully should be calculated as (44/56)*(43/55)*(42/54)*(41/53)*(40/52) or .03482.

                 

                RJOh, can you tell me if/where I made an error?  Because I'm getting about a 3.5% chance of eliminating 12 numbers succefully.

                Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today

                What are the odds of droney making a mistake?

                I was going to pick lottery numbers today, but I decided not to because I haven't had my wheaties yet.Roll Eyes

                I also like to have a three course meal of baked clams, chicken parmigiana with linguine, and some new york cheescake before I do my extreme rounding.

                Maybe those three course meals is why I have become extremely rounded?

                  Avatar
                  Kentucky
                  United States
                  Member #32652
                  February 14, 2006
                  7313 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:31 pm - IP Logged

                  Ronnie316,

                  Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE.    When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!  And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.

                  Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?

                  --Jimmy4164

                  P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."

                  "Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47"

                  We're using the same probability Boney used with standard deviation and you used in your simulation. Are you saying it's impossible for thousands of groups of 28 numbers to have a five number match in the last and in the next 5 consecutive drawings?

                  "When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!"

                  You still haven't learned your simulations aren't even close to abnormal play (25,000 players buying $5 pick-3 QPs a day for five years). You'll have to ask one of the jackpot winners if they feel they beat the house edge or ask some of the LP members if they're trying to beat the edge or win a jackpot. Thrifty and explain it to you.


                    United States
                    Member #124493
                    March 14, 2012
                    7023 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: January 2, 2013, 7:37 pm - IP Logged

                    Ronnie316,

                    Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE.    When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!  And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.

                    Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?

                    --Jimmy4164

                    P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."

                    P.S.  I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."

                    I think its more of a team of WOLVERINES

                    Like in Red Dawn.

                      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                      mid-Ohio
                      United States
                      Member #9
                      March 24, 2001
                      19828 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: January 2, 2013, 9:21 pm - IP Logged

                      Here is a new Challenge idea. Instead of hitting 5 of 5, lets see who can MISS 5 of 5 each draw.....What?

                      This should interest the KENO players, I think they can win a prize matching nothing. Thumbs Up

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


                        United States
                        Member #93947
                        July 10, 2010
                        2180 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: January 2, 2013, 9:34 pm - IP Logged

                        "Since you've possibly  discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47"

                        We're using the same probability Boney used with standard deviation and you used in your simulation. Are you saying it's impossible for thousands of groups of 28 numbers to have a five number match in the last and in the next 5 consecutive drawings?

                        "When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50%  edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!"

                        You still haven't learned your simulations aren't even close to abnormal play (25,000 players buying $5 pick-3 QPs a day for five years). You'll have to ask one of the jackpot winners if they feel they beat the house edge or ask some of the LP members if they're trying to beat the edge or win a jackpot. Thrifty and explain it to you.

                        Stack47,

                        Your responses to both of the clips you quoted from my post are very telling.  And in a way, they're puzzling.  Look above.   In response to me encouraging you to present your potentially revolutionary ideas to a premier mathematical software publisher, instead of thanking me and making inquiries at Mathworks, you go on the defensive and make statements clearly indicating you are not confident in your beliefs. Perhaps you feel your ideas need to be peer reviewed before presenting them to a potential employer or publisher.  If that's the case, why not prepare an article for one of the math or science journals?  A more modest approach might be to establish an account at Wikipedia and present your ideas there.

                        This should get you started:

                        http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Getting_started

                        --Jimmy4164

                          Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                          New Jersey
                          United States
                          Member #99032
                          October 18, 2010
                          1439 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: January 2, 2013, 10:33 pm - IP Logged

                          Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today

                          What are the odds of droney making a mistake?

                          I was going to pick lottery numbers today, but I decided not to because I haven't had my wheaties yet.Roll Eyes

                          I also like to have a three course meal of baked clams, chicken parmigiana with linguine, and some new york cheescake before I do my extreme rounding.

                          Maybe those three course meals is why I have become extremely rounded?

                          Get a grip bro.

                           

                          I was trying to ask him if I made an error in my math, or if he did.  Calm down.  I had a busy morning and hadn't gotten to eating yet, so I was a bit tired.


                            United States
                            Member #124493
                            March 14, 2012
                            7023 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: January 2, 2013, 10:35 pm - IP Logged

                            This should interest the KENO players, I think they can win a prize matching nothing. Thumbs Up

                            only in a 7 spot or above i think.

                              Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                              New Jersey
                              United States
                              Member #99032
                              October 18, 2010
                              1439 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: January 2, 2013, 10:50 pm - IP Logged

                              RJOh,

                               

                               

                              I'm still confident that there is an error in your analysis.

                               

                              Like I said, using the formula (44/56)*(43/55)*(42/54)*(41/53)*(40/52) I get roughly 1 in 28 against your eliminating 12 numbers sucessfully, rather than 1 in 487.  The formula being the product of the odds of each indivdual balling NOT hitting one of those 12.

                               

                              I see the math you did to get 1 in 487 but I'm pretty sure the logic is wrong.

                                 
                                Page 213 of 353