Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 3, 2016, 10:44 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 299 of 353
4.820
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
Posted: February 11, 2013, 8:22 pm - IP Logged

there ya go Thumbs Up

                                        Thumbs Up


    United States
    Member #116268
    September 7, 2011
    20244 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: February 11, 2013, 8:27 pm - IP Logged

    Have a good night everyone. Sleep

      helpmewin's avatar - dandy
      u$a
      United States
      Member #106665
      February 22, 2011
      19740 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: February 11, 2013, 8:31 pm - IP Logged

      Have a good night everyone. Sleep

      Let it Snow Snowman

        Avatar
        Kentucky
        United States
        Member #32652
        February 14, 2006
        7295 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: February 11, 2013, 8:49 pm - IP Logged

        Stack, if they don't understand this statement, they are a lost cause.

        By "beat" I literally mean to gain an edge."

        My definition of beating the odds is different than yours. When someone makes a conditional bet, they aren't beating the odds, but when they win the bet, they beat the odds.

        The only edge that counts in the long run is did you win or did you lose. When I hit that 7-Spot playing Keno, the house had a 30% edge so when I won over $8000, I didn't gain an edge. Are lottery players trying to gain an edge or are they trying become instant millionaires?

        Several years ago, this person was leaving Florida after vacationing at Disney, driving back to Texas. Before he crossed the state line, he stopped and purchased 15 qp's. One of those qp's( a conditional bet) won him 15 million dollars( he beat the odds).

        It's almost like we are being asked to justify why we play lottery games. I've made bets that I believed I had an excellent chance of winning, but I've never thought I had an edge on winning on the jackpot or if I did win, think I beat the game.

          Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
          New Jersey
          United States
          Member #99032
          October 18, 2010
          1439 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: February 11, 2013, 9:01 pm - IP Logged

          The only person talking in circles is you boney......

          We understand that we are talking about a concept. It is NOT something that you can calculate on a piece of paper with a pencil. We are NOT talking about changing the actually odds of the game itself. I think LottoBoner said it best with the phrase "expecting something to happen" I like to like of it as "manufacturing a win" much like the Yankee's when they decide do things in a creative and different way in order to "manufacture a run" that otherwise would have NEVER taken place.

          You keep trying to interpret "beating the odds" as "changing the odds" and thats not really the concept here.

          "The only person talking in circles is you boney......"

           

          Not true.  You talk in circles all the time.  Then you say that you love that this is an online forum where you can talk in circles.

           

          Than you say that only I'm talking in circles.

           

          Like how sometimes you claim you have better odds, but other times you claim that nobody is trying to change the odds.

           

          Circles.  Although I really shouldn't be wasting my time using logic on you, as you really only understand non-sensible smily faces.  But Ronnie, the problem is, you keep talking about a "concept" of which you cannot explain, because it is constantly whatever you decide it was whenever you want.

           

          As I said before, Good luck.  I'll keep doing what I know works - instead of what I know doesn't.

            Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
            New Jersey
            United States
            Member #99032
            October 18, 2010
            1439 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: February 11, 2013, 9:05 pm - IP Logged

            It's almost like we are being asked to justify why we play lottery games. I've made bets that I believed I had an excellent chance of winning, but I've never thought I had an edge on winning on the jackpot or if I did win, think I beat the game.

            Nope no need to justify it.  Some people find it fun.  That's why I sometimes play, purely for fun (and the potential to win a jackpot, which is the fun part.)

             

            I was just trying to explain that you cannot change the odds (since Ronnie kept quoting asinine numbers as his odds) and you seem to know that.  This last statement proves that you understand that you cannot "beat" the game mathemetically.  I'd think that you should understand that your bets never have a better chance of winning than any other bet - but I'm not sure.

             

            I mean, you can figuratively use the term "beat the odds" to say that you did something unlikely, but in terms of gambling, beat the odds implies doing better than the stated odds through skill.  At least - that's what the literal term means.  And I do like to "beat" games when I gamble, so the lottery usually isn't for me.

             

            If that's not your goal with gambling, there's no need for you to justify your gambling.  Do whatever you enjoy the most.

              Avatar
              Kentucky
              United States
              Member #32652
              February 14, 2006
              7295 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: February 11, 2013, 9:36 pm - IP Logged

              You would understand WHY gambling is all about the odds, or the edge, if you were beating a game.

               

              The lotto isn't that game.  But when you have the edge, it absolutely becomes about how much that edge is.  It's also about managing risk - but it's not about trying to beat the odds, it's about trying to be the guy who the odds favor.  In other words -  I don't rely on luck.  And as much as you talk about that one day that you hit a 7 spot keno ticket, by that logic you should always play Keno forever.  But that's bad logic, because you'll go broke.

               

              Obviously lotto players are trying to get instantly rich without gaining an edge - but all of this talk of better odds is about trying to get better odds - an impossible feat.  I don't feel I should respond again, even if you respond to this, because we're just talking circles.  You can use the term "beat the odds" in a figurative sense but in a much more real sense, you cannot "beat the odds" by definintion, since the odds contain the possibilities of a win.

              "You would understand WHY gambling is all about the odds, or the edge, if you were beating a game."

              I suppose every casino gets their share of fanatics they end up escorting out the door because they were outraged when they didn't beat the game. I, like the majority of gamblers don't gamble to beat the game, I gamble to win money. If you believe gambling is all about gaining an edge and looking for an odds advantage in your favor, the odds of that happening are about the same as a $1 QP winning MM.

              "And as much as you talk about that one day that you hit a 7 spot keno ticket, by that logic you should always play Keno forever."

              "My logic" was to make a Keno bet while eating lunch that gave me a chance to break even or win a few bucks and pay for my lunch. I didn't play five $3 "catch-all" 7-spots, I played a five $3 Way ticket that would pay the cost of the tickets and for my lunch if I matched 4 numbers in any of the five games. 

              "But that's bad logic, because you'll go broke."

              Occasionally betting $15 while I'm eating lunch or dinner in a casino will cause me to go broke?

              "Obviously lotto players are trying to get instantly rich without gaining an edge"

              Nope, it's obvious lottery players believe their ticket has the same chance of winning as another ticket and they are correct. You're really hung up on gaining the edge and I hope you find it.

              "You can use the term "beat the odds" in a figurative sense but in a much more real sense, you cannot "beat the odds" by definintion, since the odds contain the possibilities of a win."

              I don't want to sound rude, but you're ignoring the "1" behind the larger number and that is the possibility of winning a jackpot. And when that "1" is the ticket the player purchased, they BEAT the odds in any type of real common sense. Ronnie isn't trying to beat the odds by eliminating some of the extra numbers, but is betting he won't eliminate the "1" combination with the five winning numbers.

              Playing 5 numbers straight up in Roulette doesn't magically eliminate the other 33 numbers, but I've never seen one Roulette wheel that had more than "1" winning number.

                Avatar
                Kentucky
                United States
                Member #32652
                February 14, 2006
                7295 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: February 11, 2013, 10:39 pm - IP Logged

                Nope no need to justify it.  Some people find it fun.  That's why I sometimes play, purely for fun (and the potential to win a jackpot, which is the fun part.)

                 

                I was just trying to explain that you cannot change the odds (since Ronnie kept quoting asinine numbers as his odds) and you seem to know that.  This last statement proves that you understand that you cannot "beat" the game mathemetically.  I'd think that you should understand that your bets never have a better chance of winning than any other bet - but I'm not sure.

                 

                I mean, you can figuratively use the term "beat the odds" to say that you did something unlikely, but in terms of gambling, beat the odds implies doing better than the stated odds through skill.  At least - that's what the literal term means.  And I do like to "beat" games when I gamble, so the lottery usually isn't for me.

                 

                If that's not your goal with gambling, there's no need for you to justify your gambling.  Do whatever you enjoy the most.

                "I was just trying to explain that you cannot change the odds"

                You can change your odds by making extra bets, but the one thing you can't change is the "1" behind the odds.

                "I'd think that you should understand that your bets never have a better chance of winning than any other bet - but I'm not sure."

                Playing 28 numbers doesn't magically reduce the odds to 98,280 to 1, but there is a probability you'll get those odds once in 39 drawings.

                "I mean, you can figuratively use the term "beat the odds" to say that you did something unlikely, but in terms of gambling, beat the odds implies doing better than the stated odds through skill."

                Then why not call successfully eliminating 28 of the numbers more than once every 39 drawings skill?


                  United States
                  Member #124493
                  March 14, 2012
                  7023 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: February 11, 2013, 11:12 pm - IP Logged

                  No offense guys, but this conversation is getting DULL.

                  We might as well debate, which came first the chicken or the egg.

                  Or we could debate the existence of G-d.

                  Or we could debate who would win in a caged match battle royale,

                  a) the muslim god, Blue Angel

                  b) the christian god  Blue Angel

                  c) the judeo god, Blue Angel

                  d) the hindu god  Blue Angel

                  e) the Red Devil

                  f) macho man randy savage.

                  g) hulk hogan

                  h) andre the giant

                  i) Ralph Fiennes

                  j) Qi gong.

                  k) Batman

                  L) harry potter

                  M) Mr. T

                  N)Voltron

                    Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                    New Jersey
                    United States
                    Member #99032
                    October 18, 2010
                    1439 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: February 11, 2013, 11:50 pm - IP Logged

                    "You would understand WHY gambling is all about the odds, or the edge, if you were beating a game."

                    I suppose every casino gets their share of fanatics they end up escorting out the door because they were outraged when they didn't beat the game. I, like the majority of gamblers don't gamble to beat the game, I gamble to win money. If you believe gambling is all about gaining an edge and looking for an odds advantage in your favor, the odds of that happening are about the same as a $1 QP winning MM.

                    "And as much as you talk about that one day that you hit a 7 spot keno ticket, by that logic you should always play Keno forever."

                    "My logic" was to make a Keno bet while eating lunch that gave me a chance to break even or win a few bucks and pay for my lunch. I didn't play five $3 "catch-all" 7-spots, I played a five $3 Way ticket that would pay the cost of the tickets and for my lunch if I matched 4 numbers in any of the five games. 

                    "But that's bad logic, because you'll go broke."

                    Occasionally betting $15 while I'm eating lunch or dinner in a casino will cause me to go broke?

                    "Obviously lotto players are trying to get instantly rich without gaining an edge"

                    Nope, it's obvious lottery players believe their ticket has the same chance of winning as another ticket and they are correct. You're really hung up on gaining the edge and I hope you find it.

                    "You can use the term "beat the odds" in a figurative sense but in a much more real sense, you cannot "beat the odds" by definintion, since the odds contain the possibilities of a win."

                    I don't want to sound rude, but you're ignoring the "1" behind the larger number and that is the possibility of winning a jackpot. And when that "1" is the ticket the player purchased, they BEAT the odds in any type of real common sense. Ronnie isn't trying to beat the odds by eliminating some of the extra numbers, but is betting he won't eliminate the "1" combination with the five winning numbers.

                    Playing 5 numbers straight up in Roulette doesn't magically eliminate the other 33 numbers, but I've never seen one Roulette wheel that had more than "1" winning number.

                    "If you believe gambling is all about gaining an edge and looking for an odds advantage in your favor, the odds of that happening are about the same as a $1 QP winning MM."

                     

                    Not true at all.  It's actually relatively easy to gain an edge over a gamble.  Not in most casino games, but relative to your odds of being up in the lottery over any extended amount of play (or even with very little play.)

                     

                    "Nope, it's obvious lottery players believe their ticket has the same chance of winning as another ticket and they are correct."

                     

                    You'd think that'd be obvious.  It doesn't appear to be appear to be obvious to everyone.

                     

                    "I don't want to sound rude, but you're ignoring the "1" behind the larger number and that is the possibility of winning a jackpot. And when that "1" is the ticket the player purchased, they BEAT the odds in any type of real common sense. Ronnie isn't trying to beat the odds by eliminating some of the extra numbers, but is betting he won't eliminate the "1" combination with the five winning numbers.

                    Playing 5 numbers straight up in Roulette doesn't magically eliminate the other 33 numbers, but I've never seen one Roulette wheel that had more than "1" winning number."

                     

                    You don't sound rude, and I'm not ignoring it, I'm multiplying the probability of the event by it's expected result in order to get the Expected Value.  I realize that MOST gamblers aren't actively seeking oppurtunities for that EV to be larger than 1.00 (100%) but I am.  It's totally fine to gamble with a negative expectation, especially because you won't find a game with potential for huge payouts and a positive expectation.

                     

                    I understand that you're using the term "beat the odds" figuratively.  But I'd argue that it's you guys, not me, who are ignoring the "to 1."  I'm counting both the large number and the "to 1" to get an average value, and I account for the variance.  Like I've said many times, it's about players preferences, even if they don't understand the math behind their preferences.  My preference is to have as high EV and low STD DEV as possible.  You rarely find low STD DEV games, so I focus on finding +EV games, and managing the risk I take.  Basically the same concepts that are used when trading stocks.  In English that means I have an edge and as little "swinginess" as possible.

                     

                    Most people, and you've described this, prefer to have the potential for huge payouts.  Most players don't have much of a concept of EV, as indicated by your insisting that other players at a blackjack table affect your play.  They may affect the order of the cards, but since they don't affect the EV (probabilities*payouts) a player shouldn't actually care what the other players do.  And the math oriented players don't.

                      Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                      New Jersey
                      United States
                      Member #99032
                      October 18, 2010
                      1439 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: February 11, 2013, 11:51 pm - IP Logged

                      As for the comments about the Keno ticket, I misunderstood why your brought it up.  Consider my statements on that null.

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7295 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: February 12, 2013, 1:20 am - IP Logged

                        No offense guys, but this conversation is getting DULL.

                        We might as well debate, which came first the chicken or the egg.

                        Or we could debate the existence of G-d.

                        Or we could debate who would win in a caged match battle royale,

                        a) the muslim god, Blue Angel

                        b) the christian god  Blue Angel

                        c) the judeo god, Blue Angel

                        d) the hindu god  Blue Angel

                        e) the Red Devil

                        f) macho man randy savage.

                        g) hulk hogan

                        h) andre the giant

                        i) Ralph Fiennes

                        j) Qi gong.

                        k) Batman

                        L) harry potter

                        M) Mr. T

                        N)Voltron

                        Then let's talk about trends and using them for spot plays. If we were talking about a regular 5/39 with a secondary prizes of $1, $10, and $300, there might be enough cashes to play almost every drawing. For MM, playing 28 numbers in a 4 if 4, about one five number match out of every twelve drawings is necessary to justify playing every drawing.

                        It might make more sense waiting for a trend that's good for 3 or 4 drawings out of ten and just play those drawings. Instead of needing to match five numbers 5 out of the next 60 drawings, maybe get more matches by playing a selective 60 drawings.

                        Get out your flag formation and let's see how that does.


                          United States
                          Member #124493
                          March 14, 2012
                          7023 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: February 12, 2013, 1:40 am - IP Logged

                          Then let's talk about trends and using them for spot plays. If we were talking about a regular 5/39 with a secondary prizes of $1, $10, and $300, there might be enough cashes to play almost every drawing. For MM, playing 28 numbers in a 4 if 4, about one five number match out of every twelve drawings is necessary to justify playing every drawing.

                          It might make more sense waiting for a trend that's good for 3 or 4 drawings out of ten and just play those drawings. Instead of needing to match five numbers 5 out of the next 60 drawings, maybe get more matches by playing a selective 60 drawings.

                          Get out your flag formation and let's see how that does.

                          Well first one must "find" the LFF.  Given the amount of combinations available there are an ∞ amount of possible LFF.

                          One must first enumerate all the "potential variables" that can be expressed in this fashion. In this instance a programmer would be necessary to make this process easierand less time consuming. (There are many here who fit the bill)

                          I manually do that for my games, and its is very time consuming.  The LFF is the standard, and what you want to find is something equal to or "better" than the LFF.

                          So first step would be to enumerate all the variables that could potentially express in this fashion.

                          Honestly I keep up with the MM as its cheaper.

                          However it would be wise to keep up with the PB, because if I could win a million for two bucks catching an "easy" LFF then that would be swell.  But I would have to pick my pitch.

                          Kosmic has already indicated several potential variable and I agree with him.  I call it LDS for Last Digit Same.

                          So you have 0's 1's 2's 3's 4's 5's 6's 7's 8's 9's

                          That is ten variables just for starters.

                          However I dont know if it would be wise to provide winning methods for losers like the three stooges.

                          Perhaps Todd can accomodate hard core players with an invitational "chat" functionality, whereby you can "invite" a group of members to go to the chat room (as opposed to only on Sunday where there are only mostly Pick 3 addicts anyway)
                          where this type of information can be shared in a more "friendly and positive" atmosphere.


                            United States
                            Member #116268
                            September 7, 2011
                            20244 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: February 12, 2013, 10:11 am - IP Logged

                            Nope no need to justify it.  Some people find it fun.  That's why I sometimes play, purely for fun (and the potential to win a jackpot, which is the fun part.)

                             

                            I was just trying to explain that you cannot change the odds (since Ronnie kept quoting asinine numbers as his odds) and you seem to know that.  This last statement proves that you understand that you cannot "beat" the game mathemetically.  I'd think that you should understand that your bets never have a better chance of winning than any other bet - but I'm not sure.

                             

                            I mean, you can figuratively use the term "beat the odds" to say that you did something unlikely, but in terms of gambling, beat the odds implies doing better than the stated odds through skill.  At least - that's what the literal term means.  And I do like to "beat" games when I gamble, so the lottery usually isn't for me.

                             

                            If that's not your goal with gambling, there's no need for you to justify your gambling.  Do whatever you enjoy the most.

                            Boney............. While you were talking in circles you stated the concept perfectly.........

                            , beat the odds implies doing better than the stated odds through skill.

                            And I'm not implying it, I'm saying it. Me and all the other 5000 LP members who are on line every day making predictions using skills that you don't have, or even have the ability to comprehend.

                              x1kosmic's avatar - neptune vg2.gif

                              United States
                              Member #48046
                              December 7, 2006
                              1699 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: February 12, 2013, 12:01 pm - IP Logged

                              This atmosphere is fine with me,    LottoBoner

                                   Lately,  Trend-wise,   Digit Zero, has taken  FIRE, the last few draws.

                                       I also think Digit  1  will be hanging around,     and...

                                          Digit 7  acts kinda funny,  but,  it's shown some signs of life lately. 

                                    Here are  Three, from my 'No Show"  list, for tonight 

                                                              3,    9,   0      ( last digits )           let's see if one of those shows tonight.

                                 
                                Page 299 of 353