Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 21, 2017, 10:35 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Do you believe every combination has the same probability?

Topic closed. 595 replies. Last post 2 months ago by Soledad.

Page 24 of 40
3.68
PrintE-mailLink
CARBOB's avatar - FL LOTTERY_LOGO.png
ORLANDO, FLORIDA
United States
Member #4924
June 3, 2004
5976 Posts
Offline
Posted: September 29, 2016, 5:29 pm - IP Logged

I don't know. Of course both sides do have an opinion that's based on ideal situations. This is a rather interesting discussion or debate though. I wish LotteryBraker was still around to jump in, lol. No of course it's not personal. I just wanted to clear that up.

lotterybraker and I have discuss this many times, and we both agree about pre-tests.

    Lucky Loser's avatar - bucks
    Texas
    United States
    Member #86154
    January 30, 2010
    1654 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: September 29, 2016, 6:21 pm - IP Logged

    lotterybraker and I have discuss this many times, and we both agree about pre-tests.

    Yes Nod Yes, you most certainly have discussed this with him and so have many others that are truly open-minded, and, possess the real-time understanding of true un-tampered probability. Pre & post-tests directly affect the relationship of present and future combinations...period. You know, CARBOB, I'm still not sure why "I" had to be the one that Soledad and Company ramped up on so hardNo NodFrown over such a basic issue. Soledad is now calling on lotterybraker, which is EXCELLENT FOR MEDance, 'cause lotterybraker took the same position that I'm taking and it's based on the same premiseLOLYes Nod. More so, here's the link to just one of the conversations you and lotterybraker were engaged in, and, lotterybraker outright agreed with you...which means he's also in agreement with meCool. There's so much more compelling evidence on this issue from members way back in the day who all arrived at the same conclusionSee Ya!...and there's a reason for it. Here's the link from 9/28/2008:

    http://lotterypost.mobi/thread.aspx?td=1127115

    Tell ya what, CARBOB, here's another one where lotterybraker is actually saying the exact same thing I've recently said about about including the pre-tests into your list somehow if possible... 4th post down. Pre-tests matterYes Nod.

    https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/152731

     

    So, I guess now, Soledad will discount lotterybraker's assessment...all after I went out, found him TWICE, and brought him to the partyGreen laugh

    Small games, frequent wins, and regular payouts 'cause.....

    There are seven days in the week...'Someday' isn't one of them.

    #lotto-4-a-living

      Avatar
      New York, NY
      United States
      Member #140634
      March 23, 2013
      3211 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: September 29, 2016, 6:42 pm - IP Logged

      That's fine and I'm trying not to discount anyone's opinions. I just was saying that I think that he would have a lot of interesting things to say also, which he does. But I don't have the time to read them all. I did say that he believed they skewed the draws, but he did also say more and why they (the commission) do that in the first place, and that thread LL says the same thing that I know he said in the first place.

      Anyways, like I said everyone is entitled to their opinion. I still don't understand the fact that you don't agree with the notion that each draw is independent by its own unique randomness. Whether or not a draw is skipped in your systems or way of finding numbers, the strategy in finding those numbers remains the same. You seem to only agree with the idea that a lottery system should only work one way and one way only. That's not true of a good lottery system.

      And I still believe that they pretest in order to make sure that the machines are working properly. Machines are prone to wear and tear. Testing them ensures that they are working properly. Changing them also increases the randomness as well. If they didn't change them often, there would be bias towards numbers. That is where this argument lies. Where the bias is actually found.

      I take the side of Ion Saliu on this issue, and nothing will change that, until I hear overwhelming evidence of the other side of the case.

      And LL, read that post that I put at 6:22 this morning on the previous page. Tell me if that doesn't make a whole lotta sense to you.

        Avatar
        NY
        United States
        Member #23835
        October 16, 2005
        3501 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: September 29, 2016, 6:58 pm - IP Logged

        "The last thing I want to read "

        Well, it seems pretty clear that you don't always bother to read things. OTOH it seems clear that responding is a little ray of sunshine in your sorry existence. Why else would you bother when you've said several times that you're done, and you don't eve have anything you're actually answering?

         

        "So there is no reason it couldn't happen"

        There's also no reason you couldn't win PB this weekend, even if you buy just one ticket and play 1,2,3,4,5 and 6. That doesn't mean I can't say with an extremely high degree of confidence that it won't happen.

        "Show the math."

        You mean you don't already know what it is? You've got no idea what the probability of using the same 4 machines and 4 ball sets to do 8 consecutive drawings, but want to know how I can be sure of the improbability of it? And you've got no clue about the actual probability of one particular digit coming up in 8 consecutive drawings, but you think you've got a valid basis to compare that to the probability of results in the testing? I trust you can at least figure out the probability for drawing 4 or 5 balls from one single machine and getting the same ball each time during the tests.

        I'll show you the math, but first give us an idea if you've even got a reasonable feeling for things and answer 2 simple questions. Is it more likely for a pick 4 drawing to have a digit that was in the previous drawing or to not have a digit that was in the previous drawing? Is it probable that a specific digit will be drawn, somewhat improbable, or extremely improbable?

        "But it's NOT considered random in the pre-test."

        You don't know what they're assuming unless they've told you. All you know is that they've got a policy of swapping out equipment if the same ball is selected too many times.

        "They are trying to take away or alter the the natural random process."

        How does using different equipment "alter the the natural random process"?

         

        "Would you bet on the next flip and which would you bet H/T?"

        It wouldn't matter what I bet, because if its a fair coin heads and tails always have the same probability of .5000000000000000000 (ignoring the small chance of lading on edge. As I've told Amber, that has been demonstrated time and time again by actually flipping a coin, as well as by various other tests with only two possible outcomes. It doesn't matter what the past results are. The coin doesn't know what th elast results are and there's no magical force that influences the outcome.

        "If you don't believe the pre-draws interrupt Random"

        Nobody here has magical powers, either. Nobody here knows exactly why the lotteries chose the exact protocols they did, except in general terms. What those of us who actually understand probability do know is that testing can't "interrupt" random. Selecting balls from the machine works exactly the same way whether it's for a test or for the official drawing that determines the winning numbers.

        "explain why the pre-tests were not conducted prior to 2008?"

        Powerball has been doing tests since at least October 2002.

         

        "Most randomized sequences do not have an easily recognizable pattern"

        It's easy for all of us to fall into part of the same trap. People tend to think of patterns in terms of some find of repetition, but every result has a distinctive pattern.

        "Yet any one specific arbitrary sequence has exactly the same chance of occurring as any other."

        As near as I can tell a lot of people here don't understand that at all. They look at a particular string of events and attach an arbitrary significance to it, such as 6 heads in a row, and seem to have absolutely have no clue that it's got exactly the same probability as any other possible result.

         

        "How is it possible to avoid countering person's A's assessment to go after person B's when they're both saying the same thing?"

        If you all were saying exactly the same thing there wouldn't be any point in countering each particular instance of it, would there?  You and particularly Amber just have more of a knack for saying things that are utterly ridiculous or downright stupid. grwurston doesn't seem to have any idea of what the relative probabilities of different events are, but I don't recall seeing them make a ridiculous claim that a perfectly fair coin suddenly becomes unfair and develops a magical preference because of some particular  string of results.

          Lucky Loser's avatar - bucks
          Texas
          United States
          Member #86154
          January 30, 2010
          1654 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: September 29, 2016, 7:59 pm - IP Logged

          Green laughLet the records show that in neither link provided in my post above, KY FLOYD is found nowhere objecting to any of the pre-test assessments by lotterybraker who's very well respected around here. 

          You and particularly Amber just have more of a knack for saying things that are utterly ridiculous or downright stupid. grwurston doesn't seem to have any idea of what the relative probabilities of different events are,

          Green laughSo, amber123 and I simply say stupidSad things but, those same stupid things are agreed upon and said among all of us that speak against the pre-testsYes Nod. Yet, look at the the tone he takes with us as opposed to themNo Nod. It's all good, though LOL...I get it. 

           

          If you all were saying exactly the same thing there wouldn't be any point in countering each particular instance of it, would there?

          Anyone that has kept up with this thread, and is kindergarten-capable of searching and comparing past posts, will find that myself CARBOB, amber123, grwurston, lotterybraker now, and a host of others from years past all agree here on pre-test manipulation. But, it's utterly ridiculous and/or downright stupid NOW that she and I are pushing it here? What?.  All three of these individuals press us for proof to back our claims but, seem to go right along with any/everything the lotteries say...because it's their game. Wrong! No NoNo Nod It's the players' game because the players make it happen from day to day by playing it, and, could have a say in all this if they got their voices together. *Finally, not one of them has explained to all of us dumb people here why the lotteries which utilize the digital (RNG) software method still conduct pre-tests. The algorithm/seed/programming used in RNG, which is self-contained, is supposed to already be random. Yeah.BS

          Small games, frequent wins, and regular payouts 'cause.....

          There are seven days in the week...'Someday' isn't one of them.

          #lotto-4-a-living

            Avatar
            New York, NY
            United States
            Member #140634
            March 23, 2013
            3211 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: September 29, 2016, 8:22 pm - IP Logged

            You still haven't said that what I said is untrue. So I'll understand it the way it should be understood in the end. And I'll still work out ways to come up with winning numbers. Sometimes with the help of some very good LP members who keep it interesting, and sometimes with no help except myself.

            There is no reason to re-hash this idea of pre-testing. My points were based on misinterpretations of pre-testing and patterns. I didn't ask you to prove anything. We realize an actual draw was skipped. But when you lose say after a draw, do you say "oh I wish I could go back and play that number instead!" Or do you say "oops oh well there's always tomorrow's draw." I'm on the side of "There's always the next draw no matter what." Don't let the lotteries ruin your ideas with a bunch of unnecessary thinking. Stay positive on what you're doing and believe in what you're doing. Let those that help offer good advice.

            Eh maybe you'll get a laugh, I don't know. But the Commission's don't have any Math geniuses working for them. Maybe they don't know how it works..lol That was a joke ok. Haha. I don't know much about RNG's. Just a little so..I wouldn't know how to talk about them in depth.

              Avatar
              Kentucky
              United States
              Member #32652
              February 14, 2006
              7344 Posts
              Online
              Posted: September 29, 2016, 9:19 pm - IP Logged

              LOL Good luck with that, CARBOB and grwurston! I'm sure you've clearly noticed where you, myself, grwurston, and amber123 are all speaking the same basic languageYes Nod. KY FLOYD, Stack47, and Soledad only seem to take interest, though, in countering amber123 and meWhat?FrownSad. They're afraid to take any of yours or grwurston's commentary and critique it with the same intensity as they do mine...yet it's the same premiseYes Nod. What does this tell you? It tells me that it's more personal than anything. How is it possible to avoid countering person's A's assessment to go after person B's when they're both saying the same thing? Go back and look at how many times they've all had to explain to both of you, in detail, WHY YOU'RE ALL DEAD WRONG but chose not to. It's actually pretty Green laughGreen laugh watching them do this. You and grwurston are still posing the $1M question to the geniuses and all they can do is PROMOTE the lotteries' explanation(s) of making sure the machines and balls are working properlyGreen laughBS . Then, once again, lotteries are trying to 'create random' which cannot be done because any process used in associating a corresponding outcome completely violates random as defined. Smash

              "They're afraid to take any of yours or grwurston's commentary and critique it with the same intensity as they do mine..."

              Carbob and grwurston comment, you lecture; big difference. Won't speak for KY Floyd, but I don't give you much credibility.

              "Then, once again, lotteries are trying to 'create random' which cannot be done because any process used in associating a corresponding outcome completely violates random as defined."

              And that's a great example of why I give you very little credibility. Forget the fact lotteries create their rules and by signing a tickets, you're agreeing to their rules, the lotteries define the random they use regardless how you define random or how many times you whine about it on social media.

               

                Avatar
                Kentucky
                United States
                Member #32652
                February 14, 2006
                7344 Posts
                Online
                Posted: September 29, 2016, 9:53 pm - IP Logged

                I hope KY and Stack reply to this.

                This is a response to Amber from KY.

                "Only you and many others would actually believe it's still 50/50 after let's say about 10 flips."

                Well, those "many others" are the people who aren't morons, so at least I'm in good company. Of course we "believe" that because it's a fact that's supported by millions and millions of actual tests, rather than a delusion we wallow in simply because we're morons who are too stupid to pay attention to the  vast and incontrovertible evidence. FWIW, the tests are so easy that you could do your own.

                This question is for both of you. 

                Would you bet on the next flip and which would you bet H/T?

                If you don't believe the pre-draws interrupt Random, why are they doing them. Don't say testing, unless you tell me what they are testing for. Also explain why the pre-tests were not conducted prior to 2008? Did they not test the machines?

                "Would you bet on the next flip and which would you bet H/T?"

                I've played Baccarat with odds similar to coin flips and betting on streaks is a common betting strategy. Some High-Rollers either bet on the streak continuing or don't bet at all. As for coin flips, what is the force preventing heads or tells after 10, 1000, 10,000,000 or whatever number you can thing of number of trials?

                "If you don't believe the pre-draws interrupt Random, why are they doing them."

                From what I've read from state lottery websites, tests are conducted to ensure each combination has an equal chance of being drawn. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't each combo having an equal chance the definition of random?

                "Don't say testing, unless you tell me what they are testing for."

                This is why the Texas Lottery conducts tests:

                A pre-test is an unofficial drawing that tests the machine and the ball sets used for a Pick 3 drawing. Pre-tests ensure that the drawing machine is working well and that balls are drawn in a random way.

                LL doesn't like the Texas Lottery's "random way", but I seriously doubt they are force to play. I don't know how every lottery tests their equipment or which one record and publish results, but if some states do neither, how would that effect the "natural random flow" some LP members say exist?

                  amber123's avatar - OpIFNim

                  United States
                  Member #164727
                  March 12, 2015
                  2687 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: September 29, 2016, 9:56 pm - IP Logged

                  "The last thing I want to read "

                  Well, it seems pretty clear that you don't always bother to read things. OTOH it seems clear that responding is a little ray of sunshine in your sorry existence. Why else would you bother when you've said several times that you're done, and you don't eve have anything you're actually answering?

                   

                  "So there is no reason it couldn't happen"

                  There's also no reason you couldn't win PB this weekend, even if you buy just one ticket and play 1,2,3,4,5 and 6. That doesn't mean I can't say with an extremely high degree of confidence that it won't happen.

                  "Show the math."

                  You mean you don't already know what it is? You've got no idea what the probability of using the same 4 machines and 4 ball sets to do 8 consecutive drawings, but want to know how I can be sure of the improbability of it? And you've got no clue about the actual probability of one particular digit coming up in 8 consecutive drawings, but you think you've got a valid basis to compare that to the probability of results in the testing? I trust you can at least figure out the probability for drawing 4 or 5 balls from one single machine and getting the same ball each time during the tests.

                  I'll show you the math, but first give us an idea if you've even got a reasonable feeling for things and answer 2 simple questions. Is it more likely for a pick 4 drawing to have a digit that was in the previous drawing or to not have a digit that was in the previous drawing? Is it probable that a specific digit will be drawn, somewhat improbable, or extremely improbable?

                  "But it's NOT considered random in the pre-test."

                  You don't know what they're assuming unless they've told you. All you know is that they've got a policy of swapping out equipment if the same ball is selected too many times.

                  "They are trying to take away or alter the the natural random process."

                  How does using different equipment "alter the the natural random process"?

                   

                  "Would you bet on the next flip and which would you bet H/T?"

                  It wouldn't matter what I bet, because if its a fair coin heads and tails always have the same probability of .5000000000000000000 (ignoring the small chance of lading on edge. As I've told Amber, that has been demonstrated time and time again by actually flipping a coin, as well as by various other tests with only two possible outcomes. It doesn't matter what the past results are. The coin doesn't know what th elast results are and there's no magical force that influences the outcome.

                  "If you don't believe the pre-draws interrupt Random"

                  Nobody here has magical powers, either. Nobody here knows exactly why the lotteries chose the exact protocols they did, except in general terms. What those of us who actually understand probability do know is that testing can't "interrupt" random. Selecting balls from the machine works exactly the same way whether it's for a test or for the official drawing that determines the winning numbers.

                  "explain why the pre-tests were not conducted prior to 2008?"

                  Powerball has been doing tests since at least October 2002.

                   

                  "Most randomized sequences do not have an easily recognizable pattern"

                  It's easy for all of us to fall into part of the same trap. People tend to think of patterns in terms of some find of repetition, but every result has a distinctive pattern.

                  "Yet any one specific arbitrary sequence has exactly the same chance of occurring as any other."

                  As near as I can tell a lot of people here don't understand that at all. They look at a particular string of events and attach an arbitrary significance to it, such as 6 heads in a row, and seem to have absolutely have no clue that it's got exactly the same probability as any other possible result.

                   

                  "How is it possible to avoid countering person's A's assessment to go after person B's when they're both saying the same thing?"

                  If you all were saying exactly the same thing there wouldn't be any point in countering each particular instance of it, would there?  You and particularly Amber just have more of a knack for saying things that are utterly ridiculous or downright stupid. grwurston doesn't seem to have any idea of what the relative probabilities of different events are, but I don't recall seeing them make a ridiculous claim that a perfectly fair coin suddenly becomes unfair and develops a magical preference because of some particular  string of results.

                  I'm not repeating myself. If you and stuck can't understand simple concepts after the 50th time, I can't help you, stay dumber than a box of rubbers if you want to, who gives a crap. Just go back to making Jelly, that's the only thing you're good at.

                  People just can't be this stupid, it boggles my mind. You put a stick in the middle of a shallow river and the stick disrupts the flow, where the water has to go around the stick which btw also causes turbulence on the other side of the stick. 

                  DUYEEEE!!!

                    amber123's avatar - OpIFNim

                    United States
                    Member #164727
                    March 12, 2015
                    2687 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: September 29, 2016, 10:11 pm - IP Logged

                    I wish I could afford an authentic lottery machine, a VAULT, and a live streaming feed of the machine within the vault. Also a guard watching the live feed of the machine inside the vault.

                    I'd prove to all of you suckers who don't get it, how my predictions would improve by a nice margin. No tests, no nothing. After the draw, I take the balls and insert them back into the tubes. No post tests (which really makes me laugh, they were present during the drawing, do they think a ghost came by and affected the machines?..lol), just put the machine into the vault and go the eff home!!!!!!!!!!...

                    The next day I ask the guard If he noticed anything out of the order. I mean seriously, do you doubters actually think there could be a group like the mission impossible people who are hanging from the ceiling, risking their freedom by tricking a high end security guard company with all their safeguards, check points, and redundancies in place, and that's why he officials won't take this route, but prefer man handling the machines for 12 hours a day, wearing them down to the knuckles, and then scratch their heads why the machines broke down before it's time? 

                    If all their efforts don't send a red flag screaming bloody murder, then I'm dealing with a bunch of ape men living in caves. When all they have to do is what I wrote in my first and second paragraphs as the solution. 

                      Avatar
                      Kentucky
                      United States
                      Member #32652
                      February 14, 2006
                      7344 Posts
                      Online
                      Posted: September 29, 2016, 10:14 pm - IP Logged

                      "How do you know they didn't use the same machines when the 9's hit 8 days in a row.?"

                      Because I actually understand probability and can do the math.

                       

                      The machines are picked randomly just like the numbers in the official draws. Right?  So there is no reason it couldn't happen just like this did...

                      Well, it wasn't very "probable" that the same number, (9) would hit 8 draws in a row and 11 days out of 12. (20 days out of 31 for the month btw.)  But it did. So explain that!!! Show the math. It happened Aug. 18 thru Aug. 29, 2016 Maryland Midday Pick 4. Just in case you want to it see for yourself.

                      It wouldn't have gone past 4 or 5 draws in the pre-test because they would have said, "Oops, there's something wrong with the balls. We have to change them."  This is BSAll the balls are weighed and measured and recorded before and after each drawing. If everything is exactly the same today that it was yesterday, then how could there be something wrong with the balls?

                      But that's different from the official draws where anything can happen and it's ALL considered random. But it's NOT considered random in the pre-test. Why not?  Why do they have to change the balls whenever they see something that doesn't "look right" or they don't like. Things don't "look right" all the time in the official draws. (See the above example.) But because it's the "official draws," it's all good. This why people are against pre-tests. They are trying to take away or alter the the natural random process.

                      "They are trying to take away or alter the the natural random process."

                      There was an auto accident in front of the store where I was going to purchase Keno tickets and it held me up long enough (maybe just 2 minutes) that I missed the next drawing. Five out the six numbers I was going to play in two $5 3-spots and one $2 6-spot were drawn.

                      Was it "the natural random process" that prevented me from winning $259 or was I lucky the sixth number wasn't drawn making me out over $2700?

                        amber123's avatar - OpIFNim

                        United States
                        Member #164727
                        March 12, 2015
                        2687 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: September 29, 2016, 10:24 pm - IP Logged

                        "They are trying to take away or alter the the natural random process."

                        There was an auto accident in front of the store where I was going to purchase Keno tickets and it held me up long enough (maybe just 2 minutes) that I missed the next drawing. Five out the six numbers I was going to play in two $5 3-spots and one $2 6-spot were drawn.

                        Was it "the natural random process" that prevented me from winning $259 or was I lucky the sixth number wasn't drawn making me out over $2700?

                        Your analogies SUCK PERIOD !...You in fact have a cave man mentality, you just proved it to me in your analogy above. 

                        You compare an event that was not caused on purpose, the accident, compared to a well thought out devious plan that is performed like clock work by officials.

                        Pffft!!!

                          amber123's avatar - OpIFNim

                          United States
                          Member #164727
                          March 12, 2015
                          2687 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: September 29, 2016, 10:35 pm - IP Logged

                          @ Stack47, what you are implying is the "Butterfly" effect. That's another thread for another time. Or, you could elaborate If you choose. This may be a better debate because we're not getting anywhere with the other one. Green laugh

                           

                          Unfortunately this won't be a very exciting debate because I believe in the Butterfly effect to an extent. Oh well, I tried. ROFL

                            Avatar
                            Kentucky
                            United States
                            Member #32652
                            February 14, 2006
                            7344 Posts
                            Online
                            Posted: September 29, 2016, 11:49 pm - IP Logged

                            Your analogies SUCK PERIOD !...You in fact have a cave man mentality, you just proved it to me in your analogy above. 

                            You compare an event that was not caused on purpose, the accident, compared to a well thought out devious plan that is performed like clock work by officials.

                            Pffft!!!

                            How many times have you said "I'm done" only to come back with more childish insults?

                            It wasn't meant to be an analogy so stop acting like a spoiled child brat and let the adults discuss adult stuff.

                              Avatar
                              Kentucky
                              United States
                              Member #32652
                              February 14, 2006
                              7344 Posts
                              Online
                              Posted: September 30, 2016, 12:04 am - IP Logged

                              @ Stack47, what you are implying is the "Butterfly" effect. That's another thread for another time. Or, you could elaborate If you choose. This may be a better debate because we're not getting anywhere with the other one. Green laugh

                               

                              Unfortunately this won't be a very exciting debate because I believe in the Butterfly effect to an extent. Oh well, I tried. ROFL

                              "I believe in the Butterfly effect to an extent."

                              And believe in a magical "natural random flow", and apparently in the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny too. You'll find all that stuff in the Mystical Forum. Instead of constantly saying empty gestures like "I'm done", do it, sit back and read; you might learn something.

                                 
                                Page 24 of 40