Welcome Guest
You last visited December 8, 2016, 10:44 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 303 of 353

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 7:45 pm - IP Logged

Very interesting indeed because in 8 of the last 9 drawings any QP line that used any one of those numbers had no chance of matching five numbers.

"Has MM turned to PB drawing tactics?"

It's just the ordinary causative factors in random drawings when a trend or a streak occurs. There is a 61.5% probability that none of the previous numbers will be drawn making streaks likely and reducing the odds of matching five numbers to 2,349,060 to 1. They keep telling us some number combinations can't have better odds even though a group of 51 numbers using none of the previous drawn numbers should get better odds than a group of 51 number using one or more of those numbers in 61.5% of the drawings.

The most profound statements I've heard is when x1kosmic said. "I picked those numbers for a reason"

People have the power to win, just like the group of 29 who played the same numbers for 5 years.

If someone wants to prove its wrong, let them create a simulator that can put picks to the test.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 7:56 pm - IP Logged

Set of 39 for PB. Wed. Feb. 13. 2013.

02 03 05 06 08 10 12 13 14 15 17 18 20 21 22 25 27 28 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 41 42 44 45 46 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

bonus ball 08

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 7:59 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:  2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55

1. 02-03-21-33-42
2. 02-03-30-41-51
3. 02-06-08-13-46
4. 02-08-17-18-49
5. 02-12-18-22-31
6. 02-13-14-22-36
7. 02-15-21-27-41
8. 03-05-06-17-27
9. 03-05-12-15-49
10. 05-08-14-50-52
11. 05-18-49-54-55
12. 06-15-21-30-51
13. 06-15-33-41-42
14. 08-12-17-54-55
15. 10-13-35-37-38
16. 10-14-31-36-46
17. 10-22-46-50-52
18. 13-31-36-50-52
19. 20-25-37-44-53
20. 20-28-38-44-48
21. 20-34-35-44-45
22. 25-28-35-48-53
23. 25-34-38-45-53
24. 27-30-33-42-51
25. 28-34-37-45-48

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 8:16 pm - IP Logged

Have a good night everyone.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 8:17 pm - IP Logged

Its time for someone on LP to win a jackpot.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 8:17 pm - IP Logged

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 13, 2013, 11:01 pm - IP Logged

He should try calculating C(56,28), the number of combinations of 56 things taken 28 at a time.  I will warn you; this is a VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY LARGE number!

Your not telling us anything we dont know Jimmy, we deelt with C(56,28) a VERY long time ago.

Ronnie316,

If you're going to comment on my critique of Stack47's post, the least you could do is PRETEND that you read more than one of the points contained in it.  What I had hoped is you would have accepted the challenge of making the associations between the key numbers in the C(5,2) Lotto game and the real world C(56,5).  You chose to ignore it completely.

You and Stack47 keep saying that you already know everything that I post here, but you have provided very little evidence that this is true.  You also keep saying that I have disrupted your team effort to find a way to "discard" 28 numbers from a field of 56 that leaves you with a higher probability of matching 5 of them with the Lottery Draw.  I would think that If this really was your goal you would welcome any input you could get.

Why wouldn't you be interested in whether or not your goal is impossible to achieve?  If you find convincing evidence it's impossible to increase your chances of winning a Jackpot with this method, you could move on to investigate other ideas.

I think you KNOW that if you select your 28 numbers randomly, your probability of correctly choosing the 5 winners is the SAME as it is when you select 5 from the full set of 56, precisely as you see it is in the C(5,2) game.  So what you do is drag out your trusty Gambler's Fallacy and "discard" the balls that have been appearing recently, HOPING that the ones remaining are DUE.  But you get discouraged when you find that the HOT HAND FALLACY often prevails when the HOT balls STAY HOT!

So, what you really should be doing here is trying to PROVE that the Gambler's Fallacy and the Hot Hand Fallacy are not really fallacies in Lotto.  You can do this by simulating your method against a databse of all the winning draws of a game like the (56,5) White Balls of the Powerball.  Try different "Look-Back" periods, stepping your way through the data until you find one that results in a winning ROI over the entire run.  This is the way Market Timing Systems are devised for the Stock Market.  If you can't find a Look-Back period that's a winner, you will be forced to Reject your Hypothesis and move on to greener pastures.  If you find one, you can look for financial backers and start planning for retirement!

So I don't post something else that you already know, I'll ask first.  Do you know the probability of finding 2, 3, 4, and 5 matches AMONG the 28 you choose before the draw?

--Jimmy4164

New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 5:51 am - IP Logged

"Boney discussed STD DEV and the concept of using it to get a slight edge so that leaves you as the only principal posters adding nothing but criticism to Ronnie's discussion."

- Wow you really did not understand a thing I posted.  You can't "use" standard deviation, and you certainly don't use it to gain an edge.

United States
Member #124493
March 14, 2012
7023 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 5:53 am - IP Logged

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:15 am - IP Logged

Ronnie316,

If you're going to comment on my critique of Stack47's post, the least you could do is PRETEND that you read more than one of the points contained in it.  What I had hoped is you would have accepted the challenge of making the associations between the key numbers in the C(5,2) Lotto game and the real world C(56,5).  You chose to ignore it completely.

You and Stack47 keep saying that you already know everything that I post here, but you have provided very little evidence that this is true.  You also keep saying that I have disrupted your team effort to find a way to "discard" 28 numbers from a field of 56 that leaves you with a higher probability of matching 5 of them with the Lottery Draw.  I would think that If this really was your goal you would welcome any input you could get.

Why wouldn't you be interested in whether or not your goal is impossible to achieve?  If you find convincing evidence it's impossible to increase your chances of winning a Jackpot with this method, you could move on to investigate other ideas.

I think you KNOW that if you select your 28 numbers randomly, your probability of correctly choosing the 5 winners is the SAME as it is when you select 5 from the full set of 56, precisely as you see it is in the C(5,2) game.  So what you do is drag out your trusty Gambler's Fallacy and "discard" the balls that have been appearing recently, HOPING that the ones remaining are DUE.  But you get discouraged when you find that the HOT HAND FALLACY often prevails when the HOT balls STAY HOT!

So, what you really should be doing here is trying to PROVE that the Gambler's Fallacy and the Hot Hand Fallacy are not really fallacies in Lotto.  You can do this by simulating your method against a databse of all the winning draws of a game like the (56,5) White Balls of the Powerball.  Try different "Look-Back" periods, stepping your way through the data until you find one that results in a winning ROI over the entire run.  This is the way Market Timing Systems are devised for the Stock Market.  If you can't find a Look-Back period that's a winner, you will be forced to Reject your Hypothesis and move on to greener pastures.  If you find one, you can look for financial backers and start planning for retirement!

So I don't post something else that you already know, I'll ask first.  Do you know the probability of finding 2, 3, 4, and 5 matches AMONG the 28 you choose before the draw?

--Jimmy4164

Hey Jimmy, Ive try to be nice to you in spite of the fact that your nothing but a troll on LP. Just because you post something does NOT mean that I'm required to read it..........

You are nothing but a huge ass to demand that I pretend to  do this or that...... NO I did NOT finish the first sentence of what you posted (on this and most others) because I or no one else cares what you are posting or what you have to say.................

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:19 am - IP Logged

"Boney discussed STD DEV and the concept of using it to get a slight edge so that leaves you as the only principal posters adding nothing but criticism to Ronnie's discussion."

- Wow you really did not understand a thing I posted.  You can't "use" standard deviation, and you certainly don't use it to gain an edge.

Hey boney, we understand what you have been posting. You have turned into nothing but a troll.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:21 am - IP Logged

Set of 39 for PB. Wed. Feb. 13. 2013.

02 03 05 06 08 10 12 13 14 15 17 18 20 21 22 25 27 28 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 41 42 44 45 46 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

bonus ball 08

3 of 5 on this draw.

 Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12 · 23 · 25 · 27 · 43    + 29 \$50 Million

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:40 am - IP Logged

I have heard numerous complaints about the content/message that Jimmy and Boney bring to this thread.

Is there ANYONE who thinks their repeated message is still a relevant part of this discussion?

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:40 am - IP Logged

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 14, 2013, 10:46 am - IP Logged

 Page 303 of 353