Welcome Guest
You last visited April 20, 2019, 5:13 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Megamillions and Powerball Games

Topic closed. 205 replies. Last post 5 years ago by SergeM.

 Page 12 of 14

Which Play is the Best Bet?

 Powerball [ 9 ] [24.32%] Powerball with Powerplay [ 4 ] [10.81%] Megamillions [ 12 ] [32.43%] Megamillions with Megaplier [ 12 ] [32.43%] Total Valid Votes [ 37 ] Discarded Votes [ 7 ]

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 12:15 am - IP Logged

Here is a list that shows what we play for every time my 5-39 is played regardless
of the numbers, digits, etc....

prizes 5 of 5 = 1      in 575757
prizes 4 of 5 = 170    in 575757
prizes 3 of 5 = 5,610  in 575757
prizes 2 of 5 = 59,840 in 575757
_____________________
Total possible prizes  = 65,621
_____________________

The overall odds of winning a prize = 575,757 / 65,621 = 8.773974 and this is the
most important number a player needs to know.

We can see that for every ticket we play there are 65,621 possible sets in the
matrix that will at least break even for this game. 5,610 of the 65,621 will pay
10 to 1 and 170 that pays 250 to 1.

The big one, the grand daddy of them all, the hardest to catch, the elusive 5of5
will always be 1 in 575757. Any reduction of the matrix even by one line can remove
any chance of a JP prize.

Jimbo says that I suffer innumericy but let me lay this to rest. The thing here
is that we must remember that every line played has overall odds of 1 in 8.773947
for winning a prize. Just for fun let's do a little math, let's say that I play 12
lines, 12*65621=787452. Next we check to see how the 12 lines combined stack up in
overall chances to win a prize.

787452/575757=1.36768. The overall odds are 1 in 8.773974 and 12/8.773974=1.36768.
Hmmmmm, both have the same chances of winning the same number of prizes.  This is
also the same if I play 12 lines all with the same numbers or if each set contains
different numbers.

Player #1
01-02-11-21-22
01-02-11-21-22

Player #2
01-02-03-04-05
06-07-08-09-10

As I have said in the past you can't change the odds for the game without changing
the matrix.

All lines have the same number of prizes but does playing 2 lines with the same
numbers fair as well overall as playing two lines with different numbers?

The answer to this may seem a bit counter intuitive but both are the same. Remember I
said that each line has a fixed number of possible prizes for each draw.  At first
thought one might assume that playing the same set twice will only have 1 in 65,621
chances of matching at least 2 numbers where playing 2 different lines would have twice
the number of chances.

What one must consider is that anytime player #1's set falls within the range of numbers
drawn then they will win on both tickets where player #2 might only win one.

I say that no matter how you twist it, the chances and odds are always those that are

With all this being said there is only one method that will produce results better than
the expected over time. All the above depends on making random choices so one must conclude
that if a system is doing better in the long run then something else must be going on.

The whole business behind the digit system is that I can predict or guess the digits
that will show with a much greater accuracy then I can if picking numbers.  Playing 5
or 6 digits just puts me in a better position more times than not. The digit system is
way more than playing 5 or 6 digits and saying that simply by doing this I will win is
foolishness.

My analysis is paying off for my 5-39 but as yet I have not been able to apply it to the
big games.  Everything boils down to "can I predict the digits." If I can, even to a small
degree then my selections and the actual drawing arn't totally random.

RL

....

United States
Member #93943
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 5:44 am - 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.S.  Be forewarned.  There's a LOT of competition out there for Lottery Prediction Software.

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

In your second to last paragraph immediately above, it's not clear who you're trying to convince, me or you.

Back on March 26th, in this thread, you said, “If you play only sets that are built from 2 digits then you will reduce your chances of hitting a JP within your lifetime.”

This is unequivocally wrong!  And until you can be convinced of this fact, you will continue to waste large amounts of precious time trying to INCREASE your "chances of hitting a JP."  I am working on a colorful post that I think might convince, maybe not you, but at least a few people reading here that what I’m saying is true.

Based on one of your earlier postings describing your digit system, I derived the following:

In the Total Universe of (5,39) Sets…

146784   of  575757  have 2, 3, 4, 7, or 8  different digits or  0.25494

428973   of  575757  have 5 or 6               different digits or  0.74506

In other words, there are approximately 3 times as many sets containing 5 or 6 digits, than all the rest combined.  And yes, this is the same “population and distribution” you will find if you count the digits in the sets from Quick Pick machines as well as the ones produced by the Lottery Draws.

However, these facts, the expected results of Combinatorics and the Base 10 Number System, in NO WAY, support your quoted claim above.

If you think you can prove the opposite of this, you should probably start working on it.

Stay tuned.

--Jimmy4164

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 7:03 am - IP Logged

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

In your second to last paragraph immediately above, it's not clear who you're trying to convince, me or you.

Back on March 26th, in this thread, you said, “If you play only sets that are built from 2 digits then you will reduce your chances of hitting a JP within your lifetime.”

This is unequivocally wrong!  And until you can be convinced of this fact, you will continue to waste large amounts of precious time trying to INCREASE your "chances of hitting a JP."  I am working on a colorful post that I think might convince, maybe not you, but at least a few people reading here that what I’m saying is true.

Based on one of your earlier postings describing your digit system, I derived the following:

In the Total Universe of (5,39) Sets…

146784   of  575757  have 2, 3, 4, 7, or 8  different digits or  0.25494

428973   of  575757  have 5 or 6               different digits or  0.74506

In other words, there are approximately 3 times as many sets containing 5 or 6 digits, than all the rest combined.  And yes, this is the same “population and distribution” you will find if you count the digits in the sets from Quick Pick machines as well as the ones produced by the Lottery Draws.

However, these facts, the expected results of Combinatorics and the Base 10 Number System, in NO WAY, support your quoted claim above.

If you think you can prove the opposite of this, you should probably start working on it.

Stay tuned.

--Jimmy4164

You can only win lottery games in the short term.

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 7:11 am - IP Logged

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

Earlier you said, "There are still disciplined people who refuse to give up hope that they will find the missing link regardless of what the math says."

I don't know anyone in biology, zoology, anthropology, or archaeology who are looking for a "missing link."  And I know a few, personally.  Interestingly, the kind of reasoning required to understand how evolution works is very similar to what is required to understand why, when you've chosen one of the majority sets in a (5,39) lotto, ONE with 5 or 6 unique digits, the probability that the lottery will match your set is still 1 in 575,757, the same as for a set with only 2 digits.  And this is notwithstanding the fact that you were able to display "simulation" results earlier that, TO YOU, seemed to indicate otherwise.

Perhaps this video will help you with your confusion.  Don't give up at Part 1.  Part 2 especially addresses your analogy of a computer trying to randomly generate a set of drivers.

--Jimmy4164

Humans have not evolved enough to understand the evolution process. Humans can only react to the evolution process by being RISK AVERSE OR RISK PRONE.

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 9:04 am - IP Logged

THRIFTY

Humans have not evolved at all, technology however has due to population increases.

Since the time of our earliest ancestors the second law of thermodynamics has been in

play. Entropy.  We are getting weaker and weaker as a species as we are copies of

copies of copies of copies of copies etc.............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................

RL

....

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 9:30 am - IP Logged

Jimbo

Don't waste the time, you won't apply the correct application to the many different aspects.  You are

so into your ego that all you look for is fault.  I reread the thread which prompted me to write the above

post.  The reason for it was to show you that I do understand that which you think I am unaware of.

Sorry you don't agree with the statement that you will reduce your chances of winning a JP in your

lifetime but it's true.  In my many test of random over many years these type of sets don't show that

often.   Please note that the set has the same odds as any other set but if you play this set you can

expect it to show only once within so many drawings, that amount is most likely longer than you have

left.  This also applies to many other types of lines and is not limited to just your set.  I use digits in

such a way that it gives me the most coverage I can get in the fewest possible.  Nothing more than

this is meant by the statement.   I hope to hit the JP when I play but the real effort is in trying to trap

as many smaller prizes as I can.  The game odds would say that your set has the same chance to show

but actual test I have ran say otherwise.  I don't care if you agree or not it's just my personal observation.

I think it's my personal observations that gets your panties all bunched up.   When you post your colorful

post I hope you attempt to put your EGO aside and try to understand what I wrote.  Many times your

response is addressed to me but I can't figure out why because you miss what I meant by a mile.  The

digits I choose to play determines the range of possible sets that if the drawing falls within then I will

win way more than expected.  If you study my last post you should see how that certain digits can be

combined to give the best coverage based on my beliefs that the next set drawn will fall within some

range.  All that it is doing is expanding the field I choose to play.  Nothing more nothing less.  If my digit

choices are incorrect then well they are incorrect, so what.

RL

....

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 9:55 am - IP Logged

Thrifty

Here is an example, geneticists decided to test evolution and for their test they choose the fruit fly.

The fruit flies life span is around 10 days which is why they choose it as the test subject.  I don't

remember how many years that they tried to introduce mutations that would change the fruit fly

but it represented thousands of generations.  Their conclusion was that the fruit fly refused to be

anything but a fruit fly.

RL

....

Los Angeles, California
United States
Member #103809
January 5, 2011
1530 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 10:05 am - IP Logged

Humans have not evolved enough to understand the evolution process. Humans can only react to the evolution process by being RISK AVERSE OR RISK PRONE.

Human beings are not evolving anymore, if anything, we are devolving.

Thanks to modern society, technology and government benefits, the stupid and weak and lazy not only survive but are prosperous and multiply in great numbers.

Pretty soon we'll all be a bunch of fat, lazy, stupid blobs whizzing around on beds like in the movie Wall-E, being served by robots. At that point, the machines will take over and use us for batteries.

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:06 am - IP Logged

Human beings are not evolving anymore, if anything, we are devolving.

Thanks to modern society, technology and government benefits, the stupid and weak and lazy not only survive but are prosperous and multiply in great numbers.

Pretty soon we'll all be a bunch of fat, lazy, stupid blobs whizzing around on beds like in the movie Wall-E, being served by robots. At that point, the machines will take over and use us for batteries.

Lottery players are being blamed for the high unemployment rate that the USA is facing. Lottery players are lazy people who do not like to work for a living. So they say.

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:06 am - IP Logged

Human beings are not evolving anymore, if anything, we are devolving.

Thanks to modern society, technology and government benefits, the stupid and weak and lazy not only survive but are prosperous and multiply in great numbers.

Pretty soon we'll all be a bunch of fat, lazy, stupid blobs whizzing around on beds like in the movie Wall-E, being served by robots. At that point, the machines will take over and use us for batteries.

I agree

....

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:07 am - IP Logged

THRIFTY

Humans have not evolved at all, technology however has due to population increases.

Since the time of our earliest ancestors the second law of thermodynamics has been in

play. Entropy.  We are getting weaker and weaker as a species as we are copies of

copies of copies of copies of copies etc.............................................................................

..........................................................................................................................................

..........................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................

RL

TIME IS MONEY.

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:15 am - IP Logged

Thrifty

Here is an example, geneticists decided to test evolution and for their test they choose the fruit fly.

The fruit flies life span is around 10 days which is why they choose it as the test subject.  I don't

remember how many years that they tried to introduce mutations that would change the fruit fly

but it represented thousands of generations.  Their conclusion was that the fruit fly refused to be

anything but a fruit fly.

RL

Survival of the fittest. Large population of fishes survive from the sharks.

United States
Member #59352
March 13, 2008
5041 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:16 am - IP Logged

Jimbo

Are you sure my earlier post is correct, I may just be playing with your head.  Here is a advanced

question for you.  Which of the groups below has the greatest chance of winning a prize in the next

5-39 drawing.

Group #1

01-02-11-12-21

01-02-11-12-21   5 numbers * 3

01-02-11-12-21

Group #2

01-02-03-04-05

06-07-08-09-10  15 numbers in play

11-12-13-14-15

Group #3

01-04-15-23-38

08-13-24-25-33  all 3 are 6 digit sets, 1-2-3-4-5-8

02-18-22-34-35

RL

....

Los Angeles, California
United States
Member #103809
January 5, 2011
1530 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:18 am - IP Logged

Lottery players are being blamed for the high unemployment rate that the USA is facing. Lottery players are lazy people who do not like to work for a living. So they say.

I blame the high unemployment on a bunch of rich irresponsible fat cats who GAMBLED other people's wealth away on derivatives, CDOs and other complex financial products. But that's another story.

Many lottery players are retired people who worked all their lives and now have lots of equity and disposable income and don't care about throwning money away on the lottery. Just look at all the old farts winning in Florida. Remember, you can't take it with you.

100
NEW YORK
United States
Member #90531
April 29, 2010
12428 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 17, 2014, 11:20 am - IP Logged

I agree

I do not mind supporting all humans and non humans with the taxes that I pay.

 Page 12 of 14