Lucky lottery lady outed as Stanford University statistics PhD

Comment #74

martingorgeous — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:14:02 GMT

Wow, thanks for the info. I didn't know about Richard Lustig. I guess he must be in touch with his feminine side.

Comment #73

RJOh — Sun, 21 Aug 2011 16:07:06 GMT

I just wonder if she still returns to Bishop to buy scratch-off tickets when she feels the time is right to win another big jackpot.

Comment #72

jarasan — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 04:25:05 GMT

That is funny!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I laugh long time.

Comment #71

rdgrnr — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 03:23:00 GMT

LOL, you got me there, Nance.

I assumed a feminine nature to a name like Edessa and I may well be wrong.

I'm not hip to all these video games and being that EdessaKnight chose not to divulge a gender on their profile, I could not but hazard a reckoning.

Ruling out a gaze upon his/her countenance, I'll await a rejoinder.

My apology EdessaKnight, if required.

Comment #70

jimmy4164 — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 03:01:30 GMT

This could explain at least one of your preoccupations...

Joker17 is going to crack up when he hears that rdgrnr is murmuring sweet nothings to someone who could very possibly turn out to be a Strong Male Warrior!

http://m2tw.warlore.org/units/Knights_of_Edessa?campaign=crusades

With a job like yours here, I guess it's hard to keep track of everybody as you make your rounds.

Comment #69

rdgrnr — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:41:58 GMT

You can also win by cheating.

Like President Reagan said when negotiating with the Soviets on strategic arms limitation : Trust but verify.

It never hurts to ask questions when a pelican is walking like a duck.

Comment #68

LiLSpeedy — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 13:58:42 GMT

Why all the questions about her wins? You had no trouble taking her money the months and years she was not winning. If it's your time to win, algorithms or not, you are going to win.

Comment #67

KY Floyd — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 20:52:12 GMT

I'll bet that Richard Lustig, the Florida guy who has won 7 times, is going to be pretty surprised to find out he's really a woman.

Comment #66

martingorgeous — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:09:17 GMT

Congratulations to Joan Ginther! There is nothing more appealing than a beautiful mind!

Have you noticed that the people who have won the lottery multiple times and/or cracked the lottery code are all women over 40? Joan Ginther won the lottery 4 times, Amy McCauley won the lottery twice, and L Hattingh-Spurgeon cracked the lottery code. Wow, I expect lightning bolts to come out of their feet

Comment #65

rdgrnr — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 04:49:44 GMT

Well thank you, lil darlin.

Comment #64

eddessaknight — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 03:15:22 GMT

LOL rdgrn Now that clever response just might be up there on the level with the Phd's game plan.

You're darn tootin (Gabey Hayes)

EddessaKnight

Comment #63

rdgrnr — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 01:58:08 GMT

Ah, I see what you're gettin' at.

You're sayin' the Catholics was behind it cuz the name of the town was Bishop.

I think that's crazy.

Comment #62

redhot7 — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:04:57 GMT

Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop.

It's not her fault that 3 of the winning tickets were sold in the same store.

Comment #61

sully16 — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:26:27 GMT

Thank you.

Comment #60

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 02:00:27 GMT

Scratchers account for over 50% of total sales in Missouri and if these games can be hacked then I would think

it would be a big concern. I once found a way for one game to win around 80% of the time but did not take

avantage of it. I also found other games that winning tickets would have a small stripe at the point where they

were torn apart from other tickets. I think these games all have a weakness if a person could find it and this would

be right down her alley so to speak. I thi... [ More ]

Comment #59

rdgrnr — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:43:42 GMT

Yeah, I heard the old Hors retired and live in Vegas.

Too bad that secret number list got burnt up in that fire.

Made 'em both millionaires.

Comment #58

MADDOG10 — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 01:09:59 GMT

As George Straight once said in Pure Country, This Lady has got nothing but Pure Luck. No doubt about it...

Comment #57

freeobama — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:38:46 GMT

Something tells me Ms.Ginther is not done winning yet.

Comment #56

eddessaknight — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:23:32 GMT

Righto rdgnr, to date no one has blown the cover or has ratted out the mercirial winning WOBA Sisters who ostensibly took up residence here,,,,,,

EddessaKnight

Comment #55

rdgrnr — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:42:24 GMT

Kinda makes you wonder how many times it's been done and nobody ratted anybody out and they're all living happily ever after.

Comment #54

IsaiahT — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:53:26 GMT

Wepa a gozar

Comment #53

TheOtherOne — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 03:52:42 GMT

I might not 'live' There per se, but I'd definitely have a house or condo there at least

Comment #52

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:22:20 GMT

If I had $21M to play with, I might live in Vegas! Wouldn't you consider it too?

http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

http://catlin.casinocitytimes.com/article/lottery-nonsense-8694

Comment #51

TheOtherOne — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 22:09:25 GMT

Oh you cannot tell me she doesn't have this figured out.I look forward to hearing of more of these 'adventures'.I mean, a STATISTICS *PROFESSOR* living in LAS VEGAS after hitting FOUR times on the TX lottery? Something tells me this Lady Luck is comfortably stalking a roulette wheel, happily raking in small jackpots on keno, and/or effortlessly 'Breaking Vegas' at several Blackjack tables on a regular basis.And if she is ruling the craps table somewhere, I sure hope I am at the same one while th... [ More ]

Comment #50

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:51:34 GMT

These are good points. To me it's a no-brainer that none of this should be possible.

If scratch-offs were being administered the way they should be:

(1) NO ONE would know what lies beneath the material to be scratched off on ANY of the tickets.

(2) Knowledge of the progress of payouts over time would be restricted to the smallest number of lottery officials possible so that if there was any question of fraud, law enforcement would have a short suspect list. If possible, this information... [ More ]

Comment #49

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 21:14:37 GMT

joker17,

I thought I was being very clear by giving you the link to the coin flip option at

http://www.random.org/coins/?num=1 cur=60-usd.5000c-gold-buffalo

When you believe that after 15 Heads, or Red, or whatever, there is some reason for you to choose a particular outcome on the next flip, or spin, you are a victim of the Gambler's Fallacy!

IT DOES NOT MATTER!

--Jimmy4164

Comment #48

Slick Nick — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:21:40 GMT

More power to the woman, I'm happy for her.

Comment #47

RJOh — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 18:12:51 GMT

Edit: When I say it's been done before I don't mean this whole scenario but only someone tipping off someone else about where the winning ticket(s) are.

That whole scenario happened a few years ago in Indiana. A security person while verifying a winning ticket just happened to see a secured list for a new game that identified the roll that had a million dollar prize and the store it was delivered to and sent a couple of his buddies to buy the whole roll and cash in the ticket. It would have w... [ More ]

Comment #46

joker17 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 15:38:26 GMT

Jimmy, in the link you didn't answer which one, you wrote Yes Yest ot what?...red or black

Comment #45

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:39:37 GMT

Come on Joker, I just answered this question for you within the context of Roulette!

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/234355/2161069

Comment #44

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:29:56 GMT

Maybe this link will help you understand why I posted what I did earlier this AM...

Click HERE and note the date of this posting.

Comment #43

jarasan — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 14:05:47 GMT

Comment #42

sully16 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 12:56:31 GMT

How could a woman understand the sum of x minus xbar divided by n-1 squared ? Finding the standard deviation on the bell curve must be a tough one. Understanding the cpk or ppk couldn't possibly come from sitting in a class room and learning it.

Comment #41

Delta Draw — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 07:17:56 GMT

Well at least you know what you don t want to do for the rest of your life. Thank you for

your service.

Let me say that I am most ashamed of that malcontent so-called patriot (tax weasel)who has very bigoted, racist

and overt islamophobic views. You are much more an American in my eyes.

I think the lady is OKAY and she should keep all her money. All this speculation is a

reason to take her money away.

Comment #40

joker17 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 07:02:23 GMT

Yes, I was in the Navy Between December, 1982...... to......December, 1986. It stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.....lol

Comment #39

Delta Draw — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:26:49 GMT

Oh.

It was a woman? That is a very strong reason for luck coming into play. No way

can a woman be smart enough to outsmart a bunch of texicans. It has to be luck

boys, LADY LUCK

Comment #38

belle$star3! — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:22:15 GMT

I believe that this lady honestly won this money. Congratulations to Ms. Ginther enjoy your money

Comment #37

Delta Draw — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:08:35 GMT

+

I think it is pure luck and a coincidence that the winner is a statistician. The only way to beat astronomical odds is

luck.

-

But, would not the odds for each game stand on their own? If the person plays

a new hand in a new game are not the odds for that game set? The guy is on a lucky

roll. Same thing happens to a gambler who goes from game to game in a casino.

?

Why would lotteries distribute winners to just one general area of a state? Are

those not lucky areas e... [ More ]

Comment #36

joker17 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:05:15 GMT

The coin being flipped 10 times heads you think, may still have a 50/50 chance on the 11th, but what would you personally bet on the 11th?

No math jargon or any other theories, just answer the question honestly. Thanx...

Comment #35

joker17 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 06:00:49 GMT

I think eveyone is thinking too hard. S**t happens. Even with random distribution of scratch offs, there's bound to be clusters of winners. It's a given, rare, but nevertheless it happens. It looks biased, but it's not. Spread-out randomness will, from time to time experience events where it will cross paths within itself creating clusters or anomolies. Highs and lows where the lines intersect.

I knew someone in the Navy, in Key West where I was stationed years ago, who was struck by lightnin... [ More ]

Comment #34

imagine — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 05:30:46 GMT

No professor is named in the article.

I thought it was the link for this:

RJOh made the most compelling observation that anyone should be able to comprehend at 5:27 PM yesterday!

What thread are you refrencing, was gonna have a look see, thanks.

Comment #33

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 05:16:46 GMT

No, I'm referring to an earlier treatment of this same Ginther affair. When that ridiculous odds number was mentioned before, it was a joke to anyone who knows that the only way to get such an astronomical number is to MULTIPLY the odds of each of the 4 games by each other, which is patently absurd, unless you were predicting IN ADVANCE that you were going to win 4 specific games, IN ADVANCE!! It's still a joke! Of course, if you believe that the odds of a coin coming up heads is less that 50% a... [ More ]

Comment #32

jeffrey — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 05:15:56 GMT

where did you study math? sharpen those pencils and try again.

Comment #31

imagine — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 04:58:18 GMT

jimmy4164

The odds came from a series of mathmatecians that the AP consulted when the original story came out.

The author consulted a statician who said actually they are much higher.

I think you posted the wrong link. That thread has been closed for a year.

Comment #30

jimmy4164 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 04:21:12 GMT

This is an old story, bandied about here before.

It is nothing but harebrained, unproven, speculation, designed to get tongues wagging.

So, the odds of her winning these 4 lottery games is 1 in 18 septillion? I'm afraid not. Some idiot multipled together the probabilities of winning each of the 4 to come up with that number. Just as the probability of flipping a coin heads is 50%, no matter how many times it previously came up heads, so is the probability of winning a subsequent lottery pr... [ More ]

Comment #29

Trillionaire — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 04:05:04 GMT

Now that I understand the real importance of math and stats, I wish I had paid more attention to these subjects than to girls. Although, to be honest, the girls were a helluva lot more fun.

Comment #28

imagine — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 03:21:09 GMT

Texas is so free with it's information that Joan could have figured out from the info on the web, and the destination of such tickets.

A sparcely populated town like Bishop would help, with the lack of ticket sales, or if the store owner held the packs for her.

Comment #27

imagine — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 03:09:45 GMT

I did a digital download of this mag, just for this article. Just a brief summary.

The reporter talked to a statistics PhD who said the odds of one person hitting the 3 scratchers is much steeper than 18 septillion.

The reporter spoke to a state official from another lottery who said I am certain that the Texas Lottery is doing a serious investigation, and they are not going to let anyone know about it. An IRS investigation is the what the locals say promted the store closing.

The scrat... [ More ]

Comment #26

tg636 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 02:44:21 GMT

It wasn't luck. But asking her how she did it is like asking her if she wants to be arrested and sued.

The first win was luck, then she used her good fortune to study and investigate and learned something very interesting.

But we know it is in the states' interest to assure lottery players no one can figure out the games so Texas says Nope, nothing to see here, move along. But I think this quote from The Sting says it... What was I supposed to do - call him for cheating better than me, in... [ More ]

Comment #25

jarasan — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:35:16 GMT

I stand corrected. I didn't read it to the bottom on Drudge. Three wins were scratchies and one was not. Big scratchie games are expensive requiring a bank, but she did hit a non scratchie jackpot and she'll probably hit another before the end of a quadrillion years.

Comment #24

Lucki723 — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:24:27 GMT

Ginther is a former math professor with a PhD from Stanford University specialising in statistics.

Nuff Said

Comment #23

atoz — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 01:02:51 GMT

Boney the way I read it...3 of these wins were scrtatch offs............. Personally I find it hard to believe everything is kosher. I have always wondered about the people who work at the places that make the scratch offs. I think they could figure out a way to tell where the big payouts would be if they are not an honest person.

Comment #22

jarasan — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:33:48 GMT

This is making some heads explode. I don't think these are scratchies. This story was on Drudge. You can't explain it away. Accept it. Someone has a good methodology (system) whatever to win, just like the guy a few months ago who has repeatedly won. It is possible.

One can conclude this:

If you a have a good bank and system, play it and stick to it.

If you don't have a good bank and system.....................quick pig and hope for the best.

Release the pigs

Comment #21

diamondpalace — Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:21:30 GMT

Winning the jackpot multiple times with ball games then it can be seen as having good luck.

When winning with predetermind lottery games (scratch offs) or RNG type lottery multiple times, in millions, jackpot prizes, then there's a small chance being inside work.

If this is the work of highly sophisicated inside job, then someone has to stand forward to claim the winning tickets. Someone with a math degree, like a PhD so they don't question how it was done, because it's too complex you kno... [ More ]

Comment #20

sully16 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:32:02 GMT

Does seem to good to be true.

Comment #19

dallascowboyfan — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:31:15 GMT

WOW!!!!! I don't know what to make of this

Comment #18

rdgrnr — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:23:05 GMT

I'm not saying there was any hanky-panky going on but if there was, I would think that rather than her figuring out the algos and all that, it was something much more simple.

Like a person or persons at the Lottery or at the printing outfit telling his friend that he's sending the winning ticket(s) to his store and the store owner tells the lady to come in and buy that book of tickets and they all clandestinely split the winnings in some manner.

It's been done before.

I'd be interested... [ More ]

Comment #17

joshuacloak — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:17:39 GMT

you guys want random, play mega millions and powerball

Now that is where Luck Rules, even a person specialising in statistics will have a epic uphill fight vs them 2 games

however as others have pointed out, the card games are fixed, they just hide where the winners are shipped and when they shipped out in each game

i however do like what some states do with play it again, like tennessee

all the losers can be entered into a random raffle draw, and 1 winner at end of the gam... [ More ]

Comment #16

maringoman — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:06:42 GMT

I smell a big fat nasty hood rat. Methinks its an inside job. Follow the money...

Comment #15

mike4u2nb — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 23:00:42 GMT

This is funny a person winning four time some

questioning but non questioning one area in California that wins 95% of all lottery

games. That is scratchers, big spin, mega, the area wins almost all prizes

above one hundred thousand dollar yet more than half are unclaimed. The area in

California is a fifty mile radius around Los Angeles. If these women lived in

the LA area would this still be an issue? Now I know a lot of you will say LA

has the most winner because they buy the

Comment #14

Boney526 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 22:51:49 GMT

I suppose if it's not random enough, then you could find patterns with smallrt samples of data, I was sort of assuming it is random, but that would probably change state by state, if any states are random.

I always assumed they have a batch of say, 14 million computerized tickets, and a random number generator picks from them when are ordered by stores, and the digital tickets are printed out and sent off. If they decide to add more, they can easily do so, without the need to print them... [ More ]

Comment #13

eddessaknight — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:42:15 GMT

Congrats to the lucky + lady, we will probably learn how iy happend.

NEVER SAY NEVER

EddessaKnight

Comment #12

Jon D — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:29:23 GMT

You don't need to figure out the algorithm itself, just the result.

Scratch-offs are unlike all other lottery draw games. You are not dealing with a pseudo-random number generator, not dealing with probabilities on an undertermined timeline. You are dealing with a finite set.

The lottery publishes the data. A fixed number of tickets total for the game, and sequential numbering of ticket books, a fixed number of prizes in each prize tier. So you just need a sampling, like in any statistical... [ More ]

Comment #11

RJOh — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:27:52 GMT

If the company producing the tickets has an algorithm for distributing the prizes on the tickets then it was known by several people. However since she brought all her winning tickets at the same store in a little town of less than four thousand people, it wouldn't have helped her knowing it if the winning tickets weren't distributed in that town at that store.

Comment #10

Boney526 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:21:09 GMT

Obviously an algorithm is used, but without information of every scratch off printed, and even with it, you could end up with a multitude of algorithms that would achieve the same result.

Unless I just don't understand what an algorithm is, but I was under the assumption that an algorithm is a set of steps.

Comment #9

Jon D — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:17:31 GMT

I definitely think it's possible for this to more than just pure luck.

The whole idea of scratch-offs is to hide the winners in the manufacturing and distribution process. The problem is that they need to somewhat evenly distribute the top prizes otherwise they could lose money, every million tickets or so. It is not purely random and there is definitely some kind of algorithm. So if someone can determine which ranges of ticket books are more likely to contain the top prizes, they buy heavy o... [ More ]

Comment #8

Boney526 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:14:19 GMT

Can't vouch for Tennessee, but this type of stuff will happen from time to time. Plus I've seen the balls flying around, I know it's random, but I still rarely play Pick 3 anymore (50% payouts made me wanna stop playing, the worse popular Casino Table game - roullette - pays back 94ish percent, so I'll stick w/ JP games, where I'm not thinking about the low payout lol)

If Tennessee uses RNGs then I can say without a doubt it's not random. B/C computers are essentially non-random (there's... [ More ]

Comment #7

RJOh — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:10:10 GMT

What ever happened to those reporters who use to write lotteries are voluntary taxes for the uneducated and stupid ? Now we're finding out that not every lottery player is uneducated or stupid, but some have actually thought about what they are doing and have a strategy for winning. Obviously those players calculate their chances of winning differently than that professor at the Institute of Gambling who think anyone who wins more than once should be arrested and questioned. If they were interes... [ More ]

Comment #6

Boney526 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 21:03:05 GMT

EDIT: No idea why I quoted that.

I don't see how the odds could possibly be in the septillions, I'm assuming the calculated those odds by multiplying the odds of winning each of those prizes together, without accounting for the fact that she probably played a lot more than 4 tickets.

And to reverse engineer the algorithm that randomly (as random as a computer can get) distributes the prizes would be problematic to say the least. She'd have had to buy millions of tickets, and then h... [ More ]

Comment #5

tnhope — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 20:59:03 GMT

mmmhumm ... random? it isn't..

check out the cash 3 midday august 1st to august 7 220??? 220??? 220??? somebody getting the hook up huh doubles right...but in the same order

Comment #4

tnhope — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 20:50:40 GMT

Comment #3

Stack47 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 20:44:24 GMT

Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop.

Most store owners feel lucky if they sell a $5000 winner, but THREE million dollar plus winners in two years does raise an eyebrow; especially when the three winners are the same person.

Comment #2

jeffrey — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 19:55:06 GMT

sounds like she jacked the system. glad i didn't play. supposed to be random but it isn't. if someone snitched then there is fraud involved.

Comment #1

Hermanus104 — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 19:09:24 GMT

There is nothing that says that this cannot be the one year in a quadrillion where it happens.

Lucky lottery lady outed as Stanford University statistics PhD

Lottery Post — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:43:54 GMT

She was called the luckiest woman in the world.

But now that luck is being called into question by some who think that winning the lottery four times is more than just a coincidental spell of good fortune.

Joan R. Ginther, 63, from Texas, won multiple million dollar payouts each time.

First, she won $5.4 million, then a decade later, she won $2 million, then two years later $3 million and finally, in the spring of 2008, she hit a $10 million jackpot.

The odds of this has been calcula... [ More ]