Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on Sep 22, 2016
"The result will the same as the day before for at least 2 days in a row."
No it won't. All you're doing is showing an example of one particular series of results that happened in the past. We already know that the same result will sometimes repeat, and probability tells us how often it will happen. What we don't know is when it will happen. With only two choices (H/T, odd/even) yesterday's result can be expected to repeat the next day half of the time, and to repeat for the next two days 25% of the time, but you can never say with certainty that it will happen the next day or next two days.
"That to me is predicting future results."
That you are sometimes right as a result of simple probability isn't prediction.
"And don't send me your starter replacement bill."
Doing a bunch of pre-tests may result in wear and tear that results in more frequent replacement of equipment, but that's completely unrelated to which particular balls are selected. Thanks for another example of how stupid you are, and for once again proving that you're incapable of offering a sensible explanation of why things would work the way you think they do.
"WOW!...some people are just plain dumb !!!!!!"
Well, at least you get something right once in a while.
"To remotely assert that the lotteries would conduct a completely 'blind' operation without an idea of how much they'd win or lose is absurd"
Of course it is, and I haven't done that. All I've said is that they rely on simple probability to know how much they'll profit. When they sell pick 3 tickets for $1 each and pay $500 for winning they know that in the long term they're going to sell $1000 worth of tickets for every $500 they pay out for a winning ticket. The same is true for pick 4, MM and PB, and the various other state lotto games. The selection of winning numbers is the completely random result of probability, but there's nothing blind about the number of winners and losers that will result.
Of course the article you linked to has nothing to do with that. Scratchers differ from the online games in that they rely on randomness in distributing the tickets, but the tickets themselves aren't generated randomly. Instead the lottery determines a payout structure and then deliberately issues tickets that have the necessary number of winners (in all necessary amounts) and losers; they even provide you with that information if you're smart enough to look for it. The statistician who "cracked" the lottery simply figured out that for one particular game he could usually determine if a particular ticket was a winner if he already knew some of that ticket's attributes.
"Have you done any back-testing"
It's not a type of cognitive bias, but belief in back testing is somewhat similar. It's a form of circular reasoning, and relies on past results to predict past results. If it doesn't confirm what you hope it will you've made some kind of an error.
"Do you start/shut off your car 7 times before you drive to make sure the starter works?"
You're quite adept at being unable to think clearly. Lotteries don't conduct tests to see if things are working correctly. They conduct them to see if there's any indication of a possible problem. That means the proper analogy is to ask, "If you think there might be a problem with your starter would you conclude that there's nothing wrong with it after your mechanic turns the key once and the car starts?"
" -Another thing that is predictable is over time the ten digits won't be drawn in equal amounts in any digit position.-
The above statement completely validates exactly why savvy players KNOW that every number/combination DOES NOT have the same probability of being drawn"
What stack's statement shows is that he's got a better understanding of probability than you do. In a random selection each number has the same probability of being selected, but that's completely different than each number being selected the same number of times. Given a large enough number of selections random probability will tend to result in a uniform distribution, but that's not the same thing as an equal distribution. It should be obvious if you give it just a tiny bit of thought. If you roll a die three times and get 2, 3 and 5 then it's more likely that the first 12 rolls will have two 2's than two 6's and that the first 18 rolls will have three 2's than three 6's simply because you've already gotten the first 2 but not the first 6. You need fewer 2's than 6's to have the repeats you're looking for. As the sample size gets larger the distribution tends to get closer to being equal, but there's no magical force that demands that it be equal. If you look at past results of pick 3 or 4, lotto, and similar games you'll find that the frequency with which each number has been selected can always be plotted as a bell curve. Some numbers being selected a bit more often and some a bit less is what we expect from random probability.
"I've written how it gets affect about a 1,000 times"
Well, you may have claimed that there's an effect 1,000 times. What you've never done is offered a sensible explanation about what actually causes that effect. I'll offer you (another) chance to start to explain it by answering a simple question: how many times can I test a coin by flipping it before the chances of heads or tails is no longer 50/50?
"I had a theory when I first started to play that if you play a combination long enough eventually you will hit it"
You're right. If you try often enough it will happen. There's only a problem with the thinking if you think that offers you a useful guarantee. Even if you could be positive that playing 123 for pick 3 guaranteed that you'd win once every 1000 days you'd still lose half of your money, but you can't even be sure it will happen once in 1000 tries. The actual chances of a particular P3 number being drawn in 1000 tries is a bit less than 2 in 3. That's balanced by a 1 in 3 chance that it would be drawn twice, but even then you'd only break even.
That last is an excellent example of how an exactly equal chance of being selected results in the possible numbers being selected a different number of times.