Welcome Guest
You last visited December 4, 2016, 7:09 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Does your odds increase tremendously by millions just like this? Read for details.

Topic closed. 29 replies. Last post 2 years ago by dr san.

 Page 2 of 2
Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 10, 2014, 8:48 pm - IP Logged

Same if you decide to play 1-5-15-26-41-48. You're only playing 6 numbers and only covering 1 line of possibilities.

My bad, didn't type out enough numbers in my post, but you get the idea.

I think people focus too much on patterns and playing numbers without realizing that the winning ticket is an entire line and not just select numbers. You can believe all you want that last drawing's numbers affects the next, but that doesn't change the fact that there are X possibilities and X-t ways to lose.

I can cover 30 of the 49 numbers, which would cost me 593,775 lines, but that still leaves 19 uncovered numbers and 13,390,041 losing possibilities. To have a 50% chance of winning you would need to cover nearly 44 of the 49 possible numbers. There's really no winning!

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 4:10 am - IP Logged

In no way does this strategy improve your odds. More tickets give you more chances, but arbitrarily picking numbers does not. It doesn't matter what numbers you play, because there are still X ways that can lose. If you decide to play 1-2-3-4-5-6, there are still 49-6 = 43 numbers you didn't play and 13,983,815 ways to lose. Same if you decide to play 5-15-26-41-48. You're only playing 5 numbers and only covering 1 line of possibilities.

1 line = 1 combination. So buying 15 lines still leaves 13,983,801 ways to lose. Coming up with conditional odds given that you already matched 2 numbers is deceptive and honestly a waste of time, because it doesn't reflect the actual probability of winning, which does not change. I can buy 15 tickets and say my odds are 1 in 932,254.4 which is true! But this is equal to 1-(13983801/13983816), which is exactly the same as saying you have 13,983,801 ways to lose. So the odds may sound different depending on how you carve up the numbers, but in the end the chances don't really change....unless you buy more tickets of course.

Btw the probability of 2/6 numbers matching for 2 draws in a row is about 1.75%. And you're worried about the odds after that?

Are you sure the probability of 2/6 numbers is that low? Looking at the histories of multiple lottos, just in the first page of about 50 draws, there's an average of 10 draws that has 2 or more numbers from the last draw.

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 4:31 am - IP Logged

Are you sure the probability of 2/6 numbers is that low? Looking at the histories of multiple lottos, just in the first page of about 50 draws, there's an average of 10 draws that has 2 or more numbers from the last draw.

If it were easy, lotteries wouldn't make money  85% of combinations in 6/49 (11,872,042) will match one or no numbers in the drawing.

The probability of any 2 given numbers showing up in a drawing is equivalent to you matching 2 numbers on your ticket.

Every drawing is independent. Thus, the probability of "matching" 2 numbers two drawings in a row is simply the above probability squared.

For 6/49, there are 1,851,150 possible 2-number combinations. 1,851,150/13,983,816 = 0.132378. This is the probability of a specific pair appearing.

0.132378^2 ≈ 1.75%

If you bump that up to include all possible 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-number combinations, then that improves the probability to 0.151016, which squares to 2.28%.

It sounds paradoxical but it is not unusual for streaks of the nature you describe to occur. This is not necessarily indicative of non-randomness. If my calculations are correct, the odds for the particular series you stated to occur would be about 1 in 75,733.

However, you are in Singapore, correct? It would not be out of the question that your lottery drawings could be biased. Some countries do not use the highest standards of equipment etc. Mexico, Italy, to name a few, have a history of statistically-biased drawings.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 4:58 am - IP Logged

If it were easy, lotteries wouldn't make money  85% of combinations in 6/49 (11,872,042) will match one or no numbers in the drawing.

The probability of any 2 given numbers showing up in a drawing is equivalent to you matching 2 numbers on your ticket.

Every drawing is independent. Thus, the probability of "matching" 2 numbers two drawings in a row is simply the above probability squared.

For 6/49, there are 1,851,150 possible 2-number combinations. 1,851,150/13,983,816 = 0.132378. This is the probability of a specific pair appearing.

0.132378^2 ≈ 1.75%

If you bump that up to include all possible 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-number combinations, then that improves the probability to 0.151016, which squares to 2.28%.

It sounds paradoxical but it is not unusual for streaks of the nature you describe to occur. This is not necessarily indicative of non-randomness. If my calculations are correct, the odds for the particular series you stated to occur would be about 1 in 75,733.

However, you are in Singapore, correct? It would not be out of the question that your lottery drawings could be biased. Some countries do not use the highest standards of equipment etc. Mexico, Italy, to name a few, have a history of statistically-biased drawings.

There's no way my state's lottery is bias, it's one of the strictest and non corrupted country in the world. I'm not talking just about my lottery, you can go to any country's lottery history and see the same, every 10 or so draws there's a 2 number match. And I looked it up, the probabilities of matching 2 numbers with your ticket is about 1 in 8. Remember we're talking about 649 lottery.

Infact I just did a test run with a lottery generator, I get 2 numbers right frequently.

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 5:03 am - IP Logged

There's no way my state's lottery is bias, it's one of the strictest and non corrupted country in the world. I'm not talking just about my lottery, you can go to any country's lottery history and see the same, every 10 or so draws there's a 2 number match. And I looked it up, the probabilities of matching 2 numbers with your ticket is about 1 in 8. Remember we're talking about 649 lottery.

Infact I just did a test run with a lottery generator, I get 2 numbers right frequently.

And I looked it up, the probabilities of matching 2 numbers with your ticket is about 1 in 8. Remember we're talking about 649 lottery.

That's the odds, but nevertheless the answer is identical.

1/8 (technically it's 1 in 7.55) = 0.132 which is the exact same I gave for matching 2 numbers.

And again, matching 2 numbers 2 drawings in a row (or 2 numbers showing up 2 drawings in a row) is simply that number squared. There is a difference between matching 2 numbers, and doing so consecutively.

The probability of having 1 or more drawings with duplicate pairs in a series of 10 is about 16%. It's not hard to cherry-pick if you're looking for a specific pattern but either way you try to analyze it, the end result will be the same.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 5:46 am - IP Logged

And I looked it up, the probabilities of matching 2 numbers with your ticket is about 1 in 8. Remember we're talking about 649 lottery.

That's the odds, but nevertheless the answer is identical.

1/8 (technically it's 1 in 7.55) = 0.132 which is the exact same I gave for matching 2 numbers.

And again, matching 2 numbers 2 drawings in a row (or 2 numbers showing up 2 drawings in a row) is simply that number squared. There is a difference between matching 2 numbers, and doing so consecutively.

The probability of having 1 or more drawings with duplicate pairs in a series of 10 is about 16%. It's not hard to cherry-pick if you're looking for a specific pattern but either way you try to analyze it, the end result will be the same.

I'm actually not following, isn't 1/8 (or 7.55) 12.5%?

Oh, so you're saying the actual percentage for two numbers to pop up in 2 draws... Ok, I get it now, but well, we don't need them to pop up in 2 draws, we're choosing numbers from the first draw that might pop up in the next, so we only really need to calculate for 1, which is 1/8. Isn't that so?

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 5:57 am - IP Logged

I'm actually not following, isn't 1/8 (or 7.55) 12.5%?

Oh, so you're saying the actual percentage for two numbers to pop up in 2 draws... Ok, I get it now, but well, we don't need them to pop up in 2 draws, we're choosing numbers from the first draw that might pop up in the next, so we only really need to calculate for 1, which is 1/8. Isn't that so?

1/7.55 = 13.245%. My original calculations I gave the exact number of combinations that match, which is how the lottery comes up with their odds.

You seem to contradict yourself here, if you don't need them to pop up in 2 draws, then why would we need them to pop up in one draw followed by another (1+1=2)? The 1/8 or whatever is for a specific pair to show up in any one draw, not back-to-back or multiple draws. Example: there is a 13.2% chance that 1 and 3 will show up in any drawing. See, this is where probability can get confusing. 13.2% chance of showing up in any one draw doesn't mean there is a 13.2% chance it will show up in consecutive draws. For multiple draws of specific numbers you have to bring binomial probability into the picture.

I put together a basic sim to illustrate this visually. The first chart is basically the distribution....if you look closely you can see how "2" is hovering just above 0.12. This is for a single drawing. I duplicated the distribution and simulated both at the same time (they ran separately, the distributions are simulations themselves), then forecasted when both had 2 or more matches (i.e. match 2,3,4,5,6) so in essence this would be 1 drawing followed by another. I ran this about 5 million times. The result turned out to basically be the same of what I have been saying, 2.28% since I included matches of 3+ numbers.

I'm not necessarily disputing that these lotteries indeed have many drawings of multiple pairs, but have you also considered how many drawings there are? It wouldn't be proper to say that a pair occurs 1 in 10 draws on average if you have only looked at 50 out of 1000 drawings. I have analyzed many lotteries and in the short run the empirical observations may deviate from the theoretical distribution but if they are not biased then in the long-run they always converge.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 6:58 am - IP Logged

1/7.55 = 13.245%. My original calculations I gave the exact number of combinations that match, which is how the lottery comes up with their odds.

You seem to contradict yourself here, if you don't need them to pop up in 2 draws, then why would we need them to pop up in one draw followed by another (1+1=2)? The 1/8 or whatever is for a specific pair to show up in any one draw, not back-to-back or multiple draws. Example: there is a 13.2% chance that 1 and 3 will show up in any drawing. See, this is where probability can get confusing. 13.2% chance of showing up in any one draw doesn't mean there is a 13.2% chance it will show up in consecutive draws. For multiple draws of specific numbers you have to bring binomial probability into the picture.

I put together a basic sim to illustrate this visually. The first chart is basically the distribution....if you look closely you can see how "2" is hovering just above 0.12. This is for a single drawing. I duplicated the distribution and simulated both at the same time (they ran separately, the distributions are simulations themselves), then forecasted when both had 2 or more matches (i.e. match 2,3,4,5,6) so in essence this would be 1 drawing followed by another. I ran this about 5 million times. The result turned out to basically be the same of what I have been saying, 2.28% since I included matches of 3+ numbers.

I'm not necessarily disputing that these lotteries indeed have many drawings of multiple pairs, but have you also considered how many drawings there are? It wouldn't be proper to say that a pair occurs 1 in 10 draws on average if you have only looked at 50 out of 1000 drawings. I have analyzed many lotteries and in the short run the empirical observations may deviate from the theoretical distribution but if they are not biased then in the long-run they always converge.

I don't need them to show up back to back, because I'm taking the numbers, no matter what it is, from the first draw.

So I'm not looking for any specific 2 numbers to appear for the first draw, just any number.

Today it came out 12, 15, 20, 33, 45, 49.
Ok, great.

Now I take the 6 numbers and arrange them in pairs, for any combination, so it takes me 15 tickets to get all combinations of 2.

Now the next draw comes. The chance that one of my tickets (based on the previous 6 numbers) have a pair match in the next draw is 1/8.

This is what I'm saying.

So if I'm buying 15 tickets like that, for every draw, 1/8 of the time I would have a pair match.

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 7:29 am - IP Logged

I don't need them to show up back to back, because I'm taking the numbers, no matter what it is, from the first draw.

So I'm not looking for any specific 2 numbers to appear for the first draw, just any number.

Today it came out 12, 15, 20, 33, 45, 49.
Ok, great.

Now I take the 6 numbers and arrange them in pairs, for any combination, so it takes me 15 tickets to get all combinations of 2.

Now the next draw comes. The chance that one of my tickets (based on the previous 6 numbers) have a pair match in the next draw is 1/8.

This is what I'm saying.

So if I'm buying 15 tickets like that, for every draw, 1/8 of the time I would have a pair match.

Ohhhhhkay, I think I understand clearly now. I was just about to post that I may have been thinking the wrong thing (I tend to confuse myself times ) because I checked ToTo and another lotto and the data didn't seem to make sense.

What I really should have been saying/thinking all along is that because your chances for any pair are 1 in 7.55 or whatever, then it doesn't matter what pair you choose for the next draw. I basically got hung up on specific pair in specific sequence, which is why probability was so low. Tbh now I feel silly posting charts and all

I looked through ToTo going back to 2008 but only this past October did it switch to 6/49 so not much data to go on there; however, out of the 653 draws prior, 104 of them (15.93%) had 3 or more numbers that were also present in the prior draw. This is quite close to the [then] theoretical of 17.53%. The other lottery was at about 9% when the theoretical was 12.7%, but the difference doesn't raise any alarms. I may still be doing this wrong but I'm going to move on to something else!

Anyway, in this case, it looks like you've answered your own question and hopefully I've helped somehow. Because if the probabilities of matching numbers from last drawing are equal to probabilities of drawing different ones, then there is no reason to believe that using the ones from the last drawing improve your odds. If last draw 1-2-3-4-5-6 came out, then there is a 15.10% (6/49) chance that any 2, 3, 4, 5, or even 6 of those numbers show up again, just like there is a 15.10% chance that I match that many numbers in the next drawing (regardless of what numbers I choose).

I guess an analogy would be flavored candies with different colors on the outside. Each candy has a unique flavor inside but the outside color changes every time you reach in and take out 6 (before putting them back). You can change the outside color all you want but it doesn't change what's inside each candy. It kinda goes back to what I was saying about possibilities. You can arbitrarily choose select possibilities but it doesn't eliminate others, and that which is probable tends to happen.

If you buy 15 tickets, wheeling or not, then you should see a match of 2 or more numbers. I mean, there is only a 8.5% chance you won't (again, not wheeling).

Right? Each ticket has a 15.10% chance of matching 2 or more numbers in the drawing. Using Rule of Complements (1-0.1510)^15 = 0.08583

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

Economy class
Belgium
Member #123700
February 27, 2012
4035 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 7:49 am - IP Logged

K: 1 2
W: 3 4 5 6

KW:

1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 6
1 2 3 5 6
1 2 4 5 6

Outcome:
K score: 0 1 2
W score: 0 1 2 3 4
K: 2 + W: 4 cannot

Probability win over full system, costs and odds when
1 AND 2 are correct and the rest of numbers are in the wheel in any order.

Conclusion:
Chances for a jackpot improve when all the keys are correct.
Chances for a jackpot are none when more than no key is wrong.

Do you improve your odds? Only when your keys are right, then yes and in all other cases no.

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 7:57 am - IP Logged

Ohhhhhkay, I think I understand clearly now. I was just about to post that I may have been thinking the wrong thing (I tend to confuse myself times ) because I checked ToTo and another lotto and the data didn't seem to make sense.

What I really should have been saying/thinking all along is that because your chances for any pair are 1 in 7.55 or whatever, then it doesn't matter what pair you choose for the next draw. I basically got hung up on specific pair in specific sequence, which is why probability was so low. Tbh now I feel silly posting charts and all

I looked through ToTo going back to 2008 but only this past October did it switch to 6/49 so not much data to go on there; however, out of the 653 draws prior, 104 of them (15.93%) had 3 or more numbers that were also present in the prior draw. This is quite close to the [then] theoretical of 17.53%. The other lottery was at about 9% when the theoretical was 12.7%, but the difference doesn't raise any alarms. I may still be doing this wrong but I'm going to move on to something else!

Anyway, in this case, it looks like you've answered your own question and hopefully I've helped somehow. Because if the probabilities of matching numbers from last drawing are equal to probabilities of drawing different ones, then there is no reason to believe that using the ones from the last drawing improve your odds. If last draw 1-2-3-4-5-6 came out, then there is a 15.10% (6/49) chance that any 2, 3, 4, 5, or even 6 of those numbers show up again, just like there is a 15.10% chance that I match that many numbers in the next drawing (regardless of what numbers I choose).

I guess an analogy would be flavored candies with different colors on the outside. Each candy has a unique flavor inside but the outside color changes every time you reach in and take out 6 (before putting them back). You can change the outside color all you want but it doesn't change what's inside each candy. It kinda goes back to what I was saying about possibilities. You can arbitrarily choose select possibilities but it doesn't eliminate others, and that which is probable tends to happen.

If you buy 15 tickets, wheeling or not, then you should see a match of 2 or more numbers. I mean, there is only a 8.5% chance you won't (again, not wheeling).

Right? Each ticket has a 15.10% chance of matching 2 or more numbers in the drawing. Using Rule of Complements (1-0.1510)^15 = 0.08583

I understood your explanation of why your probabilities were low and knew your equation was correct, but I realized we were talking about different stuff that's what I was trying to clear up. :D

Yeap, it's actually 1/8 for any 6 group of numbers, not just the previous draw. Actually, I have to admit I sorta blanked that out, because in reality, I don't buy 15 every week, I just do that whenever there's been quite a few draws with no previous numbers. So in a way it gave me an illusion of control over the 6 numbers and 1/8 chance. It's not for sure, but if there's been 5 draws with no previous numbers, chances are high that it's going to come up in the next. It's not exactly "predicting" but comes very close. Better than using 2 more random pairs.

From there on, 1/8 of the time you'll be playing a pick 4 game. So if it's that, wouldn't that means 1/8 of the time you're having a 1 in 1000 odd? That was my question for this thread. I found out the answer, and it's no, because you only have 4 numbers instead of 6 to match with now. But the odds are still lower. The catch is your paying more so it actually becomes way more higher than the default 13 million for 649.

But I'm thinking, if you're "predicting" and not playing every draw. Would it be feasible? The problem is that I'm not certain if the prediction is an illusion.

Anyway, I'm surprised how much info you dug up about ToTo, and yeah it changed to 649 recently, that's when I started playing, Didn't give lotteries much thought until I read about the change.

Now that you mention it, the percentage is 6/49! Hah! Could've just looked at it that way!

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 8:16 am - IP Logged

I understood your explanation of why your probabilities were low and knew your equation was correct, but I realized we were talking about different stuff that's what I was trying to clear up. :D

Yeap, it's actually 1/8 for any 6 group of numbers, not just the previous draw. Actually, I have to admit I sorta blanked that out, because in reality, I don't buy 15 every week, I just do that whenever there's been quite a few draws with no previous numbers. So in a way it gave me an illusion of control over the 6 numbers and 1/8 chance. It's not for sure, but if there's been 5 draws with no previous numbers, chances are high that it's going to come up in the next. It's not exactly "predicting" but comes very close. Better than using 2 more random pairs.

From there on, 1/8 of the time you'll be playing a pick 4 game. So if it's that, wouldn't that means 1/8 of the time you're having a 1 in 1000 odd? That was my question for this thread. I found out the answer, and it's no, because you only have 4 numbers instead of 6 to match with now. But the odds are still lower. The catch is your paying more so it actually becomes way more higher than the default 13 million for 649.

But I'm thinking, if you're "predicting" and not playing every draw. Would it be feasible? The problem is that I'm not certain if the prediction is an illusion.

Anyway, I'm surprised how much info you dug up about ToTo, and yeah it changed to 649 recently, that's when I started playing, Didn't give lotteries much thought until I read about the change.

Now that you mention it, the percentage is 6/49! Hah! Could've just looked at it that way!

if there's been 5 draws with no previous numbers, chances are high that it's going to come up in the next. It's not exactly "predicting" but comes very close. Better than using 2 more random pairs.

Well, if it's any consolation, there has been very loose evidence in academia that 'cold' numbers (basically similar to what you describe) are slightly better to play. This is simply because eventually every number will come out. However, any advantage (if any even exists) is really mitigated by the awful odds and payouts. A better exploit would be to play unpopular numbers (those avoided by other players), because it reduces your chances of having to share the prize. But the fact that academia touts this as a good strategy just goes to show that there's nothing more than grasping at straws when it comes to a terrible game we call the lottery.

I think the illusion goes back to what I was saying about conditional probability. The odds are lower, sure, but only 1/8th of the time, which makes it useless. As you say, the added cost....buying 15 tickets every draw for essentially 1 chance every 8 draws or so of only having to match 4 more numbers, which would happen about once in 1000 draws. When said like that it doesn't sound so great! Sitting out between draws wouldn't help much, since you don't know how many draws before the next match. Randomness is quirky. You might get a whole string of draws with the pattern and then a dry spell. You could think a match is near and then go another 10 draws with nothing. It's these inconsistencies and unpredictability that make lottery games so lucrative yet so elusive. Even if you could predict with accuracy that the next draw would have a 2-match, you would still have to cover all the combinations because you wouldn't know which one will match all 6. Example: you know 1 and 2 will be in the next draw; well, that leaves 47 other numbers of which there are 4 chosen. That comes to 178,365 combinations. But how do you really know that exactly 1 and exactly 2 will show up in the next draw? It's pretty much impossible. Even if it was possible you would still have to face the logistics of buying tickets.

There's nothing wrong with coming up with creative ways to decide what numbers to play, but in order for a pattern to work would mean to ignore the other possibilities. I've come to accept that it's the lines and not the numbers themselves that matter. I am actually not the best at math but I think the best way to describe it is variance. Playing more lines and more numbers reduces your variance....as you match more numbers (i.e. 1-2-3 okay last three numbers!), your variance decreases until the last number matches and it is 0. It's basically how wheeling works, combining lines to get the lowest variance for certain matches in the least number of tickets.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

New Member

Singapore
Member #161709
December 8, 2014
26 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 9:20 am - IP Logged

Regarding the cold number, thats exactly what I'm saying. But I try to stay away from that, in my ToTo lottery there's a big example of why. I noticed the number 35 keeps coming up as a bonus number but never as the main and was wondering if it's due for the main number. I checked and discovered it's been 42 draws since it last appeared (which is the longest of all number, the second due number is 19 draws ago), and not only that, since ToTo began, it has appeared the least times (80 times).

That has me deciding to stay away from 35 for good (so essentially I'm playing a 6/48 lottery now, hah).

I don't play cold numbers, I'd like to rather say I play cold groups of numbers, or sometimes the inverse of that.
Like if I see 40-49 range has appeared consistently for 10 draws, I'd start leaving that range out (so, playing 6/39). Likewise for "previous numbers". I really don't believe the moment I started leaving 40-49 out, for the whole rest of year every draw will have 40-49 in it, thus making it a horrible decision.

Does that really work? I don't know, but so far it's been doing good for me. Today I got my 6th 3 number match doing it that way, since I started doing it this way there's only been 1 draw I haven't won. I might not have gotten it if I included a previous number (last week draw had one, so I left the 6 numbers out this week).

Happyland
United States
Member #146344
September 1, 2013
1129 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 10:28 am - IP Logged

Regarding the cold number, thats exactly what I'm saying. But I try to stay away from that, in my ToTo lottery there's a big example of why. I noticed the number 35 keeps coming up as a bonus number but never as the main and was wondering if it's due for the main number. I checked and discovered it's been 42 draws since it last appeared (which is the longest of all number, the second due number is 19 draws ago), and not only that, since ToTo began, it has appeared the least times (80 times).

That has me deciding to stay away from 35 for good (so essentially I'm playing a 6/48 lottery now, hah).

I don't play cold numbers, I'd like to rather say I play cold groups of numbers, or sometimes the inverse of that.
Like if I see 40-49 range has appeared consistently for 10 draws, I'd start leaving that range out (so, playing 6/39). Likewise for "previous numbers". I really don't believe the moment I started leaving 40-49 out, for the whole rest of year every draw will have 40-49 in it, thus making it a horrible decision.

Does that really work? I don't know, but so far it's been doing good for me. Today I got my 6th 3 number match doing it that way, since I started doing it this way there's only been 1 draw I haven't won. I might not have gotten it if I included a previous number (last week draw had one, so I left the 6 numbers out this week).

Well, there's a tricky line between playing numbers you think have shown up "too much" or "too little" and those that actually have. I don't really play draw games much anymore but when I do, usually I will perform a chi-square test on the numbers; basically it is a statistical test for bias/independence. There are other and more vigorous tests but this one is the simplest. You come up with an 'expected' number of appearances (basically 6*draws/49), compute the chi-test statistic, and then calculate the p-value for significance (anything <=0.05 is a flag). Now this is somewhat useless if your lottery changes machines and ballsets often but if they don't you can use it to determine when a number is getting 'close' to being in the significance zone. If you discover that a ball is biased then you have relatively high accuracy in picking or eliminating it. I was able to lower my odds on Pick 3 to about 1 in 700 doing so, but as I said earlier, the awful payouts and still awful odds on pretty much every draw game keeps any attempts to minimal efficacy.

As far as playing/avoiding specific ranges, I don't know. Given the mixture of the balls, the machine's entropy would make it highly unusual (though still very possible) for it to go awhile without drawing/not drawing from a particular range. But what's to keep you from arbitrarily labeling the range 30-39 instead. And of course if you cover more numbers (via range) then you are more likely to hit. It's somewhat of an endless cycle and personally I think it isn't worth all the effort.

If the chances of winning the jackpot are so slim, why play when the jackpot is so small? Your chances never change, but the potential payoff does.
If a crystal ball showed you the future of the rest of your life, and in that future you will never win a jackpot, would you still play?

2016: -48.28% (13 tickets) ||
P&L % = Total Win(\$)/Total Wager(\$) - 1

bgonÃ§alves
Brasil
Member #92564
June 9, 2010
2122 Posts
Offline
 Posted: December 11, 2014, 11:52 am - IP Logged

Hello, metro, the lottery 49/6 decades we have 5 or 4 groups of 10 numbers and a group with 9 numbers, sometimes if we have 5 groups then is are drawn 6 numbers of the groups always have at least two numbers that is a pair, one could also filter by position by position vertically using the teminaçoes
example
12,15,25,36,45,49
1st place 12 Termination (last digit) is 2 = filter their adjacent 1.3, your mirror 7 (see table)
Then himself in position = 2, 1.3 and its adjacent mirror 7 = not play 2,1,3,7
Left 6 digits that MT will be hot and cold to choose from, do the same in the other five positions in each vertical position

 Page 2 of 2