United States Member #93943 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: April 11, 2014, 3:26 pm - IP Logged

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

No matter that tenured mathematicians and scientists sympathetic enough to take the time to talk to you about this will agree with me - YOU KNOW BETTER! Based on the many self appraisals of your IQ, knowledge, and skills presented here in these forums, I'm sure you must think Don Catlin and Richard Arnold Epstein should kiss your feet. I don't think they will. And Pascal, Fermat and Einstein, some of whose opinions you would reject as well, are not available to pay their respects.

Do you have any more code snippets to demonstrate your prowess in your chosen dialect of BASIC? Your groupies who have no idea what it means seem to be quite impressed. In my experience, the ability to program a computer does not necessarily correlate positively with other measures of intelligence nor with a person's contributions to the world in general. Sometimes the correlations are negative. You are a prime example in that you can write programs that should reveal the truth to you, but your Innumeracy won't allow it to happen.

Dream on!

--Jimmy4164

P.S. As for the statement you might wish you hadn't made...

DIM SHARED PICKT AS INTEGER DIM SHARED NSET AS INTEGER DIM SHARED NCR AS DOUBLE DIM SHARED NC1 AS DOUBLE DIM SHARED LEX1 AS DOUBLE DIM SHARED LEXHI AS DOUBLE DIM SHARED DP1 AS INTEGER DIM SHARED L1 AS INTEGER

'I have tested the lexie converter up to 13 lexie digits, However in test it seems to handle a 13 - 99 matrix but 'has not been tested to this level. A 13-99 matrix would have 6,186,171,974,825,304 sets and 16 lexie digits.

'The next two variables below are the matrix values' The converter is limited to a pick-13 of 99 so don't go above these or 'you will get errors

'Pickt can be set from 2 to 13.

PICKT = 13 'numbers in each set NSET = 99 'total numbers in pool

COUNT=0 time1$=time$

'calculate total combinations in matrix NCR = Factorial(NSET) / (Factorial(PICKT) * Factorial(NSET-PICKT)): NCR$ = LTRIM$(STR$(NCR)) DP1=0 IF INSTR(NCR$, ".") > 0 THEN DP1=CINT(VAL(MID$(NCR$,INSTR(NCR$, "."), 10))) IF INSTR(NCR$, ".") > 0 THEN NCR$=MID$(NCR$,1,(INSTR(NCR$, ".")-1)) NCR=VAL(NCR$) + DP1

locate 2, 2: PRINT "Press any key to stop RNG"

NEXTPAIR: COUNT=COUNT+1

'stop code, exit on key press IF INKEY$ <> "" THEN GOTO ENDSIM

NEXTCALC: 'calculate combinatons remaining NC1 = Factorial(L1)/(Factorial(PICK1)*Factorial(L1-PICK1)): NC1$ = LTRIM$(STR$(NC1)):DP1=0 IF INSTR(NC1$,".") > 0 THEN DP1=CINT(VAL(MID$(NC1$,INSTR(NC1$, "."), 10))) IF INSTR(NC1$,".") > 0 THEN NC1$=MID$(NC1$,1,(INSTR(NC1$,".")-1)) NC1=VAL(NC1$)+DP1

'main algorithm conversion code DO UNTIL NC1 <= LEXHI L1=L1-1:IF L1 <= (PICK1-1) THEN EXIT DO NC1 = Factorial(L1)/(Factorial(PICK1)*Factorial(L1-PICK1)): NC1$ = LTRIM$(STR$(NC1)) DP1=0 IF INSTR(NC1$, ".") > 0 THEN DP1=CINT(VAL(MID$(NC1$,INSTR(NC1$, "."), 10))) IF INSTR(NC1$, ".") > 0 THEN NC1$=MID$(NC1$,1,(INSTR(NC1$, ".")-1)) NC1=VAL(NC1$) + DP1 LOOP

'pad single digits with a zero IF (NSET - L1) < 10 THEN SET1$=SET1$+"0"+LTRIM$(STR$(NSET-L1))+" " IF (NSET - L1) > 9 THEN SET1$=SET1$+LTRIM$(STR$(NSET-L1))+" "

'check to see if conversion complete LEXHI=LEXHI-NC1: PICK1=PICK1-1 IF PICK1 > 0 THEN GOTO NEXTCALC QP1$=SET1$

'print quickpick set to screen, comment out to increase speed of the program locate 1,2: PRINT ""; QP1$; "" GOTO NEXTPAIR 'start over

ENDSIM: cls locate 1, 2: print "Total sets generated ->"; count; "" locate 2, 2: print "Start time ->"; time1$; "" locate 3, 2: print "End time ->"; time$ locate 4, 2: PRINT "Press any key to exit" sleep system

'This function is needed to factor numbers greater than 30 FUNCTION Factorial# (n AS DOUBLE) CONST maxNToCache = 99 STATIC resultCache() AS DOUBLE STATIC FIRSTCALL AS INTEGER IF firstCall = 0 THEN firstCall = -1 REDIM resultCache(maxNToCache) AS DOUBLE resultCache(0) = 1 resultCache(1) = 1 resultCache(2) = 2 END IF IF n <= maxNToCache THEN IF resultCache(n) <> 0 THEN Factorial = resultCache(n) EXIT FUNCTION END IF END IF resultCache(n) = INT(n) * Factorial(INT(n) - 1) Factorial = resultCache(n) END FUNCTION ________________________________________________________________________________________________________

New Jersey United States Member #21205 September 4, 2005 960 Posts Offline

Posted: April 14, 2014, 5:11 pm - IP Logged

To answer Jimmy's question about which game I voted in the poll, I would say this:

The way I play, outside the poll, is by a calculation of the expectation values, which vary with prizes.

Megamillions, which is in the process of total destruction as a game, reduced the expectation value for lower prizes significantly with the matrix change, but I was surprised that the game actually produced an expectation value close to 1.00, this after an unprecedented number of draws.

The game is definitely in a tail spin, and it would be interesting to compare the average sales per draw with the situation that existed before the $2 powerball, after the $2 powerball but before the MM matrix change, and after the recent matrix change.

I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it.

MM will probably not have a reasonable expectation value for many, many months, if at all.

I enjoyed the simulator, by the way, and regret that it's not there anymore.

United States Member #93943 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: April 14, 2014, 8:07 pm - IP Logged

Prob988,

"The way I play, outside the poll, is by a calculation of the expectation values, which vary with prizes."

This is a reasonable approach. I think RJOh does this too. What EV triggers a buy for you?

"The game is definitely in a tail spin, and it would be interesting to compare the average sales per draw with the situation that existed before the $2 powerball, after the $2 powerball but before the MM matrix change, and after the recent matrix change. I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it."

RJOh may have this info too.

"I enjoyed the simulator, by the way, and regret that it's not there anymore."

I'm disappointed too and haven't been able to find out what happened. It was referenced from so many places that maybe their server was getting overworked. Or maybe it was hurting the bottom line of some powerful interests.

New Jersey United States Member #21205 September 4, 2005 960 Posts Offline

Posted: April 14, 2014, 10:52 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on April 14, 2014

Prob988,

"The way I play, outside the poll, is by a calculation of the expectation values, which vary with prizes."

This is a reasonable approach. I think RJOh does this too. What EV triggers a buy for you?

"The game is definitely in a tail spin, and it would be interesting to compare the average sales per draw with the situation that existed before the $2 powerball, after the $2 powerball but before the MM matrix change, and after the recent matrix change. I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it."

RJOh may have this info too.

"I enjoyed the simulator, by the way, and regret that it's not there anymore."

I'm disappointed too and haven't been able to find out what happened. It was referenced from so many places that maybe their server was getting overworked. Or maybe it was hurting the bottom line of some powerful interests.

--Jimmy4164

I will sometimes buy a ticket or two, just for fun, when the EV is less than 0.5, and may buy a few more on a drawing where it is between 0.5 and 0.8 - I regard the lottery as a fun way to pay taxes - and we play a little more seriously above that figure. It now requires MM to have something like 20 draws to approach that figure, 2 and 1/2 months.

I believe that casinos generally have expectation values of around 0.9, although I don't go to them. This high expectation value probably feeds a feedback loop that keeps people playing and the casinos making money. I don't know.

It does seem to me that the design of the MM game, with it's very low payouts on smaller prizes, and longer odds of doing anything other than breaking even, may well backfire. The feedback loop, to me at least, seems broken, as the simulator showed. Arguably, the $2 Powerball game may have backfired, inasmuch as it messed up MM, at one time a nearly equal source of revenue for most states.

But the lotteries don't ask my advice, and they do what they want. Many years ago, the California lottery tried to raise the odds beyond a certain point and it back fired. They went from a 6/49 game to a 6/54 game and retreated to a 6/51 game.

People often point to the extraordinary odds of the lottery and indicate that anyone who plays must do so because they can't do math, but actually the game is not quite as impossible as reality itself, as anyone who has studied, say, statistical mechanics will know.

There is also a biological analogy:

I note that, even ignoring the probability that one's parents will even meet, never mind have a relationship, at the moment of conception the odds of a particular genome resulting is 2^46 = (approx) 1 in 70 trillion. When one considers that each parent was the result of a 1 in 70 trillion outcome, the lottery, as awful as the odds are, seem rather generous.

United States Member #93943 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: April 15, 2014, 2:10 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Prob988 on April 14, 2014

I will sometimes buy a ticket or two, just for fun, when the EV is less than 0.5, and may buy a few more on a drawing where it is between 0.5 and 0.8 - I regard the lottery as a fun way to pay taxes - and we play a little more seriously above that figure. It now requires MM to have something like 20 draws to approach that figure, 2 and 1/2 months.

I believe that casinos generally have expectation values of around 0.9, although I don't go to them. This high expectation value probably feeds a feedback loop that keeps people playing and the casinos making money. I don't know.

It does seem to me that the design of the MM game, with it's very low payouts on smaller prizes, and longer odds of doing anything other than breaking even, may well backfire. The feedback loop, to me at least, seems broken, as the simulator showed. Arguably, the $2 Powerball game may have backfired, inasmuch as it messed up MM, at one time a nearly equal source of revenue for most states.

But the lotteries don't ask my advice, and they do what they want. Many years ago, the California lottery tried to raise the odds beyond a certain point and it back fired. They went from a 6/49 game to a 6/54 game and retreated to a 6/51 game.

People often point to the extraordinary odds of the lottery and indicate that anyone who plays must do so because they can't do math, but actually the game is not quite as impossible as reality itself, as anyone who has studied, say, statistical mechanics will know.

There is also a biological analogy:

I note that, even ignoring the probability that one's parents will even meet, never mind have a relationship, at the moment of conception the odds of a particular genome resulting is 2^46 = (approx) 1 in 70 trillion. When one considers that each parent was the result of a 1 in 70 trillion outcome, the lottery, as awful as the odds are, seem rather generous.

Or that's my take, anyway.

Prob888,

"I regard the lottery as a fun way to pay taxes..."

That's a good way to look at it, especially if your state is using it wisely. I think education is the best place to put it to use, and some states do. Education in Norway is free from Kindergarten to PhD, and it seems to work for them.

"I believe that casinos generally have expectation values of around 0.9, although I don't go to them. This high expectation value probably feeds a feedback loop that keeps people playing and the casinos making money. I don't know."

I've often wondered how the lottery does so well with a 0.5. If they set this point based on bottom line profit for the lottery, wouldn't you think the point of diminishing returns would be higher, at least 0.6 or 0.7? Before state lotteries the "Numbers" business seemed to do well with higher payouts. I've posted simulation results here of Pick-3 games and with 0.5 there are still a sizable number out of a million who come out ahead even after 10 years. As you move the prize up from $500 that number of people increases dramatically because of the shape of the distribution curve. But maybe they've studied this with Focus Groups [of sorts] and determined 0.5 was optimal.

"I note that, even ignoring the probability that one's parents will even meet, never mind have a relationship, at the moment of conception the odds of a particular genome resulting is 2^46 = (approx) 1 in 70 trillion. When one considers that each parent was the result of a 1 in 70 trillion outcome, the lottery, as awful as the odds are, seem rather generous."

Los Angeles, California United States Member #103809 January 5, 2011 1530 Posts Offline

Posted: April 15, 2014, 10:00 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Prob988 on April 14, 2014

To answer Jimmy's question about which game I voted in the poll, I would say this:

The way I play, outside the poll, is by a calculation of the expectation values, which vary with prizes.

Megamillions, which is in the process of total destruction as a game, reduced the expectation value for lower prizes significantly with the matrix change, but I was surprised that the game actually produced an expectation value close to 1.00, this after an unprecedented number of draws.

The game is definitely in a tail spin, and it would be interesting to compare the average sales per draw with the situation that existed before the $2 powerball, after the $2 powerball but before the MM matrix change, and after the recent matrix change.

I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it.

MM will probably not have a reasonable expectation value for many, many months, if at all.

I enjoyed the simulator, by the way, and regret that it's not there anymore.

I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it.

So you come to the conclusion that MM is in a tailspin without looking at the data? Well that's real scientific, isn't it.

I have the data too, and have posted graphs before showing that, far from a tailspin, MM with the new matrix has arrested the dive, and is now climbing for altitude on an upward trajectory.

Not sure why you're still so hell bent with declaring this "MM is evil and is a failure" soapbox of yours. Just observe and report. I would advise you to get over it.

Los Angeles, California United States Member #103809 January 5, 2011 1530 Posts Offline

Posted: April 15, 2014, 10:05 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on April 15, 2014

I was just wondering what the odds were for a two headed jackass. Anyone who decides rather

or not to play a game with odds of 1 in 258,890,850 based on a EV of .5 to .7 should play for fun. My

question is, if it's so much fun then why wait or why just a couple bucks? It's a fun way to pay my

taxes, 30 to 50 cents at a time for every $1.00 ticket I purchase, <---- genus at work.

The odds mentioned above of 70 trillion to one for one particular genome but why even mention this.

What are the odds for two people meeting then producing a offspring. I am just thinking off the top

of my head here but I don't think it's anywhere near 1 in 70 trillion. This is the kind of crap which is

responsible for evolution still being taught in schools.

It's also a bit funny to me how easily the online simulator is accepted without so much as a small sample

of data. Just like above you see what you want to see and nothing else. My simulator is dismissed without

so much as asking for a data sample. Hmmmmm, is this what you call science? What a fraud. The first test

of any RNG should be in the area of population and distribution. If the output does not follow the universe

in P&D then the RNG is not a RNG. If a RNG was to produce many more sets with fewer than 5 or greater than

6 digit sets for a 5-39 then I would love to play that game and the EV would mean nothing, that is, if it ever had

any value in being applied to a mega JP lottery game.

I think I will just enjoy winning way more than the odds suggest and put your "head in the sand" mentality behind

me where it belongs.

RL

Anyone who decides rather or not to play a game with odds of 1 in 258,890,850 based on a EV of .5 to .7 should play for fun.

I agree.

EV can be used in gambling to compare different games, bets, or similar games/bets at different venues. But I've said this before and will say it again, using EV on a draws of lottery jackpot game is just a foolish endeavor. The EV for MM/MP is .5 and any other number is garbage.(even .5 is somewhat garbage)

Los Angeles, California United States Member #103809 January 5, 2011 1530 Posts Offline

Posted: April 15, 2014, 11:20 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on April 14, 2014

Prob988,

"The way I play, outside the poll, is by a calculation of the expectation values, which vary with prizes."

This is a reasonable approach. I think RJOh does this too. What EV triggers a buy for you?

"The game is definitely in a tail spin, and it would be interesting to compare the average sales per draw with the situation that existed before the $2 powerball, after the $2 powerball but before the MM matrix change, and after the recent matrix change. I could do this from data I have, but haven't bothered to do it."

RJOh may have this info too.

"I enjoyed the simulator, by the way, and regret that it's not there anymore."

I'm disappointed too and haven't been able to find out what happened. It was referenced from so many places that maybe their server was getting overworked. Or maybe it was hurting the bottom line of some powerful interests.

--Jimmy4164

I'm disappointed too and haven't been able to find out what happened. It was referenced from so many places that maybe their server was getting overworked. Or maybe it was hurting the bottom line of some powerful interests.

Yeah, I wonder if he got a cease and desist from *someone* about the simulator.

I last ran it back in December when the JP was high.(that's the snapshot I posted) And I actually contacted Richard back in early November to let him know of the MM matrix change, and he updated the applet accordingly. Too bad it's gone.

NEW YORK United States Member #90531 April 29, 2010 12427 Posts Offline

Posted: April 15, 2014, 5:19 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on April 11, 2014

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

No matter that tenured mathematicians and scientists sympathetic enough to take the time to talk to you about this will agree with me - YOU KNOW BETTER! Based on the many self appraisals of your IQ, knowledge, and skills presented here in these forums, I'm sure you must think Don Catlin and Richard Arnold Epstein should kiss your feet. I don't think they will. And Pascal, Fermat and Einstein, some of whose opinions you would reject as well, are not available to pay their respects.

Do you have any more code snippets to demonstrate your prowess in your chosen dialect of BASIC? Your groupies who have no idea what it means seem to be quite impressed. In my experience, the ability to program a computer does not necessarily correlate positively with other measures of intelligence nor with a person's contributions to the world in general. Sometimes the correlations are negative. You are a prime example in that you can write programs that should reveal the truth to you, but your Innumeracy won't allow it to happen.

Dream on!

--Jimmy4164

P.S. As for the statement you might wish you hadn't made...