Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 7, 2016, 7:22 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Playing recently drawn numbers to win a jackpot

Topic closed. 1046 replies. Last post 3 years ago by str8ca$hhomie.

Page 5 of 70
4.517
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar

United States
Member #130795
July 25, 2012
80 Posts
Offline
Posted: April 5, 2013, 4:26 am - IP Logged

"The statement is unclear to me because of typos and awkward construction.  And I don't know why you are quoting it in this context.  I believe Stack47 wrote it to be critical of your approach."

A group of 35 numbers creates 324,632 combinations so any group of 35 numbers has a 1 in 12 chance matching five numbers. The probability is that any group of 35 numbers should match five numbers 10 times in 120 drawings plus or minus standard devation.

"I cannot make sense of "or 9 times a year".  If that is "for 9 times a year", I don't know why Stack47 would choose 9, since you talked about 17."

There are 104 drawings in a year and the group Ronnie is isolating on, matched five numbers 17 times which is much better than the probable 8 or 9 times (104/12). Nobody mentioned "exactly" 9 times in one year, but there probably are billions of groups of 35 numbers that will match five number exactly 9 times in any one year period.

"The probability of any of the full wheel combinations matching 9 times in a year is about 13.69%."

Does that include the group of 35 numbers that matched five numbers in the last 10 consecutive drawings?

(With apologies to Ronnie316 for the digression.)

Stack47 wrote:  "A group of 35 numbers creates 324,632 combinations so any group of 35 numbers has a 1 in 12 chance matching five numbers".

Only if we play all such combinations(!).  Since no one said anything about doing that, I think we need to stipulate that as an assumption.

Alternatively, we could play "any group of 35 numbers" by simply dividing them into 7 sets of 5.  In that case, the odds are not 1 in 12, of course.

In fact, as we learned later, Ronnie316 intends to do an abbreviated wheel.

Stack47 wrote:  ``Nobody mentioned "exactly" 9 times in one year``.

Well, I think you did.  You wrote (here):  "The probability is about 1 in 12 drawings that any 35 numbers should match five numbers or 9 times a year".

I wrote:  "The probability of any of the full wheel combinations matching 9 times in a year is about 13.69%".

Stack47 wrote:  "Does that include the group of 35 numbers that matched five numbers in the last 10 consecutive drawings?"

Who said anything about 10 times in a year? Wink

If the probability of success is 1/12 for one event, the probability of success for 9 of 104 independent events is (in Excel):

(1/12)^9 * (1 - 1/12)^(104-9) * COMBIN(104,9)

or simply BINOMDIST(9,104,1/12,0).

And yes, that includes all instances of 9 consecutive successes, among others.

    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
    mid-Ohio
    United States
    Member #9
    March 24, 2001
    19826 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: April 5, 2013, 9:14 am - IP Logged

    MathHead,

    "I had toyed with the idea of demonstrating that point with a simulation of Ronnie316's strategy; a fun little program.  But enough's enough."  Smile

    Wise decision.  The people disagreeing with you here are not impressed with simulations.  I know; I wrote them and posted the results.  I even posted source code which wise guys edited and reposted.  You would have to first convince them that computerized random number generators are valid tools, and then teach the value of Monte Carlo Techniques.  I tried - even started a thread for MCT.  I failed.  Too many innumerates literate enough to obfuscate your posts.

    Good luck.  If you're really lucky, they'll wear you out before you waste as many hours as I did.

    --Jimmy4164

    "The people disagreeing with you here are not impressed with simulations.  I know; I wrote them and posted the results."

    If your simulations had showed them how to win, maybe they would have been more interested.

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


      United States
      Member #116268
      September 7, 2011
      20244 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: April 5, 2013, 11:27 am - IP Logged

      "The people disagreeing with you here are not impressed with simulations.  I know; I wrote them and posted the results."

      If your simulations had showed them how to win, maybe they would have been more interested.

      I Agree! Simulations are a maens of self expression and creativity looking for a winner.


        United States
        Member #116268
        September 7, 2011
        20244 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: April 5, 2013, 11:30 am - IP Logged

        Most recent 35 drawn numbers for MM. Fri. Apr. 5, 2013.

        03 04 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 14 17 19 20 21 22 25 27 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 43 46 47 49 51 53

        Bonus ball 09


          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: April 5, 2013, 2:01 pm - IP Logged

          MathHead,

          "I had toyed with the idea of demonstrating that point with a simulation of Ronnie316's strategy; a fun little program.  But enough's enough."  Smile

          Wise decision.  The people disagreeing with you here are not impressed with simulations.  I know; I wrote them and posted the results.  I even posted source code which wise guys edited and reposted.  You would have to first convince them that computerized random number generators are valid tools, and then teach the value of Monte Carlo Techniques.  I tried - even started a thread for MCT.  I failed.  Too many innumerates literate enough to obfuscate your posts.

          Good luck.  If you're really lucky, they'll wear you out before you waste as many hours as I did.

          --Jimmy4164

          RJOh's response to my post above was, "If your simulations had showed them how to win, maybe they would have been more interested."

          He was absolutely right!


            United States
            Member #116268
            September 7, 2011
            20244 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: April 5, 2013, 9:22 pm - IP Logged

            It sounds like Jammy is still ignoring the human ability to pick winning numbers. I have proven over and over it can be done (as many other LP members have also) and I will continue to prove it, Stay tuned.


              United States
              Member #116268
              September 7, 2011
              20244 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: April 5, 2013, 9:43 pm - IP Logged

              Yes Nod

                Avatar
                Kentucky
                United States
                Member #32652
                February 14, 2006
                7310 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: April 5, 2013, 9:48 pm - IP Logged

                (With apologies to Ronnie316 for the digression.)

                Stack47 wrote:  "A group of 35 numbers creates 324,632 combinations so any group of 35 numbers has a 1 in 12 chance matching five numbers".

                Only if we play all such combinations(!).  Since no one said anything about doing that, I think we need to stipulate that as an assumption.

                Alternatively, we could play "any group of 35 numbers" by simply dividing them into 7 sets of 5.  In that case, the odds are not 1 in 12, of course.

                In fact, as we learned later, Ronnie316 intends to do an abbreviated wheel.

                Stack47 wrote:  ``Nobody mentioned "exactly" 9 times in one year``.

                Well, I think you did.  You wrote (here):  "The probability is about 1 in 12 drawings that any 35 numbers should match five numbers or 9 times a year".

                I wrote:  "The probability of any of the full wheel combinations matching 9 times in a year is about 13.69%".

                Stack47 wrote:  "Does that include the group of 35 numbers that matched five numbers in the last 10 consecutive drawings?"

                Who said anything about 10 times in a year? Wink

                If the probability of success is 1/12 for one event, the probability of success for 9 of 104 independent events is (in Excel):

                (1/12)^9 * (1 - 1/12)^(104-9) * COMBIN(104,9)

                or simply BINOMDIST(9,104,1/12,0).

                And yes, that includes all instances of 9 consecutive successes, among others.

                "You wrote"

                And the reply was to Ronnie and he had no problems understanding what I meant.

                "Who said anything about 10 times in a year?"

                I don't know; have a problem reading my question?

                I asked if the probability you posted applied to the group of 35 numbers that had a five number match in each of the last 10 consecutive drawings. FYI, if the group matches five numbers in 10, 15, or 17 drawing in a year, they matched in 9 drawings too.

                "And yes, that includes all instances of 9 consecutive successes, among others."

                We already discussed your math mumbo-jumbo. Do you have any suggestions about playing recently drawn numbers to win a jackpot?

                  Avatar
                  Kentucky
                  United States
                  Member #32652
                  February 14, 2006
                  7310 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: April 5, 2013, 9:58 pm - IP Logged

                  It sounds like Jammy is still ignoring the human ability to pick winning numbers. I have proven over and over it can be done (as many other LP members have also) and I will continue to prove it, Stay tuned.

                  I haven't seen any decline in the number of systems and ideas posted since July 10, 2010 so it appears whatever his message is, nobody is listening.

                    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                    mid-Ohio
                    United States
                    Member #9
                    March 24, 2001
                    19826 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: April 5, 2013, 10:20 pm - IP Logged

                    "You wrote"

                    And the reply was to Ronnie and he had no problems understanding what I meant.

                    "Who said anything about 10 times in a year?"

                    I don't know; have a problem reading my question?

                    I asked if the probability you posted applied to the group of 35 numbers that had a five number match in each of the last 10 consecutive drawings. FYI, if the group matches five numbers in 10, 15, or 17 drawing in a year, they matched in 9 drawings too.

                    "And yes, that includes all instances of 9 consecutive successes, among others."

                    We already discussed your math mumbo-jumbo. Do you have any suggestions about playing recently drawn numbers to win a jackpot?

                    'We already discussed your math mumbo-jumbo."

                    I am surprise mathhead posted his math mumbo-jombo without checking it first.

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


                      United States
                      Member #116268
                      September 7, 2011
                      20244 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: April 5, 2013, 10:33 pm - IP Logged

                      'We already discussed your math mumbo-jumbo."

                      I am surprise mathhead posted his math mumbo-jombo without checking it first.

                      I Agree! Perhaps he could have made a nice mumbo gumbo soup?

                      What?

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7310 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: April 6, 2013, 4:10 pm - IP Logged

                        'We already discussed your math mumbo-jumbo."

                        I am surprise mathhead posted his math mumbo-jombo without checking it first.

                        The same math that's being preached means there is not difference in the odds against winning whether the same amount of sets of numbers are chosen by the player, picked by an RNG, fortune cookies, or any other method. I see no reason to argue when someone says their set has better odds because they can't have worse odds.


                          United States
                          Member #116268
                          September 7, 2011
                          20244 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: April 6, 2013, 4:16 pm - IP Logged

                          The same math that's being preached means there is not difference in the odds against winning whether the same amount of sets of numbers are chosen by the player, picked by an RNG, fortune cookies, or any other method. I see no reason to argue when someone says their set has better odds because they can't have worse odds.

                          Exactly my point Stack. It's impossible to do worse than Jammy, so why not at least try to do BETTER?

                            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                            mid-Ohio
                            United States
                            Member #9
                            March 24, 2001
                            19826 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: April 6, 2013, 6:54 pm - IP Logged

                            The same math that's being preached means there is not difference in the odds against winning whether the same amount of sets of numbers are chosen by the player, picked by an RNG, fortune cookies, or any other method. I see no reason to argue when someone says their set has better odds because they can't have worse odds.

                            Getting better odds is only important to players looking for an edge, those satisfied playing quick picks or other randomly picked numbers don't care.

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


                              United States
                              Member #93947
                              July 10, 2010
                              2180 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: April 6, 2013, 8:18 pm - IP Logged

                              MathHead,

                              Do you see what I mean?

                              When you said,
                              "These forums seem to be all about voodoo practices; some are cloaked in the language of math, but that is only an illusion for the most part.  I see no basis to criticize one voodoo practice more than another."

                              and

                              "...because it is [a] hoot to see the voodoo priests argue over whose practices have more mojo...." 

                              ...you cracked me up!  Big Smile

                              I'm afraid it's a waste of precious time trying to teach math, logic and critical thinking skills to people who are either Innumerate and incapable of understanding, or have a vested interest in propagating ignorance.  The Innumerate ones are just literate enough to obfuscate teaching efforts as they expound on their fallacious beliefs.  The Numerate ones are probably praying that they will someday be forgiven.

                              --Jimmy4164

                                 
                                Page 5 of 70