To strategize or not to strategize? That is the question

Reply #66

elios311 — Sun, 28 Feb 2016 15:20:21 GMT

If you are talking about strategies like buying unpopular numbers or buying tickets at locations where rules are slightly different so the payout is higher, then I agree. I for example always pick numbers that other players avoid. That way, whenever I win in the lowest prize tier, in the majority of cases, I get above average payout because less people picked those unwanted numbers and therefore the prize pool for that tier was divided amongst less players. I get about 2-3 more than average. And... [ More ]

Reply #65

Stack47 — Sun, 28 Feb 2016 00:20:48 GMT

You increased the odds of a win when conditions were met, but you in turn reduced the odds that your conditions will be met by adding stringent criteria.

That's why I said Most gambling is based on conditions set by a bettor . Setting conditions does not change the odds against winning, but they can enhance the winnings when the conditions are met. It's like winning a $5 on a pick-3 straight number in KY compared to making the same bet in Ohio; the odds against are still 999 to 1 in either s... [ More ]

Reply #64

GatorShea — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 22:26:28 GMT

On another note, a buddy of mine and myself bought enough quick picks last night to cover most of the mega millions powerball except for two. I looked through my tickets and his numbers and noticed that 3 and 14 were the only two we did not get out of 25 quick picks. I texted him that we needed 3, 14 and 15 (I forgot that 14 was the highest). Being the math teacher that he is, he reminded me that we needed pi. I went to the store and did a qp for the numbers for 3 and a qp for the 14. Lo and beh... [ More ]

Reply #63

mathhead — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 21:51:06 GMT

Butch2030 wrote:

The odds on the back of a play slip might not the be the true odds of the game.

***Lets look at the back of a play slip for the IL Power Ball Game.

***Match 5 of 6 + PB = 1 : 292,201,338

***Match 5 of 6 = 1 : 11,688,054 (note: 11,688,054 x 26 PB = 303,889,404)

***Match 4 of 6 = 1 : 36,525

***Match 3 of 6 = 1 : 580

***

***Here are your true odds:

***Match 5 of 6 + PB = 1 : 292,201,338

***Match 5 of 6 = 1 : 11,238,513 (note: 11,238,513 x 26 PB = 292,2... [ More ]

Reply #62

eddessaknight — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 21:02:54 GMT

Well done elios, exactly why, statically, conventional linear numbers mostly fall in unpredictable manner

Warm Welcome to the LP Lottery Discussion Forum

Fortes Fortuna Juvat

Eddessa_Knight with Light

Reply #61

elios311 — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 20:15:17 GMT

There is a common misconception that random means equal representation. Random means unpredictable and not equal representation. A drawing machine that would equaly represent all numbers would by definition be non-random as we could predict future results by checking which numbers are underrepresented at the moment.

The very fact that some combinations came up more than others is the reason the draw can be called random as it is unpredictable.

Reply #60

butch2030 — Sat, 27 Feb 2016 17:57:45 GMT

1st of all - The odds of winning are not the same as your chances of winning.

***The odds of winning is a mathematical formula based on the numbers of balls used in a given game.

***The chances of winning depends on a lot of variables, but can be a lot better than your odds of winning.

***

2nd of all - Every Jackpot game has combinations of numbers that come in more often than others. This I

***can prove with no problems. - Just look at any of my post beginning with Comb... [ More ]

Reply #59

elios311 — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:14:22 GMT

If you're doing it for fun there is nothing wrong with it. But the argument here was about the belief that if you filter out numbers on your excel sheet, the balls in the drawing machine that you filtered out somehow magically become heavier.

If you claim that you're doing it for fun then ok, but then let's be clear about it. I don't take the scenic route to somewhere because it's faster, but because it is scenic. And if you use a lottery system because it is fun then you are not doing it be... [ More ]

Reply #58

BobP — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 08:20:55 GMT

Exactly: There is no need to eliminate numbers as they are eliminated automatically through your filter choices.

BobP

Reply #57

Domeman — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 00:25:54 GMT

While you certainly can filter or drop numbers from the field there is rarely a valid reason to do so as all numbers are equal in not being a measure of anything, a 4 is not worth less then a 5.

If people really believed this you would not play.

I personally use charts that I created that track everything.

Example is an Even/Odd chart. Its only has 8 rows. Waiting till it doubles on a row gives or correctly

selecting the correct row narrows you field numbers down 35 or 20.... [ More ]

Reply #56

destinycreation — Fri, 26 Feb 2016 00:01:19 GMT

Are you aware of the SIZE of FONT you're using here ??? It's too tiny - hard to read without my reading glasses !!!

I had to magnify the screen to 150 % !!!

Please Use a LARGER FONT

Reply #55

meenzy — Thu, 25 Feb 2016 23:34:00 GMT

Elios, I do agree that conditions have to be met but what other options do you have other than quick picks

Reply #54

elios311 — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:52:20 GMT

But it is also a gamble that conditions will be met.

You increased the odds of a win when conditions were met, but you in turn reduced the odds that your conditions will be met by adding stringent criteria.

For example; I bet on the dice-roll that the number 5 will come up. The odds are 1/6. But 5 is only one of the three odd numbers on the dice. So my conditions are that an odd number must come up and when that happens my odds are 1/3. But since the odds of an odd number being drawn in

Reply #53

Stack47 — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 05:04:30 GMT

Most gambling is based on conditions set by a bettor; making bets like pass line for Craps, even for Roulette, banker for Baccarat. favorite sports team etc. With lottery games, players can set a condition the pick-3 drawing will have mostly even number and the odds are much lower if the conditions are met . With jackpot games with a huge matrix, there are just too many combination so more filters are necessary.

The number of filters and which type depends on how many combos a player wants to... [ More ]

Reply #52

BobP — Wed, 17 Feb 2016 02:38:17 GMT

Probability

Reply #51

Wisconsin3054 — Tue, 16 Feb 2016 16:06:56 GMT

Can you explain what the valid reasons are to select and filter the way you are describing

Reply #50

SergeM — Tue, 16 Feb 2016 12:03:10 GMT

Programming QP's https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/299176/4484079 +35 000 EUR

Reply #49

BobP — Tue, 16 Feb 2016 07:25:37 GMT

While you certainly can filter or drop numbers from the field there is rarely a valid reason to do so as all numbers are equal in not being a measure of anything, a 4 is not worth less then a 5.

The way it works is to start with all the combinations, the jackpot is in there somewhere, right?

Now there are some valid reasons to select say 2/4, 3/3, 4/2 Odd/Even Low/High combinations versus 1/5, 0/6, 6/0, 5/1 until they are way past due.

Moving on, we can filter for the number of... [ More ]

Reply #48

elios311 — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:38:06 GMT

You don't solve the problem by picking yourself becase just like QP you don't have the knowledge of which combinations have already been sold.

Reply #47

meenzy — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 16:26:13 GMT

Haha bob,

how do you all like to filter your numbers?

Also a point I would like to make is, it is to your disadvantage to play quick picks vs. picking your own random numbers. The lottery has in place a system that is known to create duplicate tickets since it carries no memory. If your odds are terrible anyway why not be more unique in your terrible bet

Reply #46

elios311 — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 15:55:48 GMT

Then how do we know the difference between our odds were improved vs we were lucky?

It makes sense to me that if some balls were heavier, you should filter those out and your odds will be improved.

But filtering out equally likely balls then saying they weren't equally likely because I got it right is confirmation bias.

Reply #45

Wisconsin3054 — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 14:34:39 GMT

So you're saying if you successfully filter out the numbers that aren't picked, your odds are improved.

I can agree with that statement.

The problem that I see, however, is that when you combine the odds of successfully filtering out the numbers that aren't picked with the odds of picking the correct combination of numbers that remain after the filter, you end up with the same odds as you had to start with.

Of course, if you believe that past draws affect future draws, or that some othe... [ More ]

Reply #44

BobP — Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:23:58 GMT

How do you not understand the odds improvement is based on the strategy proving correct?

When you make any choice that results in the field being reduced and that choice turns out to be correct the odds of winning are improved.

If you filter down to one line and all those filter choices are correct, you then must win the jackpot. It simply does not matter if that lines stands at 1 in a billion, when the filter choices are correct and the resulting lines are put into play you win no m... [ More ]

Reply #43

RJOh — Sun, 14 Feb 2016 16:23:56 GMT

Players who really want to know the real odds of winning a game can find out fairly easy, the rest assume the odds are one in a billion even if it's a pick3 game.

Reply #42

elios311 — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 16:49:39 GMT

I find it interesting because people would argue whether buying two tickets cuts the odds is half.

When there were a few states with two plays for a dollar the game odds were given as half that of a lottery with one dollar plays without a whole lot of explanation as to why.

That's basic probability theory. You buy two combinations your odds are 2:(whatever it was)

If a lottery has a pool of numbers just: 1, 2, 3

and if two numbers get drawn then all possible combinations are... [ More ]

Reply #41

elios311 — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 16:34:32 GMT

The bigger the population of numbers you are left after filtering the better the odds of the winning combination being in it. If you don't filter at all you are left with the whole population which means that it has 100% chance of containing the winning combination. If you filter out 50% of all combinations then the odds of the remaining population containing the winning combination are 50%. If you have a lottery with 100 million combinations then filtering all but one combination out gives you... [ More ]

Reply #40

BobP — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 15:13:03 GMT

That's an interesting question. Depends on whether you're looking at dollar odds or game play odds.

Because you have to buy 8 lines the dollar odds are 8 of 6/48.

Because only 6 lines or fewer can have winning numbers among them the game odds are 6/36.

Actually if you could determine which 6 lines would have winning numbers, wouldn't be worth playing for one number per line, the intent is to have the winning numbers fall among 3 of the lines or fewer.

IMHO there has to be... [ More ]

Reply #39

docstrange — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 22:04:21 GMT

I am going to wait till the next gravitational wave hits the Earth, then buy my ticket

Reply #38

Wisconsin3054 — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:44:49 GMT

But doesn't it only become a 6/36 game for you if you are somehow able to determine in advance which 6 of the 8 lines the numbers will come from

Reply #37

BobP — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:40:04 GMT

A 6/48 game becomes a 6/36 game if played the way I described. There are 48 numbers on the 6x8 grid, there are 6 numbers drawn, the winning numbers can fall among no more then 6 lines so going into the draw the game for you is 6/36. The other two lines are in there, you paid for them, it's just a quirk of the game this happens.

BobP

Reply #36

BobP — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:34:52 GMT

That's why it's the strategy portion of the game, like chess it starts even, then strategy comes into play, when it works great, when not try again or try something different.

You do have it right, apply a strategy, when correct your odds are improved for that draw, when wrong not so much or not at all. Price paid for an improvement in some draws. What else you gonna do?

BobP

Reply #35

Wisconsin3054 — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:19:24 GMT

Seems like the idea but I'm not seeing how it actually accomplishes that. If your filter knocks out 3/4 of the possible combinations, then your pick within the remaining combinations will be quite a bit more likely in those times the actual draw comes out of those remaining combinations, but your pick within the remaining combinations will never come up in the 3/4 of draws that come out of the combinations you filtered out, leaving you with the same exact overall odds.

Reply #34

meenzy — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:02:50 GMT

I think the strategy is not to change the odds but increase the probability of matching a predicted pattern. The odds of what number pop up don't change but the probability of patterns I would think can be predicted based on the entropy of large numbers. Short run stats can have and will have permutations but the chances are that the draw will fit into a subset of predictable patterns with calculated odds for each pattern. For example looking at decades,even odd, consecutive etc. To tell me you... [ More ]

Reply #33

Wisconsin3054 — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:47:43 GMT

I'm still not seeing this. Whatever filter you use, if you narrow down to one set of numbers you still have a 1 in (enter original odds) chance. Could you better explain why the game goes from 6/48 to 6/36. Was there a filter used there that I'm missing? The way you describe it sounds like you believe every 6/48 game is actually 6/36.

Reply #32

BobP — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 13:14:50 GMT

From the moment you purchase a second unique combination a myriad of sub odds come into existence.

Every filter has its odds of being correct based on the sizes of populations it represents. As you add filters so you add odds of filters in combination being correct. When you end with 50 lines or 5 lines it is with the same overall odds of 50 or 5 lines against game size, but you also know what's in there is based on your strategy and if your strategy proves correct you must win because you... [ More ]

Reply #31

elios311 — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 10:10:25 GMT

Forgive me for not getting this at all. If in a lottery with say 1 : 100.000.000 odds you narrow down a field of number so that by now it contains 50 possible different combinations. The odds of a win in that field are now 50 : 100.000.000 regardless of the shape and position of that field on the slip. And when you narrow it down to just one combination the odds have further reduced and stopped at precisely 1 : 100.000.000 regardless of where you started narrowing down your field and in what way... [ More ]

Reply #30

meenzy — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 02:38:20 GMT

Every unique combination has the same odds, the overall odds never change, but odds of a reduced field do with each size change.

~well said

Reply #29

BobP — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 21:27:57 GMT

Well no, because the choices you make will determine whether you win or lose rather then a RNG code in a machine. Give your skills a chance. It's much easier to correctly select from six filter choices then 53 numbers. Especially when you can pick more then one for some filters and still narrow down to budget. Hey, if someone can win six coin flips in a row, anything is possible!

Every unique combination has the same odds, the overall odds never change, but odds of a reduced field do with... [ More ]

Reply #28

elios311 — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:24:17 GMT

Oh, so what you're saying is is that you're only doing it because it's more fun than QuickPicks? Odds remain the same or not it's just fun to do it? Ok then. I just thought that people assume that if a lottery has say one against a million chance of a win but that you have one against a billion if you play with 123456.

Reply #27

meenzy — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:22:08 GMT

Are you kidding me with yesterday's Powerball numbers? Pretty darn close to consecutive. 2,3,40,50,62 (5

Reply #26

BobP — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 11:08:54 GMT

That's why we refer to these techniques as strategies. This is why we can plow millions of equally likely combinations out of our glide path.

Take a step back from the pizza counter. What part of the city are we more likely to encounter a pizza parlor, Little China or Little Italy?

Every combination is representative of multiple combinational populations.

For example: When we filter out all but 3 low 3 high millions of combinations are taken out of our play book including: 01-02-03-04-0... [ More ]

Reply #25

elios311 — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 22:56:48 GMT

But that doesn't count here. While the pizza has a higher probability of being in the pizza parlor as opposed to somewhere else, the numbers 123456 however have the same probability of being drawn as numbers 608713.

Reply #24

meenzy — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:50:56 GMT

Agreed, unless some new hipster in town opens up a dry cleaner that offers pizza service. Think of it, while you wait and eat your pizza you stain your shirt. More business! Now all I have to do is win a Jackpot to fund this idea.

Reply #23

BobP — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:23:38 GMT

While the lottery does not pay off on anything but correct winning numbers, getting close shows you're on the right track.

For example, you walk up to the counter and order a pizza. You have a better chance of getting that pizza if you're in a pizza parlor then a dry cleaner. Being in the right place doesn't guarantee a prize, it's a starting point in problem solving. Solve enough problems (filters) and you can win a jackpot.

BobP

Reply #22

SilverLion — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 02:49:39 GMT

Six or seven? Or Six or Seven hundred

Reply #21

meenzy — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 01:30:02 GMT

It is of course true that it is more likely that a non-consecutive combination will be drawn. But that is simply because there are more non-consecutive combinations to be had.

That is what I was saying from the start haha I get what you are saying about applying stringent criteria. That is my point, we are talking about 1 specific criteria. similar to saying ill play all high numbers or all odd numbers or all numbers ending in 1. Basically variety is the spice of life.

~Wait...can I... [ More ]

Reply #20

elios311 — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:34:08 GMT

It is of course true that it is more likely that a non-consecutive combination will be drawn. But that is simply because there are more non-consecutive combinations to be had. Think again about the car accidents. The majority of them happen after the first week of the month. But you are no safer in the first week as opposed to in the second one. The majority of them happen outside of the second week, and the majority happen outside of the third week, and the majority happen outside of the fourth... [ More ]

Reply #19

meenzy — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:10:45 GMT

I agree that the numbers have no real significance they could be called apple jello chicken and serve the same function. My rational was purely how many combined ways you can make non consecutive numbers vs consecutive.Non-consecutive have more combinations physically. Thinking that, If there are more ways to make combinations how would this not make sense then that you are more likely to pick one of those many variant combinations vs. a specific sequence limiting your condition to relatively fe... [ More ]

Reply #18

elios311 — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 23:31:23 GMT

Thank you.

If there were less cups then yes, but since the color of the cups does not influence the decision under which cup the person places the coin, it therefore doesn't help you. You still have all three cups to choose from even though two are red. There is a 1/3 chance that the coin is under the blue cup, 1/3 chance that it is under the first red and a 1/3 chance that it is under the second red. Likewise, there is a one in a gazillion chance that the combination will be 123456, and a sa... [ More ]

Reply #17

SilverLion — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 20:59:43 GMT

You know, I have watched that movie many times, I have not yet caught that. I am going to have to watch again, next time during my workout.

Reply #16

meenzy — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 20:48:07 GMT

Thanks for the well thought out reply. I would like to 1st say welcome to LP! I guess the word chance was wrong as it means the odds and the odds are the same if you take out combinations or not. I guess I am asking will it increase the frequency of finding a coin if there are less cups to dig through to find that coin i.e. a winning ticket.

Reply #15

elios311 — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 20:04:54 GMT

You shouldn't agree with it. It's basically the same logic if someone said that you should go on a road trip on the first week of the month because the majority of car accidents happen in latter weeks of the month. The catch? There are more days in the latter weeks then in the first one so of course there will be a higher count of accidents in that longer period. The same can be said about the second, third and fourth week. So it's a logical fallacy.

And in the lottery example; yes there are... [ More ]

Reply #14

meenzy — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 20:01:40 GMT

hmm Good point sir.

Reply #13

BobP — Tue, 09 Feb 2016 14:42:31 GMT

Once again the winning lottery numbers are 01-02-03-04-05-06, there were no winners. Idiocracy (2006)

IMHO some simple strategies such as wheeling 12 numbers (12,6,4,6)=6 lines have an almost amazing odds reduction of having winning numbers among the 12 compared to among the 6.

BobP

Reply #12

meenzy — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 15:31:19 GMT

I read another interesting article about consecutive numbers can hurt your chances in the end. The bases for it seems rather straight forward and I think I agree with it. Even though any number is likely, the chance that all consecutive numbers will draw are far less than non-consecutive numbers. The reasoning is there are far more non-consecutive combinations then there are consecutive. So not only do you have to split your winnings if you chose consecutive numbers but you have a decreased draw... [ More ]

Reply #11

Murgatroyd — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 03:44:33 GMT

So many that the people who got second prize would be better off than the ones who won the jackpot.

Reply #10

GatorShea — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 02:06:19 GMT

I bought one ticket for Saturday's drawing with the least 5 drawn numbers of all time. No surprise that none of them were drawn.

Reply #9

RJOh — Mon, 08 Feb 2016 02:01:14 GMT

Six or Seven, I hear a few people play those numbers every drawings.

Reply #8

eddessaknight — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 22:41:29 GMT

Hi meenzy - et al

A couple of precepts that may be helpful to keep in mind:

Heisenberg Effect

Werner Heisenberg was a German theoretical physicist was a quantim forerunner saying that an event did not exist unless witnessed when observed the event becomes changed

Also the physicist Werner Heisenberg declared that the universe is made of music not of matter

~

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they... [ More ]

Reply #7

meenzy — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:05:59 GMT

That is funny and sad at the same time! Those #'s shall be referred to from now on as the numbers we do not speak of and yes I have Harry Potter on the brain.

Reply #6

SergeM — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:45:00 GMT

There may be stuff about programming that you don't know

Reply #5

SergeM — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:42:56 GMT

Millions of tickets may be sold. Percentage is a very rough number, and an average isn't worth much either.

There is more to it, that has not been discussed, I think, as usually and mostly superficial and enigmatic is king.

Reply #4

TheMeatman2005 — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:25:56 GMT

It's funny you bring up 1-2-3-4-5-6.

Back in the days when it wasn't illegal to gamble at online casinos, I used to play Blackjack on one of them. They offered a once-a-week bonus game called TIME2LOTTO It was a lotto style game where they used the numbers drawn by the NYS lottery on Saturday nights. Depending on how many bonus points you earned while playing during the week determined how many bets you could make.

I had so many bonus points that I played 1-2-3-4-5-6, 2-3-4-5-6-7, 3-4-5-6... [ More ]

Reply #3

gy65 — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:25:00 GMT

My thought is math has its place in number games because it can approximate physical limitations (as small as they may be) put on a physically operated lottery.

Per Powerball website . . .

About 70% to 80% of winners are computer picks.

Reply #2

sookie — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 19:13:09 GMT

My numbers are really random. They aren't a system or equations. When I bought my first ticket for Powerball a few years back it went like this: My favorite #, 2 ages in my life that meant a lot to me, the route # I was driving on to get the ticket and the speed I was driving at the time I looked down. When I got there and needed a powerball # too I picked the first # on the ticket slip I saw. They are random lol

I've won a lot with that set, go figure. I buy it on multiple draws.

Then wh... [ More ]

Reply #1

LiveInGreenBay — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 18:18:06 GMT

I wonder how many winners there would be if 1 2 3 4 5 6 came up

To strategize or not to strategize? That is the question

meenzy — Sun, 07 Feb 2016 17:56:50 GMT

Don't form combinations in a mathematical sequence

So many people select their lottery numbers by choosing a small number and then selecting each subsequent number by adding the same value to it. For example, they start with a 04 and then add six to each number to get 04, 10, 16, 22, 28, 34 as their combination. Or they use squared numbers to come up with their combination - for example, 04, 09, 16, 25, 36, 49.

Don't do this.

Choosing numbers in this way won't increase your chances of w... [ More ]