Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 3, 2016, 8:36 am
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 270 of 353
4.820
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
Posted: January 30, 2013, 11:09 am - IP Logged

A couple of sets to play for 01-30-2012 Powerball drawing.

Set 1: 04-12-13-20-22-24-27-33-37-39-47-50-52-57-58

Set 2: 03-04-07-09-11-12-13-14-15-17-18-21-22-23-25-26-28-29-31-33-34-37-42-43-44-45-48-52-53-54-55-58-59

Jimmy

Nice work jimjwright

Here are mine for tonight.......

01 02 03 06 07 08 09 11 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 32 35 36 38 39 40 44 45 46 49 51 54 55 56 59

bonus ball 12

    Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
    New Jersey
    United States
    Member #99032
    October 18, 2010
    1439 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: January 30, 2013, 12:20 pm - IP Logged

    1) YES

    2) No

    Wow....  You answered with yes and no, but neither of these were yes or no questions.....

     

    That's so dumb it's ridiculous.

      Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
      New Jersey
      United States
      Member #99032
      October 18, 2010
      1439 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: January 30, 2013, 12:34 pm - IP Logged

      "Roulette pays $35 to $1 so the house edge on any winning 35 to 1 bet is 5.26% and the house should win 5.26% of all bets. If player bets and loses $100, the house doesn't charge then an extra $5.26 so the edge is only applied when paying off winning bets. If a roulette table has a volume of $1 million, the house should keep $52,600 and the winners should collect $947,400."

       

      Your logic holds for roulette, but not many of the other casino games.  The house edge is applied to all bets placed, not just winning ones.

       

      "If there is an advantage, it's thoroughly understand how to play the game. I won't stay very long at a Blackjack table if the other players are not using basic hitting strategies unless I'm benefiting from their poor play. You might think it's a better game until you see many other players effecting your outcomes."

       

      In Blackjack, the other players decisions do not affect you.  There play is just as likely to hurt or help you, and will even out.  Mathemetically, it doesn't matter to you whether they play basic strategy or not.  If you can't enjoy the game with people playing badly, that's one thing, but know that the math doesn't change.

       

      "Today poker is all about no limit tourneys and the best players in the world can't overcome a run of bad cards. Even the cash games are no limit. How can you grind it out when the other players constantly take you all in?"

       

      It's actually pretty simple.  Don't put down your whole bankroll, just a piece of it.  Use proper bankroll management, and play strong poker against weaker players.  That's how you grind out any advantage, in most games you place bets using the Kelly Criterion (theoretically you could with poker, but you can't actually quantify what you need to know) and in Poker you generally just play with X buy ins, depending on how much risk you are willing to take on.

       

      "You can get the advantage more often playing poker if your good enough, but you still won't win every time. Gambling is about timing and looking for an advantage is the idea of this topic. You can calculate the odds of pocket aces winning hands, but knowing you had the best odds means nothing when the other guy is raking in the pot."

       

      It absolutely means something.  If I got in all in with Aces preflop, I'm over an 80% favorite to win the pot.  That's a great bet!  And to say that it means nothing that you were able to do that if the other player wins is very short sighted.  In Poker, you're going to have bad beats.  If you can list 100 bad beats and not so many times when other players outplayed you then you're in good shape.  The more often you get your money in good, the more often you are likely to win.

       

      Not to mention that there's a million other things that can happen.  In most cases, people don't go all in pre flop and you have a couple more rounds of betting.  A lot of information can be extracted during the flop and turn, which could lead you to fold what WAS the best hand preflop, and has become the 2nd best hand.  You can save A LOT of money by making information bets and making disciplined folds.  And in Poker, each dollar you saved is basically the same as a dollar won.

       

      Think about it, if I was dealt AA and you were dealt KK, and I got you all in, that's good for me.  If the situation's reversed, and I'm able to get away from KK and fold it, then whose that good for?  Obviously you won a small pot, but I was able to get away from a situtation where I'm about 80% to lose my stack.  I'd say that folding KK to AA is a good play for KK.  (Obviously only if he folds it to a really obvious tell, though.  Otherwise he's throwing away KK to any of the premiuum hands, and that's not profitable.)  This situation happened to me ONCE and it's the only time I've ever folded KK preflop.  The other player threw up AA, and everyone else at the table was amazed that I folded.


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: January 30, 2013, 1:29 pm - IP Logged

        Wheel: Pick 5 Abbreviated 2 if 5 of 39

        Tickets:  25

        Description:  Minimum 2-number match, if 5 numbers drawn fall within your set of 39 numbers.

        Input:  1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 32, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 44, 45, 46, 49, 51, 54, 55, 56, 59

        1. 01-02-19-26-38
        2. 01-02-24-36-51
        3. 01-06-07-11-44
        4. 01-07-16-17-46
        5. 01-09-17-20-25
        6. 01-11-13-20-30
        7. 01-14-19-22-36
        8. 02-03-06-16-22
        9. 02-03-09-14-46
        10. 03-07-13-49-54
        11. 03-17-46-56-59
        12. 06-14-19-24-51
        13. 06-14-26-36-38
        14. 07-09-16-56-59
        15. 08-11-29-32-35
        16. 08-13-25-30-44
        17. 08-20-44-49-54
        18. 11-25-30-49-54
        19. 18-21-32-39-55
        20. 18-23-35-39-45
        21. 18-27-29-39-40
        22. 21-23-29-45-55
        23. 21-27-35-40-55
        24. 22-24-26-38-51
        25. 23-27-32-40-45

        Ronnie316,

        As promised, here is the winnings report for your 25 picks for Saturday's Powerball.

        01/26/2013   03-22-26-41-49 (18).

        You were quick to point out that 4 of the drawn numbers were in your set of 39.  Were you trying to imply that you got a 4/5 hit?  Unfortunately, based on your 25 selections, this was not the case.

        Here is a tabulation of the results of buying 1 each of these sets for a total cost of $50.00.  You didn't mention Powerplay or any options for the Powerball, so I assumed no action there.


              Selection          Winnings


        01. 01-02-19-26-38          $0
        02. 01-02-24-36-51          $0
        03. 01-06-07-11-44          $0
        04. 01-07-16-17-46          $0
        05. 01-09-17-20-25          $0
        06. 01-11-13-20-30          $0
        07. 01-14-19-22-36          $0
        08. 02-03-06-16-22          $0
        09. 02-03-09-14-46          $0
        10. 03-07-13-49-54          $0
        11. 03-17-46-56-59          $0
        12. 06-14-19-24-51          $0
        13. 06-14-26-36-38          $0
        14. 07-09-16-56-59          $0
        15. 08-11-29-32-35          $0
        16. 08-13-25-30-44          $0
        17. 08-20-44-49-54          $0
        18. 11-25-30-49-54          $0
        19. 18-21-32-39-55          $0
        20. 18-23-35-39-45          $0
        21. 18-27-29-39-40          $0
        22. 21-23-29-45-55          $0
        23. 21-27-35-40-55          $0
        24. 22-24-26-38-51          $0
        25. 23-27-32-40-45          $0

            Total Winnings:        $ 0.00
            Cost:                  $50.00
            Loss:                 ($50.00)

        Of course, all this proves is that finding the winning numbers among an arbitrary set of 39 does not imply there will be any gain from playing a small subset of combinations of 5 of them

        --Jimmy4164

          Avatar
          Kentucky
          United States
          Member #32652
          February 14, 2006
          7295 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: January 30, 2013, 2:49 pm - IP Logged

          You call it negativity, I call it reality.

          Here's the thing:  That piece of information gets us no closer to determining what those groups of 28 numbers are.  If the answer to the question "do some number combinations have better odds?" is "yes", isn't the logical follow-up question "which number combinations have better odds?"  Ronnie seems to get real mad whenever anyone asks that question, though.  Why is that?  Is it because he's afraid to admit that he has no flippin' idea?  And if we're not supposed to discuss ways to narrow down the number pool, what's the point of continuing this thread?  At that point it becomes an expanded version of Maddog's Challenge in which Ronnie beats his drum if he hits 3 (or more) out of 5 and taunts the people he doesn't like if they match fewer numbers.  Utterly useless.

          Besides, you'll notice that the post I was objecting to was one in which Ronnie proclaimed that x1kosmic's ONE line has "better odds" (than what?) due to the concept of "positive energy flow".  That, in my opinion, is proof that he has given up on finding a mathematically-sound answer -- assuming that was EVER his objective, which I doubt it was -- and has gone off the rails into conjecture.  Furthermore, given his interactions in this thread specifically and on Lottery Post as a whole, it is fairly obvious that he's not actually serious about any of this, that this thread is just an exercise in inflating his ego.

          It's a shame because if anyone were to come in here looking for useful information on how to get "better odds", they'd walk away disappointed, wondering why the guy who started the thread has such a chip on his shoulder and doesn't offer any insights other than "intuition" and "positive energy flow".

          "You call it negativity, I call it reality."

          With MM, 97.5% of all the $1 tickets will win nothing and in about 80% of the drawings, 100% of the tickets will not win the jackpot. That's the reality yet millions of people that know the reality play every drawing. As the jackpots grow, millions more people unrealistically begin playing the game.

          If we were having a general discussion and the subject of playing lottery games came up, the consensus would probably be it's unrealistic to believe you can win the MM jackpot. However the discussions on this site are by people who already understand it's unrealistic, but are still willing to take the risk. In most cases the risk is about $300 a year to get over 300 chances of winning a life changing jackpot. I just don't see any reason other than negativity to tell people what they already know or should know. 

          "If the answer to the question "do some number combinations have better odds?" is "yes", isn't the logical follow-up question "which number combinations have better odds?"

          That's a fair question, but it's still based on the fact it's possible. And you're asking that question to people who already know they only have a 1 in 39 chance of giving you the correct answer.

          "Ronnie seems to get real mad whenever anyone asks that question, though.  Why is that?"

          My best guess, it's out of frustration because he already did something statistical improbable and people are demanding he duplicates it.

          "It's a shame because if anyone were to come in here looking for useful information on how to get "better odds"

          We've already discussed the title of this thread is some what deceptive, but the discussion has evolved into looking for more effective playing strategies. Considering the fact the players already weighed the risk and reward and the playing strategies discussed here don't increase the odds against, where is the useless information?


            United States
            Member #116268
            September 7, 2011
            20244 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: January 30, 2013, 2:51 pm - IP Logged

            Wow....  You answered with yes and no, but neither of these were yes or no questions.....

             

            That's so dumb it's ridiculous.

            That's so dumb it's ridiculous.

            Like the lottery, boney??


              United States
              Member #116268
              September 7, 2011
              20244 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: January 30, 2013, 3:09 pm - IP Logged

              "You call it negativity, I call it reality."

              With MM, 97.5% of all the $1 tickets will win nothing and in about 80% of the drawings, 100% of the tickets will not win the jackpot. That's the reality yet millions of people that know the reality play every drawing. As the jackpots grow, millions more people unrealistically begin playing the game.

              If we were having a general discussion and the subject of playing lottery games came up, the consensus would probably be it's unrealistic to believe you can win the MM jackpot. However the discussions on this site are by people who already understand it's unrealistic, but are still willing to take the risk. In most cases the risk is about $300 a year to get over 300 chances of winning a life changing jackpot. I just don't see any reason other than negativity to tell people what they already know or should know. 

              "If the answer to the question "do some number combinations have better odds?" is "yes", isn't the logical follow-up question "which number combinations have better odds?"

              That's a fair question, but it's still based on the fact it's possible. And you're asking that question to people who already know they only have a 1 in 39 chance of giving you the correct answer.

              "Ronnie seems to get real mad whenever anyone asks that question, though.  Why is that?"

              My best guess, it's out of frustration because he already did something statistical improbable and people are demanding he duplicates it.

              "It's a shame because if anyone were to come in here looking for useful information on how to get "better odds"

              We've already discussed the title of this thread is some what deceptive, but the discussion has evolved into looking for more effective playing strategies. Considering the fact the players already weighed the risk and reward and the playing strategies discussed here don't increase the odds against, where is the useless information?

              We've already discussed the title of this thread is some what deceptive

              Excellent observation Stack,

              but it is only deceptive in the sense that different people interpret the question in different ways.

              The Three Stooges are obsessing over "Which number combinations have better odds"?

              While the rest of us discuss "Who or what produces number combinations that outperform the odds"?


                United States
                Member #116268
                September 7, 2011
                20244 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: January 30, 2013, 3:13 pm - IP Logged

                In others words, we focus on creative ways to get better odds and "beat" the lottery.....

                While the Stooges focus on the lottery as.........  "That's so dumb it's ridiculous."

                  Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                  New Jersey
                  United States
                  Member #99032
                  October 18, 2010
                  1439 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: January 30, 2013, 3:58 pm - IP Logged

                  In others words, we focus on creative ways to get better odds and "beat" the lottery.....

                  While the Stooges focus on the lottery as.........  "That's so dumb it's ridiculous."

                  WOWWW

                   

                  Way to take my words completely out of context.  I said your response to Jimmy was dumb, and you extoplated that.

                   

                  I've never said the lottery is dumb.


                    United States
                    Member #116268
                    September 7, 2011
                    20244 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: January 30, 2013, 4:21 pm - IP Logged

                    WOWWW

                     

                    Way to take my words completely out of context.  I said your response to Jimmy was dumb, and you extoplated that.

                     

                    I've never said the lottery is dumb.

                    I never said you said it...... In general terms it is the way you and your click act and talk about the lottery and the way some of us chose to approach it. Your curly now, so just get in lockstep with larry and moe.

                      Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                      New Jersey
                      United States
                      Member #99032
                      October 18, 2010
                      1439 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: January 30, 2013, 4:37 pm - IP Logged

                      "My best guess, it's out of frustration because he already did something statistical improbable and people are demanding he duplicates it."

                       

                      None of the people that you are referring to are asking him to duplicate it, just stating that it's not that he had or has better odds, just that he got lucky.

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7295 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: January 30, 2013, 6:01 pm - IP Logged

                        Tell ya what, Stack.  Despite the fact that you've chosen to be Ronnie's waterboy, I still think you're a relatively smart guy.  One of the best on LP, even.  If you're actually serious about pursuing research into how to narrow down the Powerball or Mega Millions matrix into a pool of 28 numbers that have a decent chance of containing the 5 winning numbers, why don't you break off and start your own thread rather than continuing to associate yourself with this mess?  Leave the serious discussion to serious people and let Ronnie wallow in his own self-aggrandizement.

                        "If you're actually serious about pursuing research into how to narrow down the Powerball or Mega Millions matrix into a pool of 28 numbers that have a decent chance of containing the 5 winning numbers, why don't you break off and start your own thread rather than continuing to associate yourself with this mess?"

                        If I did that, I would be just expanding on Ronnie's idea and some of the ideas RJ and others have posted. It's easier for me to add my ideas to theirs. I've been around gambling, sports, and other things long enough to understand there is going to be bragging and never let that bother me. Most of the time it's better to congratulate them or say nothing and move on.


                          United States
                          Member #116268
                          September 7, 2011
                          20244 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: January 30, 2013, 6:10 pm - IP Logged

                          "My best guess, it's out of frustration because he already did something statistical improbable and people are demanding he duplicates it."

                           

                          None of the people that you are referring to are asking him to duplicate it, just stating that it's not that he had or has better odds, just that he got lucky.

                          And if I define "got lucky" as "number combinations that have better odds" what then boney? Do you presume to have power to determine how I define words and the way they view things like moe does?


                            United States
                            Member #116268
                            September 7, 2011
                            20244 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: January 30, 2013, 6:19 pm - IP Logged

                            We all know you want to control how people think and the way they say things boney, but its just NOT going to work out that way for you here no matter how long you keep posting. If you want to call something "winning a bet" I can respect that, but don't try to control me into calling it that, as my view is "beating the lottery" or "beating the roulette wheel" Sorry, you are not in control of my viewpoints or definitions. Get over it.


                              United States
                              Member #116268
                              September 7, 2011
                              20244 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: January 30, 2013, 6:38 pm - IP Logged

                              In other words boney, if someone or something wins at a rate that beats the stated odds and I want to call it "better odds" why do you think you have some authority to make me call it otherwise.

                              You can call it "standard deviation" all you want or "getting lucky" no one is faulting you for it.....

                              You and moe and larry are the ones all pissy and upset and nagging and complaining and ect, ect ect......

                              Moe talks about "bandied about ideas" but has never posted one single time without whining and complaining and sounding like someones henpecked husband who is too afraid to leave the house.

                                 
                                Page 270 of 353