Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 24, 2017, 12:09 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Megamillions and Powerball Games

Topic closed. 205 replies. Last post 3 years ago by SergeM.

Page 3 of 14
54
PrintE-mailLink

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 ]  
Avatar

United States
Member #145267
August 1, 2013
1732 Posts
Offline
Posted: March 23, 2014, 11:58 am - IP Logged

I think MM and PB are both awful, but I still play. I also think that the odds are alot higher for both games than what you see on there websites because of dulicate quick pick numbers and how many people that play in your state. Like the Virgin Islands, have they ever had a jackpot win. But, if I had to pick, it would be PB for equal ticket buying.  MM for buying alot of tickets without multiplier.


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: March 23, 2014, 3:16 pm - IP Logged

    I went back and read this. I sometime wonder why G-d sends us on a journey and puts people in our path. I can't /wont elaborate too much but I do have a system that worked so well I got hacked  so you CAN win a lot of money. The answers are right there in front of noses using basic math. Yes I said BASIC math. If you can add 1+1=2 you can master the lottery. The nay Sayers are here to discourage us to quit   Laws of Attraction is where it's at. BTW , I now use a computer with no modem lol

     

    RL keep on trucking until you get it. I've only been at almost a year and most weeks I only miss 1 to 2 balls no matter what fame I play. Now , some weeks I miss them all

    SkyLine69,

    You're missing the point of this thread.  Its purpose is to help you choose the Jackpot Game that best matches your comfort level.  If you've run the simulator, you've seen that UNLESS you win a higher tiered prize, you are going to lose money over time - MOST LIKELY in excess of 80 cents on each dollar wagered.  This is because most of the prize money is held back for the Jackpots.  In terms of the 4 options in this poll, you must decide which is "best" for you based on whether you're willing to absorb higher costs in exchange for bigger Jackpots, or not.

    In another post you said when you buy a ticket, your odds are 50/50 to win.  Not true.  For example, in the Megamillions game, your odds of winning ANYTHING with ONE ticket is 1 in 14.71.

    And yes, you CAN win lots of money in the lottery!  Witness the majority Quick Pick winners!

    Why can't you have fun playing the lottery without having to believe you can "Beat The Odds?"  Those of us who accept the fact that the lottery is a Random Process but still enjoy dreaming about what we'd do if we won, really don't understand you.   And since we don't spend money on Snake Oil software and books, we have more money to buy tickets! Smile

    --Jimmy416
    4

      butch2030's avatar - DiscoBallGlowing
      The KEY ingredient is Combos & Patterns
      Elgin, IL
      United States
      Member #68867
      January 1, 2009
      1225 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: March 23, 2014, 4:50 pm - IP Logged

      "Why can't you have fun playing the lottery without having to believe you can "Beat The Odds?"  Those of us who accept the fact that the lottery is a Random Process but still enjoy dreaming about what we'd do if we won, really don't understand you."

      1) You can't beat the Odds because it is a mathamatical formula based on the number of balls in the game. You can only improve your chances of winning which is not the same as the odds of winning.

      2) The Lottery is not a True Random Process.

      3) We really don't understand YOU.............................

        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
        mid-Ohio
        United States
        Member #9
        March 24, 2001
        19904 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: March 23, 2014, 4:51 pm - IP Logged

        SkyLine69,

        You're missing the point of this thread.  Its purpose is to help you choose the Jackpot Game that best matches your comfort level.  If you've run the simulator, you've seen that UNLESS you win a higher tiered prize, you are going to lose money over time - MOST LIKELY in excess of 80 cents on each dollar wagered.  This is because most of the prize money is held back for the Jackpots.  In terms of the 4 options in this poll, you must decide which is "best" for you based on whether you're willing to absorb higher costs in exchange for bigger Jackpots, or not.

        In another post you said when you buy a ticket, your odds are 50/50 to win.  Not true.  For example, in the Megamillions game, your odds of winning ANYTHING with ONE ticket is 1 in 14.71.

        And yes, you CAN win lots of money in the lottery!  Witness the majority Quick Pick winners!

        Why can't you have fun playing the lottery without having to believe you can "Beat The Odds?"  Those of us who accept the fact that the lottery is a Random Process but still enjoy dreaming about what we'd do if we won, really don't understand you.   And since we don't spend money on Snake Oil software and books, we have more money to buy tickets! Smile

        --Jimmy416
        4

        Why can't you have fun playing the lottery without having to believe you can "Beat The Odds?" 

        Why can't you believe you can "Beat The Odds" and have fun playing the lottery too? What?

         * 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: March 23, 2014, 7:33 pm - IP Logged

          "Why can't you have fun playing the lottery without having to believe you can "Beat The Odds?"  Those of us who accept the fact that the lottery is a Random Process but still enjoy dreaming about what we'd do if we won, really don't understand you."

          1) You can't beat the Odds because it is a mathamatical formula based on the number of balls in the game. You can only improve your chances of winning which is not the same as the odds of winning.

          2) The Lottery is not a True Random Process.

          3) We really don't understand YOU.............................

          Butch2030,

           “You can only improve your chances of winning which is not the same as the odds of winning.

          If you’re referring to your ability to affect the distribution and/or frequency of your winnings and NOT the total amount, then I agree, and I addressed it above in this thread.  For example, people who buy BOX tickets in the Pick-3 game will get 5-6 times as many hits over the long haul as those who play STRAIGHTS. However, if they both play LONG enough, they’ll end up with the same thing, a 50% loss*. Over shorter periods of time, there will be winners. If these winners are System Players, they will be CONVINCED that their systems work! Smile

          I just ran a simple Pick-3 Computer Simulation. It simulates 1,000,000 people buying 5 Straight Quick Picks per day for 365 consecutive days. Those of you who feel compelled to point out that REAL lottery players wouldn’t bet this way, please don’t bother – I know that. This is a simulation of what would be likely to happen, IF THEY DID. OK?  This should send you a message, nonetheless.

          To save time the program did a Pre-Draw of the Lottery’s 365 Draws. Then each of the 1M players were simulated buying 5 tickets per day, which were compared to the pre-draws. Each person’s hits were counted and recorded. Here are the results:

          Total possible outcomes (Per Draw):   1000
                               Payoff for a straight Hit:    500

                                    Yearly Cost             1825

          Hits  #People                  Per Person
                                 Winnings  Costs  Winnings-Costs
            0    161198            0      1825      - 1825


            1    293424        500      1825       -1325


            2    268365      1000      1825         -825


            3    163881     1500       1825         -325


            4      75115     2000       1825        +175


            5     27026      2500       1825        +675

           6       8245      3000       1825      +1175

           7       2157      3500       1825      +1675

           8         477      4000       1825      +2175

           9           94      4500       1825      +2675

          10          18      5000       1825      +3175

          As an exercise, you could use these data to assist you in deriving the formula for the probability of one person getting 0,1,2... hits in a year under this scenario.

          Of course, now we’ll hear from the people who will say that they know when to stop betting, and when to get back in, so they will be SURE to be one of the “18” EVERY year! 

          What I hope is that you can see clearly that it is possible to come out ahead in this game, even over a year. But I also hope you can see that it happens purely by Dumb Luck!

          --Jimmy4164

          *  With adjustments for the fact that $80 and $160 for Box hits result in slightly less than a 50% expectation.

            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

            United States
            Member #59354
            March 13, 2008
            4094 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: March 24, 2014, 11:55 am - IP Logged

            Jimbo

            Nice simulation but it falls short in that is does not show standard deviations.   My question is what

            if a single player managed 15 wins would that constitute a true winning system?  What would be

            your opinion of a control group of 100 people all using the same system managed 10 hits on there

            own?  The truth is, that all these can fall within the realm of possibilities because there is nothing

            IMHO to prevent it so who can tell.

            RL

            Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

            I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

            they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

            USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

              US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: March 24, 2014, 3:42 pm - IP Logged

              Jimbo

              Nice simulation but it falls short in that is does not show standard deviations.   My question is what

              if a single player managed 15 wins would that constitute a true winning system?  What would be

              your opinion of a control group of 100 people all using the same system managed 10 hits on there

              own?  The truth is, that all these can fall within the realm of possibilities because there is nothing

              IMHO to prevent it so who can tell.

              RL

              RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

              You can calculate the standard deviation from the above results if you wish.  Then you could estimate how huge of an outlier your (100) 10 and (1) 15 hit winners would be.  I don't think it would add much to the understanding of what is going on here.  You would probably need to simulate a lot more than a million players to get any more than a fractional person winning 15 times in one year.  You're correct that there is nothing preventing such huge deviations from expected.  Unfortunately, when you observe one of these Random Outliers, you see support for your belief that a SYSTEM could be at work.  Until you can prove that there is some way to divine which balls are more likely to be drawn from the lottery machines in the future, I and most scientifically oriented people will opt for the Random Outlier explanation. 

              Thinking back to your Digit System ideas, I remember [I think] that one of your basic rules was to choose sets for lotto that contained 5 or 6 digits, since the largest number of possible combinations were structured that way.  With this in mind, use the self pick feature in the Powerball / Megamillions simulator suggested in this thread to see if there is any DISADVANTAGE to playing the combination:

               1  2  11  12  21  (1)

              http://justwebware.com/megamillions/megamillions.html

              Good Luck!

              --Jimmy4164

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                United States
                Member #59354
                March 13, 2008
                4094 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: March 24, 2014, 6:02 pm - IP Logged

                Jimbo

                Just as I thought, you can't put a number on what it would take to prove a system.

                 

                 

                I use a 1000 line random generated database combined with the real drawings and

                in this 1000+ list there has been 32 games with four total digits and none with 2 or 3.

                I have done the same for PB and it shows 2 games with 3 digits sets and 52 games with

                4.  Sorry, I have to stay with my data on this one. 

                 

                The linked simulation uses random selections and cannot simulate a players ability to pick

                up on cues that may help.

                 

                I have stopped using DM as my lottery system and now work with prediction of lexie digits.

                It may be a while before I get things worked out but that's my choice.  I now play the new

                triple play 4-60 and working on two different prediction tools which will not be discussed

                here in any detail.  The main reason for the switch is that I get 9 lines for $2.00.   The upper

                predictor is the best code I have ever written and I have big hopes for it.  I attached a pic of

                the second triple play drawing backtest.  I did not win anything in that drawing but I think it

                shows what it's capable of.  It managed to predict 17 out of 18 needed for a JP win.  One click

                5 lines.  Also notice prediction #1 missed by 3 hitting 15 of 18.

                 

                triple play

                 

                RL

                Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                  US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                  x1kosmic's avatar - neptune vg2.gif

                  United States
                  Member #48046
                  December 7, 2006
                  1699 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: March 24, 2014, 6:29 pm - IP Logged

                  Well put LottoMetro.

                  Adulane62:

                  "You are talking gibberish again!"
                  If you look up "phenomena" you'll find that what I'm asking is what you think the "cause" is of your 21-25 balls being more likely to pop up, and consequently, what causes the other balls to lay low.  Does it still sound like gibberish?

                  Looking at it another way, when you say...
                  "...I was able to eliminate 17,191,865 combinations!"
                  ... another question comes to mind.  How do you manage to transfer this information to the balls inside the machine which will be used in the drawing you're betting on?

                  Sorry for asking hard questions, but I would think that a lot of people here would like to know the answers.


                  Hey Jimmy,

                    I was wondering if you could do me a favor,

                        go back mabey about a year's worth of drawings,  ( in Power Ball)

                   and check out,  how often  a single digit number,   1 through 8,

                    that hits with number 9,   it'll  skip some draws,   and that same number will hit with number 9 again.

                              can you tell me if that happens  more often,  as opposed to number 9  hitting with no single digit number.

                       I would be transfering that information to my bet-slip,   not the machine.

                              I haven't had much time to post in a while,  but I'm with audulane62,

                  really trying to get 5 white balls,   but getting myself  in a position to be,   close.


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: March 24, 2014, 6:40 pm - IP Logged

                    RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                    You said, "Just as I thought, you can't put a number on what it would take to prove a system."

                    No, I can't, because what you're looking for does not exist.

                    You also said,"I use a 1000 line random generated database combined with the real drawings and in this 1000+ list there has been 32 games with four total digits and none with 2 or 3."

                    This is the root of your misunderstanding of randomness.  Your database is miniscule compared to the total possibilities.  That you would accept observations based on your tiny set of results, is telling.   But I guess you like them because they support your belief that sets with only 2 digits are "inferior." You've probably never read the psychological research papers I've linked to here which explained how and why we humans have trouble understanding random processes and tend to be influenced by short term results.  Right?

                    Did you try this set in the Powerball or Megamillions simulator?

                    1  2  11  12  21  (1)

                    http://justwebware.com/megamillions/megamillions.html 

                    Good Luck!

                    --Jimmy4164

                      Jon D's avatar - calotterylogo
                      Los Angeles, California
                      United States
                      Member #103813
                      January 5, 2011
                      1530 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: March 24, 2014, 6:48 pm - IP Logged

                      Profit! Thumbs Up

                      Too bad not this easy in the real world...

                        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                        United States
                        Member #59354
                        March 13, 2008
                        4094 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: March 25, 2014, 8:33 am - IP Logged

                        Jimbo

                        Like I said before I am not that good at suffering dumb asses but will make one final atempt.

                        If you say that your two digit set will show as often as sets containing 4, 5 or 6 digits then I

                        conclude your RNG is skewed.  If a RNG does not mimic the population and distribution of the

                        matrix it's not a very good RNG.  I have tested my theories against millions and millions of sets

                        and it always comes out as I have expressed. 

                         

                        While your other little simulation may prove that it's possible for dumb luck to account for some

                        winning more than others, "which I agree in general,"  I would ask that before you take it as

                        authoritative proof that no system can do better than random that you name these dumb-luck

                        winners and run the simulation many times to see if the same winners continue to show up.   If

                        the same dumb-luck winners show up consistently then I will gladly change my position on the subject.

                             

                        What I see here is just another attempt by you to impress those who are easy influenced.  You

                        no doubt think that I am stupid but I am much smarter then you think that I think I am.   Back until

                        10 or 12 years ago everyone was convinced the speed of light was a constant.  It now appears that

                        light is slowing down and has been ever since the beginning.  Was it by chance that Einstein lived

                        within a narrow time line so that E=MC2 was possible?  Hmmmm, good question.  If he had been born

                        maybe 6000 years ago when the speed of light is believed to have been up to 10 times it's current

                        speed maybe he would have equated that E=(M*(C2/10)).  You cannot prove my wins are a product of

                        chance, nor can I prove they are not.   If Einstein had simply said E=M*(299,792,458 squared) would

                        that fix the problem?   

                         

                        PS. no I do not read the links you post.


                        RL

                        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                          United States
                          Member #59354
                          March 13, 2008
                          4094 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: March 25, 2014, 9:38 am - IP Logged

                          Jimbo

                          Another misconception on your part is your assumption that I am applying my logic to a single set.

                          If I was playing one set at a time then of course just as each number has the same odds of showing

                          so does each set.  Playing one line IMHO, one might as well play a QP.  If one runs enough data then

                          no one set regardless of the digits it contains will fair any better than another.  Each set in my 5-39

                          will show around once in every 575757 drawings, that does not say that some sets won't show more

                          than once. 

                          RL

                          Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                          I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                          they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                          USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                            US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


                            United States
                            Member #93947
                            July 10, 2010
                            2180 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: March 25, 2014, 7:13 pm - IP Logged

                            RL-RANDOMLOGIC says,

                            "If you say that your two digit set will show as often as sets containing 4, 5 or 6 digits then I conclude your RNG is skewed. If a RNG does not mimic the population and distribution of the matrix it's not a very good RNG.  I have tested my theories against millions and millions of sets and it always comes out as I have expressed."

                            I did not say that.  The FACT that there are more combinations containing 5 or 6 unique digits than 2 does NOT mean that selecting them will increase your chances of winning!  This and other flaws in your thinking are at the crux of your problem, and why you are chasing your tail.  Don Catlin showed how foolish this belief is several years ago, and it was reported here, as you probably remember.

                            "You no doubt think that I am stupid but I am much smarter then you think that I think I am."

                            You are wrong about this too.  John Paulos, in Innumeracy, gives many examples of highly intelligent and skilled people who have fallen into the same trap as you have.

                            "PS. no I do not read the links you post."

                            It shows.  But you can begin to release yourself from this trap by clicking on the link below, and watching how this set performs compared to your "superior" sets containing 5 or 6 digits...

                              1  2  11  12  21  (1)

                            http://justwebware.com/megamillions/megamillions.html

                            --Jimmy4164

                            In the event RL fails to click here, perhaps someone else would like to report on their experiences with this set.

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                              United States
                              Member #59354
                              March 13, 2008
                              4094 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: March 26, 2014, 11:56 am - IP Logged

                              Jimbo

                              You still don't understand the concept.   If you play only sets that are built from 2 digits then you

                              will reduce your chances of hitting a JP within your lifetime.   There is a finate number of sets that

                              can be assembled using only two digits.   Each game resets the odds as all the balls are returned

                              to the hopper.  Let's take my 5-39 game for an example.  There are 6 numbers 1-2-11-12-21-22 

                              which can be arranged into 6 different sets.

                              01 02 11 12 21
                              01 02 11 12 22
                              01 02 11 21 22
                              01 02 12 21 22
                              01 11 12 21 22
                              02 11 12 21 22

                              The probability of one of these 6 lines showing is one in 575757 and even though these odds are the 

                              same for any other set being drawn the short term history for the game would agree with me.  Time is

                              a factor here.  Lets say a person has played for 10 years, 365.25 *10 = 36,525 drawings.  The six lines

                              above make up 0.000010421 of the total possibilities and if as I say that the drawings will mimic the

                              population and distribution of the matrix then I expect these sets to show within the time frame given

                              35,525*0.000010421=.37, less than once.   It's always possible that  the first draw could be one of the

                              lines listed above however improbable it may be.  It's all a matter of possible combinations and if you

                              study the history of a game you will find that the drawings do follow the population and distribution of

                              the matrix.  If however I ignore time, then, well we both know the answer to that one.  My selecting 5

                              or 6 digit sets is based on P&D logic.   In the last 1000 SM-Cash games there has not been a single two

                              digit set drawn. 

                               

                              PS.

                              The bottom line is that it could take up to 27.02 years of playing these 6 lines every game for even one of

                              them to show, one might show in the very next game but I doubt it.  If I suffer from a fallacy as you believe

                              then it's a logical one given I don't have forever to play. 

                               

                              RL

                              Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                              I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                              they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                              USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                                US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                                 
                                Page 3 of 14