Dump Water Florida United States Member #380 June 5, 2002 3139 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 8:01 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by yoho on February 2, 2013

This is how you've been fooled. You keep mentioning odds of a 6/36 game, but no one was asking you that. It's completely irrelevant.

I'm asking you, what do you think your chances of winning the jackpot are, given that you buy 8 lines with BobP's strategy?

If you think it's 1:1,947,792, then I'm afraid your strategy is worse than quickpicks, because the chances for winning with 8 random quickpick lines are

1:1,533,939.

P.S tonight's lotto 6/49 in Canada will have the following winning numbers: 7 18 31 39 41 47... hehe look forward to me winning the jackpot :D

Any 8 unique lines in 6/48 are 8 in 12,271,512.00 or 1 in 1,533,939.00

However when 8 lines in 6/48 have all the game's numbers among them . . .

Do you deny no more then 6 lines can contain winning numbers?

Do you deny a reduced field is created that is to all extents and purposes a 6/36 game?

By your reasoning how is this not 8 in 1,947,792.00 or 1 in 247,474 or if you prefer 6 in 1,947,790.00 both beat 1 in 1,533,939. going into the draw.

Toronto Canada Member #138397 January 26, 2013 179 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 1:50 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by BobP on February 3, 2013

Any 8 unique lines in 6/48 are 8 in 12,271,512.00 or 1 in 1,533,939.00

However when 8 lines in 6/48 have all the game's numbers among them . . .

Do you deny no more then 6 lines can contain winning numbers?

Do you deny a reduced field is created that is to all extents and purposes a 6/36 game?

By your reasoning how is this not 8 in 1,947,792.00 or 1 in 247,474 or if you prefer 6 in 1,947,790.00 both beat 1 in 1,533,939. going into the draw.

BobP

I don't deny that no more than 6 lines will contain all the winning numbers.

I do however, deny the other two claims.

Talking about a "reduced" field is confusing and meaningless. The only clearcut way to solve this problem is to find the total probability of all 8 tickets, and

It is definitely neither 8:1,947,792 nor 6:1,947,792.

Though 6 lines contain all the winning numbers, these lines are dependent. This makes a big difference.

For example, the probability of me getting heads on the 10th flip of a coin is 1/2, because it is independent of the other 9 flips before.

However, the chances of me getting heads 10 times in a row is 1/1024, because it is dependent on all 10 flips. If one misses, I lose.

Similarly here, if one of those six lines had 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 winning numbers, the chances of you winning the jackpot is reduced to 0. Simple as

that.

Using your little example, when it's time to check the tickets, as soon as your person A, who used your strategy saw a line with at least 1 winning number

and 1 losing number, he lost all hope of winning the jackpot. He doesn't even need to check the rest of the tickets to know he lost.

However, person B, who bought 8 quickpicks still has a chance of winning even if the first 7 lines weren't jackpot winners.

Dump Water Florida United States Member #380 June 5, 2002 3139 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 3:25 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by yoho on February 3, 2013

I don't deny that no more than 6 lines will contain all the winning numbers.

I do however, deny the other two claims.

Talking about a "reduced" field is confusing and meaningless. The only clearcut way to solve this problem is to find the total probability of all 8 tickets, and

It is definitely neither 8:1,947,792 nor 6:1,947,792.

Though 6 lines contain all the winning numbers, these lines are dependent. This makes a big difference.

For example, the probability of me getting heads on the 10th flip of a coin is 1/2, because it is independent of the other 9 flips before.

However, the chances of me getting heads 10 times in a row is 1/1024, because it is dependent on all 10 flips. If one misses, I lose.

Similarly here, if one of those six lines had 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 winning numbers, the chances of you winning the jackpot is reduced to 0. Simple as

that.

Using your little example, when it's time to check the tickets, as soon as your person A, who used your strategy saw a line with at least 1 winning number

and 1 losing number, he lost all hope of winning the jackpot. He doesn't even need to check the rest of the tickets to know he lost.

However, person B, who bought 8 quickpicks still has a chance of winning even if the first 7 lines weren't jackpot winners.

"Talking about a "reduced" field is confusing and meaningless."

In lottery, wheeling / cover design "reduced" field is a common term for conditional play.

Actually in my example I use first person buys 8 quick picks, second person buys 8 lines with all the numbers.

And yes the person who buys 8 lines with all of the winning numbers will find they can not win a jackpot the moment in the draw when they find winning numbers on more then one line. The point of the strategy is simply to go into the draw with all the numbers because a jackpot is impossible when all six of the winning numbers are not among those you are playing.

However you are totally blowing off the quick pick buyer averages all 6 winning numbers among their lines only once in ten draws.

The quick pick player walks out the door having already lost the jackpot averaging 5 or fewer winning numbers among their lines in 9 times out of 10 trys. Assuming the quick picks average 32 to 36 unique numbers among the 8 lines.

To have any real chance to win a jackpot winning must first be possible as in having all the winning numbers among your lines.

Texas United States Member #55889 October 23, 2007 6182 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 4:06 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by BobP on February 3, 2013

"Talking about a "reduced" field is confusing and meaningless."

In lottery, wheeling / cover design "reduced" field is a common term for conditional play.

Actually in my example I use first person buys 8 quick picks, second person buys 8 lines with all the numbers.

And yes the person who buys 8 lines with all of the winning numbers will find they can not win a jackpot the moment in the draw when they find winning numbers on more then one line. The point of the strategy is simply to go into the draw with all the numbers because a jackpot is impossible when all six of the winning numbers are not among those you are playing.

However you are totally blowing off the quick pick buyer averages all 6 winning numbers among their lines only once in ten draws.

The quick pick player walks out the door having already lost the jackpot averaging 5 or fewer winning numbers among their lines in 9 times out of 10 trys. Assuming the quick picks average 32 to 36 unique numbers among the 8 lines.

To have any real chance to win a jackpot winning must first be possible as in having all the winning numbers among your lines.

BobP

I have tried both QP's and playing self picks when buying tics for the work pool. There are 11 of us so I buy 11 tics each draw when we play MM or Texas Lotto. When I have bought 11 QP's I never had all 5 or 6 winning numbers among the 11 lines. So, obviously, no chance at a jackpot. When I play all the numbers, at least I know I have all the winning numbers in play.

mid-Ohio United States Member #9 March 24, 2001 20041 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 4:34 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by rcbbuckeye on February 3, 2013

I have tried both QP's and playing self picks when buying tics for the work pool. There are 11 of us so I buy 11 tics each draw when we play MM or Texas Lotto. When I have bought 11 QP's I never had all 5 or 6 winning numbers among the 11 lines. So, obviously, no chance at a jackpot. When I play all the numbers, at least I know I have all the winning numbers in play.

Once you know all the winning numbers are among the numbers you are going to play, it's just a matter of finding the best ways to combine them.

I've been studying Ohio's 6/49 games and have found that better than half the winning combinations have some unique characteristics and I try to pick combinations with those characteristics. As of yet, I haven't take the time to figure out the number of possible combinations with those characteristic so I can't really say if they cover only a small group or most of the possible combinations.

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

Texas United States Member #55889 October 23, 2007 6182 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 4:51 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on February 3, 2013

Once you know all the winning numbers are among the numbers you are going to play, it's just a matter of finding the best ways to combine them.

I've been studying Ohio's 6/49 games and have found that better than half the winning combinations have some unique characteristics and I try to pick combinations with those characteristics. As of yet, I haven't take the time to figure out the number of possible combinations with those characteristic so I can't really say if they cover only a small group or most of the possible combinations.

In Texas Lotto, the most common occurance I have found so far is that the majority of draws will have a single digit number in the first position (duh!), and out of 6 decades in the game, 4 decades plays the most often.

But hey, it's something QP's won't get you, at least on purpose.

Toronto Canada Member #138397 January 26, 2013 179 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 5:03 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by rcbbuckeye on February 3, 2013

I have tried both QP's and playing self picks when buying tics for the work pool. There are 11 of us so I buy 11 tics each draw when we play MM or Texas Lotto. When I have bought 11 QP's I never had all 5 or 6 winning numbers among the 11 lines. So, obviously, no chance at a jackpot. When I play all the numbers, at least I know I have all the winning numbers in play.

I am replying to your post, because frankly, it sounds to me like BobP himself doesn't believe in his strategy, he's only using crafty words to trick people.

Of course, I could be wrong, and I'm sorry if I am. But the amount of crafty logical fallacies to mislead people makes me believe so.

Either way, here's the thing. You say you tried quickpicks, but how many times? Once? Twice? Maybe three times? That's not statistically significant. Just

because you never had all the winning numbers, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It doesn't even mean it doesn't happen very often. It just means you didn't

get all the winning numbers from your quickpick, that's it.

You guys only see one direction. Yes, with that strategy you'll have all the winning numbers. Yes, with quickpicks, you might not have all the winning numbers.

What you failed to take into account is the fact that in quickpicks, it's also possible to have more than all the winning numbers. In the 6/48 game, in 8 lines

you might get 4 winning numbers, but you might also get 10 or 12 or 40, which significantly raises your chance to win than just having each number once.

In the end, it all balances out. I don't know why you can't understand that. I'm sure I pointed this out before.

United States Member #137428 January 3, 2013 469 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 6:16 pm - IP Logged

How bout filling out 12 lines with all the digits and then letting quick pick choose the other fill ins. Sill u guaranteed to have all digits on all your lines. But same time u have craftiness of CPU terminal. Good luck. God bless goodnight

Afghanistan Member #101087 November 25, 2010 52 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 8:38 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by yoho on January 27, 2013

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 13 21 35 43 47

Can you guess which one is more likely to win the lottery? I think most of you "know" the answer - its the same. Yet how many of you would buy in with choice 1?

I'm sure most players would be more comfortable with a sequence like choice 2 rather than choice 1. Most people "know" the answer, but don't "believe" in it.

So that's my intro. For this post, I will address 3 common fallacies people tend to make here, and the only two LEGAL ways to improve your chances to win;

although I do look forward to possible methods that I may have not thought of.

Fallacy #1:

This is commonly known as the "gambler's fallacy". If you flipped a coin 9 times, and it returned heads every time, what's the probability that the next flip will

be heads?

The answer is 1/2.

Similarly, even if a number in a lottery has not appeared in the last 10 or 20 or 50 draws, it doesn't make it any less or more likely to appear the next draw. The

same can be said of "hot" numbers. Even if a number appeared every time the past 10 draws, that doesn't mean it will also appear in the next draw. There's not

much more to say about this fallacy, but it does bring us to

Fallacy #2:

It seems that a lot of people on this forum try to look for patterns from draws, and made various outrageous conclusions, for example saying that if the number

1 appears, then the number 15 will also appear or something to that effect.

This is an outrageous and silly claim. The fact is, draws don't affect each other, and drawing a certain ball will not affect the other balls. This fallacy is kind of like

the gambler's fallacy. Let's flip a coin ten times. Theoretically you'll expect that you'll get heads 5 times, and tails 5 times. But what are the chances of getting

HTHTHTHTHT or THTHTHTHTH? Actually it's 2/2^10, which is 1 in 512. Only once out of 512 tries will you get a perfectly alternating sequence of heads and

tails. Every other time you'll have at least two heads or two tails in a row. In reality, it's very likely to have 3 or 4 heads in a row, or say 7 tails out of 10 flips.

That doesn't make it more likely for you to flip tails, or to flip 4 heads in a row. It's simply statistics. With a small sample size, you're going to get some

inconsistent data, you can't really deduce anything from them. A few hundred or few thousand draws may seem like a lot, but with millions of possiblities in a

lottery draw you can't deduce anything from it. Having 1 and 15 appear multiple times together is just like having 3 or 4 heads in a row. Just because such

things happen doesn't make it more likely to happen.

Fallacy #3:

This is the point I really wanted to talk about. Some members of this forum, especially this guy called ronnie something is basically using pseudo math to

confuse others, but most importantly themselves. Honestly such obvious fallacies I'm sure many have addressed already, but seeing so many threads with

similar confusion made by ronnie and others, I felt I really should address it.

Apparently they think they can simply disregard some combinations of numbers, such as a sequence of all even numbers or all odd numbers, or all numbers

under 10 etc. Ronnie said something like 2-4-6-8-10 is less likely to appear simply because they're all even numbers.

This is simply untrue. The fact is, even numbers, odd numbers, prime numbers, pretty numbers, ugly numbers (ya, the last two aren't legit mathematical terms)

are only something humans use to to make life easier. It's like calling a group of objects that people sit on "chair". It's really completely arbitrary. There's no

significance in numbers all being even or odd by themselves.

Sure, if you're picking 6 numbers from 59, its very unlikely that all of the numbers will be under 10 (i.e 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9). That part is true. But the same can

be said of ANY set of 9 numbers, i.e 4,12,14,15,20,35,37,43,51 for example. We put significance in a sequence like 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 because its useful for us

humans in every day life, but for the purpose of a lottery draw, any set of numbers are exactly the same. There's no significance in numbers being odd or even

or pretty or ugly. Like I said in the beginning, 1,2,3,4,5,6 has the same chances of winning as 4,13,21,35,43,47. Don't try to group numbers, use some pseudo

math and convince yourself wrongly that some combinations are less likely to appear than others because all the numbers are prime or start with a 1.

***

So, with the fallacies addressed, I'll present two REAL ways to actually improve your chances of winning the jackpot, other than buying more tickets, of course.

...

Well, that's enough time for excitement, it's time to break your dreams and hopes again.

What are the ways to improve your chances?

1. Don't buy the same ticket more than once. Ya. That's my advice, haha. Sounds stupid, doesn't it? But well it works. you see news of people buying the same

numbers and then winning, but really its not a good strategy. I don't understand why anyone would buy the same ticket twice, lol.

2.This point is slightly more interesting. To maximize your chances of winning a jackpot, you should spend your whole lottery allowance on a single draw. Note,

your whole LOTTERY ALLOWANCE, not all your money, lol. NEVER spend more money on the lottery than you can afford. With that said, its better if you bought

52 tickets for a single draw than if you bought 1 ticket per week for a year.

Why? Because first of all, we know the expected return is the same. The chances are always 1 in impossibly large number. However, if you buy 1 ticket per

draw, there is a small chance, however small, that you'll win the lottery twice or three times or all 52 times. Ya, I know, dream on. But that chance exists.

If you buy in a single draw, you give up the chance to win the jackpot multiple times in exchange for a slightly higher chance to win the jackpot once. So if

you're not greedy and only need to win once, then putting all your eggs in one basket might not be a horribly bad idea, although it might hurt more when you

lose, which you probably will.

Ya, so the fact is, there isn't a real mathematically sound way to really beat the system. I'm not going to pretend I'm god and that I know everything, because

really, I don't. If god or an alien or your uncle bob told you the winning numbers for next week's draw, great, congratulations. I'm only saying that if you got

your hopes up because of the kind of reasoning I mentioned above, then I'm sorry, they aren't logically sound. Perhaps there's a way to beat the system, but

the kind of thinking above will not get you there.

6 consective #S verses non consectitive are at a much greater odds to hit

NY United States Member #103217 December 31, 2010 96 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 9:42 pm - IP Logged

When you say don't buy the same ticket twice, I assume you meant for the same game, don't buy the same set of numbers. If you meant don't buy same numbers(like how some people buy birthdays over and over gain) for different draws then according to your own logic, every set of a number is a mathematic possibility.

Yes I agree mathematicaly speaking 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 11,12,13,14,15,16 or all numbers drawn below 10 so on and so forth have the same chance(mathematically) but chance within chance is very less. So it makes sense to apply logic and make educated guesses. Every logic is fallacy when it comes to lottery. Instead of throwing dart in dark, you are using little logic that's all. You can see for yourself in last 10 yrs how many times number drawn were 1,2,3,4,5,6 doesn't mean that won't happen. Chance within chance is low is all I'm saying.

Either way most people in ourlife time will never win big , no matter what logic you follow. it all boils down to are you slightly improving chance within chance? if yes one should give it a try. It is better to go with 1 in 4 million chance to 1 in 3 million chance.

formatting is so scrwed up on this forum when someone quotes your post, you can't read it properly.

United States Member #128790 June 2, 2012 5431 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 9:51 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jaggudada on February 3, 2013

When you say don't buy the same ticket twice, I assume you meant for the same game, don't buy the same set of numbers. If you meant don't buy same numbers(like how some people buy birthdays over and over gain) for different draws then according to your own logic, every set of a number is a mathematic possibility.

Yes I agree mathematicaly speaking 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 11,12,13,14,15,16 or all numbers drawn below 10 so on and so forth have the same chance(mathematically) but chance within chance is very less. So it makes sense to apply logic and make educated guesses. Every logic is fallacy when it comes to lottery. Instead of throwing dart in dark, you are using little logic that's all. You can see for yourself in last 10 yrs how many times number drawn were 1,2,3,4,5,6 doesn't mean that won't happen. Chance within chance is low is all I'm saying.

Either way most people in ourlife time will never win big , no matter what logic you follow. it all boils down to are you slightly improving chance within chance? if yes one should give it a try. It is better to go with 1 in 4 million chance to 1 in 3 million chance.

formatting is so scrwed up on this forum when someone quotes your post, you can't read it properly.

chance within chance is very less.

What does that mean?

formatting is so scrwed up on this forum when someone quotes your post, you can't read it properly.

I have no problems at all. What type of computer, how old is it, and what browser are you using?

Joplin MO United States Member #138489 January 28, 2013 190 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 11:36 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by ZANBAB1 on February 3, 2013

6 consective #S verses non consectitive are at a much greater odds to hit

It also seems to me that it is "less likely" that the consecutive set of numbers ... or any set of numbers with such a REGULAR / DEFINED pattern such as (2-4-6-8...) or (5-10-15-20...) would ALL hit ... but again keep in mind that each of the two sets (consecutive vs. non-consecutive) do still have the same "odds" ... a calculation of the number set.

Kentucky United States Member #32652 February 14, 2006 7479 Posts Offline

Posted: February 3, 2013, 11:58 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by yoho on February 3, 2013

I am replying to your post, because frankly, it sounds to me like BobP himself doesn't believe in his strategy, he's only using crafty words to trick people.

Of course, I could be wrong, and I'm sorry if I am. But the amount of crafty logical fallacies to mislead people makes me believe so.

Either way, here's the thing. You say you tried quickpicks, but how many times? Once? Twice? Maybe three times? That's not statistically significant. Just

because you never had all the winning numbers, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It doesn't even mean it doesn't happen very often. It just means you didn't

get all the winning numbers from your quickpick, that's it.

You guys only see one direction. Yes, with that strategy you'll have all the winning numbers. Yes, with quickpicks, you might not have all the winning numbers.

What you failed to take into account is the fact that in quickpicks, it's also possible to have more than all the winning numbers. In the 6/48 game, in 8 lines

you might get 4 winning numbers, but you might also get 10 or 12 or 40, which significantly raises your chance to win than just having each number once.

In the end, it all balances out. I don't know why you can't understand that. I'm sure I pointed this out before.

"You say you tried quickpicks, but how many times? Once? Twice? Maybe three times? That's not statistically significant."

What is statistically significant, is the fact in MM 97.5% of all QPs will not win a prize.

"Just because you never had all the winning numbers, doesn't mean it doesn't happen."

All forms of gambling are based on betting conditions will be met. Roulette players don't bet on Black because they believe the outcome will be Red, 0, or 00. The probabilities against the meeting conditions can't any be worse than the 97.% against QPs winning a prize.

"What you failed to take into account is the fact that in quickpicks, it's also possible to have more than all the winning numbers."

That's almost like saying in a 6/48 game 5,245,786 combinations will not match 1 number. Would you rather have the terminal randomly give you $5 or $10 worth of those combos or create conditions, bet on that and give yourself a better chance of winning?

Park City, UT United States Member #69864 January 18, 2009 1001 Posts Offline

Posted: February 4, 2013, 4:01 am - IP Logged

I wrote a lottery simulator program to test the premise for a 6/48 game. I created two test groups A & B.

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.

For Test Group B the 8 tickets were just randomly generated with at least 1 duplicate number in play but in general had alot more duplicates in play.

The following picture depicts the results after 42,305,214 games or 338,441,172 tickets bought for Test Group A, and 338,441,172 tickets bought for Test Group B. The odds of matching 6 of 6 for this game is 12,271,512 to 1. If you divide 338,441,172 by 12,271,512 you get 27.579. So you can see both strategies matched roughly what was expected.

If you don't believe the numbers my program produced then I invite you to write you own lottery simulator to validate the numbers. Just be careful if you do this because the built-in functions srand()/rand() provided by the CRT do not have the precision required to validate a 6/48 game.