Welcome Guest
You last visited December 13, 2017, 1:26 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Do some number combinations have better odds?

Topic closed. 5280 replies. Last post 5 years ago by rdgrnr.

 Page 286 of 353

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 12:33 pm - IP Logged

There are five even and five odd digits in each digit position so multiply 5 X 5 X 5 and you get 125 all even and 125 all odd combos. The odds against having all three digits even or all three odd are 875 to 125 or 7 to 1.

In Casino Talk your statement may be understood.

However, in the world of Mathematics, the PROBABILITY

of drawing 3 Odd (or Even) digits in a Pick-3 game is:

(5/10) * (5/10) * (5/10) = (125/1000) = ( 1 : 8 )

Not ( 1 : 7 )

--Jimmy4164

upstate NY
United States
Member #108791
March 31, 2011
549 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 12:59 pm - IP Logged

I'm not sure if they have the capacity to understand overcoming the odds. I often wonder if their "its impossible to beat the odds" philosophy extents to all areas of life or just the lottery?

What about Thrifty's favorite people in the whole wide world, the three asset managers from Connecticut who won \$254 million on a single quick pick?

• Were they playing with the best odds ever, far "BETTER" than you could ever dream of acheiving?
• Did they simply "beat the odds", which appears to be your latest mantra?  If so, why on earth should we listen to some egotistical jerk prattle on about spending over \$98,000 per drawing to "beat the odds" when it can be done with a single quick pick?
• Or did they just get lucky?  By the way, choosing this option makes you a massive hypocrite, as you have consistently poo-pooed the idea that luck has anything to do with it.

upstate NY
United States
Member #108791
March 31, 2011
549 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 1:00 pm - IP Logged

I swear I don't understand why you folks are so concerned about 'odds' when there is little if anything anyone can do about them. They are what they are.

The balls are 'objects' being blown around or otherwise mixed in an enclosed vessel with an escape hatch. No outside force can affect which objects will escape and become the winning numbers.
Anyone with any sense at all knows that the values on the objects are not added, subtracted, divided, or multiplied in any way shape or form.
Also, if you have a fist full of lottery tickets you have more opportunities to win than someone who has only one ticket, although both can hit the jackpot with a single combination.
So what does it matter?
Construct as many self picks as you can afford and hope you made the right choices. Or, buy as many Quick Picks as your budget will support and hope you get a winner.

My two cents worth!

upstate NY
United States
Member #108791
March 31, 2011
549 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 1:01 pm - IP Logged

upstate NY
United States
Member #108791
March 31, 2011
549 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 1:02 pm - IP Logged

Oh, by the way, Boney's last three posts in this thread sum everything up quite nicely.

Excellent work, Boney.

United States
Member #124493
March 14, 2012
7023 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 1:19 pm - IP Logged

What about Thrifty's favorite people in the whole wide world, the three asset managers from Connecticut who won \$254 million on a single quick pick?

• Were they playing with the best odds ever, far "BETTER" than you could ever dream of acheiving?
• Did they simply "beat the odds", which appears to be your latest mantra?  If so, why on earth should we listen to some egotistical jerk prattle on about spending over \$98,000 per drawing to "beat the odds" when it can be done with a single quick pick?
• Or did they just get lucky?  By the way, choosing this option makes you a massive hypocrite, as you have consistently poo-pooed the idea that luck has anything to do with it.

This is the most asinine example ever because first of all asset managers have money. (supposedly)

Why is this an asinine example?  Because three wealthy people would not SHARE ONE QUICK PICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THIS IS SO STUPID!!!

WHAT WAS THE CONVERSATION THAT DAY?

HEY BILL I AM SHORT ON DOUGH, CAN I BORROW 66 CENTS FOR A QP?

NO I AM SORRY BILL, I ONLY HAVE 33 CENTS, MAYBE TOM CAN LOAN YOU 34 CENTS TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE.

THIS IS A FISHY STORY, AND SOUNDS MORE LIKE AN URBAN LEGEND.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20147 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 3:01 pm - IP Logged

What about Thrifty's favorite people in the whole wide world, the three asset managers from Connecticut who won \$254 million on a single quick pick?

• Were they playing with the best odds ever, far "BETTER" than you could ever dream of acheiving?
• Did they simply "beat the odds", which appears to be your latest mantra?  If so, why on earth should we listen to some egotistical jerk prattle on about spending over \$98,000 per drawing to "beat the odds" when it can be done with a single quick pick?
• Or did they just get lucky?  By the way, choosing this option makes you a massive hypocrite, as you have consistently poo-pooed the idea that luck has anything to do with it.

"What about Thrifty's favorite people in the whole wide world, the three  asset managers from Connecticut who won \$254 million on a single quick pick?"

Every jackpot is won with a single pick even if it's on a ticket with several picks and it doesn't matter if it's a quick pick or a personal pick.  Having the winning numbers among several picks don't count.

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

Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
United States
Member #73904
April 28, 2009
14903 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 3:22 pm - IP Logged

This is the most asinine example ever because first of all asset managers have money. (supposedly)

Why is this an asinine example?  Because three wealthy people would not SHARE ONE QUICK PICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THIS IS SO STUPID!!!

WHAT WAS THE CONVERSATION THAT DAY?

HEY BILL I AM SHORT ON DOUGH, CAN I BORROW 66 CENTS FOR A QP?

NO I AM SORRY BILL, I ONLY HAVE 33 CENTS, MAYBE TOM CAN LOAN YOU 34 CENTS TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE.

THIS IS A FISHY STORY, AND SOUNDS MORE LIKE AN URBAN LEGEND.

Two of the three guys' names were Bill?

What's the odds of that?

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7611 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 3:43 pm - IP Logged

In Casino Talk your statement may be understood.

However, in the world of Mathematics, the PROBABILITY

of drawing 3 Odd (or Even) digits in a Pick-3 game is:

(5/10) * (5/10) * (5/10) = (125/1000) = ( 1 : 8 )

Not ( 1 : 7 )

--Jimmy4164

Who would have though you didn't know the meaning of the word "against".

If you roll a die (a six sided cube with a different indentation on each of the six sides ; one side has 1 dot, another has 2 dots, 3, dots, 4 dots, 5 dots, and 6 dots), there are six possible outcomes. If you bet on the side with 5 dots, there is five ways to lose, but only one way to win. Therefore the odds against a 5 being rolled are 5 to 1.

My cat understands it and I'm crossing my finger that you do too.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20147 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 3:43 pm - IP Logged

Two of the three guys' names were Bill?

What's the odds of that?

I used to work with two guys called Bill but I think one of their name was really Williams so I called him Will instead.

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

Texas
United States
Member #55889
October 23, 2007
6789 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 4:29 pm - IP Logged

Who would have though you didn't know the meaning of the word "against".

If you roll a die (a six sided cube with a different indentation on each of the six sides ; one side has 1 dot, another has 2 dots, 3, dots, 4 dots, 5 dots, and 6 dots), there are six possible outcomes. If you bet on the side with 5 dots, there is five ways to lose, but only one way to win. Therefore the odds against a 5 being rolled are 5 to 1.

My cat understands it and I'm crossing my finger that you do too.

LOL. Is your cat named Felix?

CAN'T WIN IF YOU'RE NOT IN

A DOLLAR AND A DREAM (OR \$2)

United States
Member #124493
March 14, 2012
7023 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 4:48 pm - IP Logged

Two of the three guys' names were Bill?

What's the odds of that?

LMAO

Park City, UT
United States
Member #69864
January 18, 2009
1005 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 7, 2013, 7:14 pm - IP Logged

"What do you mean by "better results?""

I reduced the 98,280 full wheel combos Ronnie was using to under 5000 combos and every combo won a prize including the jackpot.

"It's absurd to think one day's results comparing a virtual handful of tickets in a game with 175Million potential outcomes would prove ANYTHING!"

LMAO!

Why would you want to compare less than 800 MM results to every possible combination when in every one of those drawings 171,318,747 of your potential combos failed to win a prize?

How was it possible for Ronnie to pick the numbers and for me to place his numbers into less than 5000 combos without any of those combos being among the over 171 million potential losing combos?

"Jimjwright showed you what to expect after quite a few more draws."

I could use Ronnie's numbers with the FREE 4 if 4 wheel on BobP's website for the next 25 years, match nothing, and still show a profit. Why do you always ignorantly assume any real lottery player would continue to use a totally failing betting strategy for quite a few more draws?

"Jimjwright showed you what to expect after quite a few more draws."

The following picture depicts the results after 42,305,214 games

Jimjwright's "quite a few more draws" is 406,781 years worth of MM drawings.

"If his work didn't convince you, check out this simulation again."

I did check it out, but you're forgetting the strategy here is to use less than all the numbers.

Jimj also said:

For each game 8 random tickets were generated for Test Group A and 8 random tickets were generated for Test Group B. For Test Group A the 8 tickets had all 48 numbers in play or no duplicate numbers.

You'll never find 8 randomly selected QP tickets with no duplicate numbers in a 6/48 game or any 8 consecutive QP where each line is not randomly generated independent of any of the other lines. Here is an example of what 8 randomly generated lines really look like in a 6/47 game.

• 05-07-12-38-40-42
• 03-13-17-19-21-36
• 05-09-19-25-37-45
• 01-15-18-23-33-34
• 10-12-13-26-27-29
• 06-08-19-34-35-44
• 14-17-29-32-35-41
• 08-12-18-30-45-46

By my count only 23 of the numbers were not duplicated and Jimj forgot to account for the fact a new set of QPs would be randomly generated for each of the 42,305,214 games.

To Jimj's credit, he did go on to explain in a later post his methodology, but I fail to see how his test results show anything more than the probably of any 8 tickets with no duplicate numbers in the next 42,305,214 games. I would like to see a comparison the my set of 8 randomly generated lines to 8 lines with no duplicates for a more reasonable 500 games.

His test doesn't apply to this discussion because we're talking about using half the numbers and the 28 numbers used can change every drawing. Post 28 numbers with any configuration of bonus numbers and will check your "ROI" using the FREE 4 if 4 wheel.

In the other thread it was proposed that a 6/48 game becomes a 6/36 game if you buy 8 tickets and all 8 tickets have no duplicate numbers or that you play all 48 numbers on your 8 tickets.

A 6/48 has odds of matching 6 of 1 in 12,271,512.

A 6/36 has odds of matching 6 of 1 in 1,947,792.

If every game you buy 8 tickets for a 6/48 game you have 1 in 1,553,939 chance of matching 6.

If every game you buy 8 tickets for a 6/36 game you have 1 in  243,474. chance of matching 6.

If I was to believe what was proposed then buying 8 tickets using all the numbers then I would have increased my odds of matching 6 by 6.38 times.

I didn't believe this so I wrote a simulator program that took me less than 6 hours to write.

Test Group A would be someone that randomly arranged 48 numbers into 8 tickets where there was no duplicates.

Test Group B would be someone that bought 8 QP's  where duplicates would be in play.  In general 13 to 14 duplicates would probably exist on those 8 tickets.

After 42,305,214 games each strategy had bought 338,441,712 tickets.  If Strategy A had actually improved your odds then if you divide 338,441,712 by 1,947,792 then that would have been your expected match 6 winners.  So I should have had 173 match 6 winners if I was to believe what was stated.  But clearly the results showed I only had 28 match 6 winners.  Using Strategy A and Strategy B had the same effective results.

All my lotto simulator proves is what it set out to prove is that buying 8 tickets for a 6/48 game where you play all 48 numbers does not improve your odds to a 6/36 game.  If anyone believes that then mathematically prove it.  I don't have the ability to mathematically prove it but I am a software architect professionally so I have the ability to write a program to test out a premise or theory.  Which is what I did.

It has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread.  I don't buy QP's I purchase SP's.  I am on the same quest as everybody else at lotterypost in trying  to gain an advantage even though I know its a daunting task.  So to lump me in with boney and jimmy4164 I think is quite unfair but I really don't care anymore.

Jimmy

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

In the other thread it was proposed that a 6/48 game becomes a 6/36 game if you buy 8 tickets and all 8 tickets have no duplicate numbers or that you play all 48 numbers on your 8 tickets.

A 6/48 has odds of matching 6 of 1 in 12,271,512.

A 6/36 has odds of matching 6 of 1 in 1,947,792.

If every game you buy 8 tickets for a 6/48 game you have 1 in 1,553,939 chance of matching 6.

If every game you buy 8 tickets for a 6/36 game you have 1 in  243,474. chance of matching 6.

If I was to believe what was proposed then buying 8 tickets using all the numbers then I would have increased my odds of matching 6 by 6.38 times.

I didn't believe this so I wrote a simulator program that took me less than 6 hours to write.

Test Group A would be someone that randomly arranged 48 numbers into 8 tickets where there was no duplicates.

Test Group B would be someone that bought 8 QP's  where duplicates would be in play.  In general 13 to 14 duplicates would probably exist on those 8 tickets.

After 42,305,214 games each strategy had bought 338,441,712 tickets.  If Strategy A had actually improved your odds then if you divide 338,441,712 by 1,947,792 then that would have been your expected match 6 winners.  So I should have had 173 match 6 winners if I was to believe what was stated.  But clearly the results showed I only had 28 match 6 winners.  Using Strategy A and Strategy B had the same effective results.

All my lotto simulator proves is what it set out to prove is that buying 8 tickets for a 6/48 game where you play all 48 numbers does not improve your odds to a 6/36 game.  If anyone believes that then mathematically prove it.  I don't have the ability to mathematically prove it but I am a software architect professionally so I have the ability to write a program to test out a premise or theory.  Which is what I did.

It has nothing to do with the discussion in this thread.  I don't buy QP's I purchase SP's.  I am on the same quest as everybody else at lotterypost in trying  to gain an advantage even though I know its a daunting task.  So to lump me in with boney and jimmy4164 I think is quite unfair but I really don't care anymore.

Jimmy

No offense was ever intended Jimmy, if I can welcome medbrat's childish and derogatory comments I think I can welcome just about anyone's. lol.

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

My idea for winning a jackpot has always been centered around playing groups of numbers.

If the simulator that Jimmy4164 posted would run without changing the winning combination, it would be perfect for testing 98,820 QPs at a time for a hit.

We already know that (98,820) self picks can easily hit BETTER than once every 39 draws. What we don't know is how often QPs would hit in a simulation?

 Page 286 of 353