Powerball Power Play Number Almost Always 2 ?Prev TopicNext Topic

• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 15, 2014, 8:09 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to LottoMetro

  Quote: Originally posted by LottoMetro on Apr 15, 2014

  Chi-squared analysis. It's the same exact test used by lottery auditors, whose sole purpose, by the way, is to determine if the drawings are rigged/biased.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chi-squared_test

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson%27s_chi-squared_test

  There are also other tests for smaller samples, i.e. auditing when a game has just been launched.

  Χ² ah, yes.

  test, hmm, good.

  within the test, what are you using as an expected frequency?

  or better yet, how are you deriving the expected frequency?

  observations we have, it's that pesky expectedness we like to see.

  

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• LottoMetro

  

  Happyland
  United States
  Member #146,336
  September 1, 2013
  1,182 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 15, 2014, 8:54 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to JADELottery

  Quote: Originally posted by JADELottery on Apr 15, 2014

  Χ² ah, yes.

  test, hmm, good.

  within the test, what are you using as an expected frequency?

  or better yet, how are you deriving the expected frequency?

  observations we have, it's that pesky expectedness we like to see.

  

  Since PowerPlay is only 1 digit it's pretty simple: the expected frequency is derived from the proportion of digits that are theoretically supposed to come up. For the case of x2, the odds are 1 in 2. This means the expected frequency is 50% of drawings. For x3, the expected frequency is about 30% of drawings.

  For x2

  24 drawings = 12 expected

  26 drawings = 13 expected

  For x3

  24 drawings = 7.21 expected

  26 drawings = 7.81 expected

  etc.

  Obviously, 7.21 exact appearances is impossible, but that doesn't matter. It's just the expected theoretical frequency. When you do the chi-squared test it basically just compares the observed frequency versus the 'expected' frequency discussed above. You calculate a p-value for the x² statistic and check it against significance values (i.e. 0.05, 0.10). Anything outside these levels indicates that there is insufficient evidence for a bias; on the other hand, if you see values within these levels, there's a pretty good chance you've got a biased drawing on your hands.

  • 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?
  • I believe Joan Ginther ("world's luckiest woman") merely played lottery as a tax strategy. Evidence: zero prize claims through 10 years after her last Lotto Texas annuity payment!
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 15, 2014, 9:00 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to LottoMetro

  Quote: Originally posted by LottoMetro on Apr 15, 2014

  Since PowerPlay is only 1 digit it's pretty simple: the expected frequency is derived from the proportion of digits that are theoretically supposed to come up. For the case of x2, the odds are 1 in 2. This means the expected frequency is 50% of drawings. For x3, the expected frequency is about 30% of drawings.

  For x2

  24 drawings = 12 expected

  26 drawings = 13 expected

  For x3

  24 drawings = 7.21 expected

  26 drawings = 7.81 expected

  etc.

  Obviously, 7.21 exact appearances is impossible, but that doesn't matter. It's just the expected theoretical frequency. When you do the chi-squared test it basically just compares the observed frequency versus the 'expected' frequency discussed above. You calculate a p-value for the x² statistic and check it against significance values (i.e. 0.05, 0.10). Anything outside these levels indicates that there is insufficient evidence for a bias; on the other hand, if you see values within these levels, there's a pretty good chance you've got a biased drawing on your hands.

  You're sure you want to go with those values?

  We see a problem.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• LottoMetro

  

  Happyland
  United States
  Member #146,336
  September 1, 2013
  1,182 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 15, 2014, 9:04 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to JADELottery

  Quote: Originally posted by JADELottery on Apr 15, 2014

  You're sure you want to go with those values?

  We see a problem.

  There are 10 total "virtual" PowerPlay balls:

  • 1 for 5X
  • 1 for 4X
  • 3 for 3X
  • 5 for 2X

  5X = 1/10 = 10%

  4X = 1/10 = 10%

  3X = 3/10 = 30%

  2X = 5/10 = 50%

  Total 100%

  Aside from the simple method, using percentages above, you can use the E_i = N/n like so: E(2X) = 24 (drawings) * 5 (x2 balls) / 10 (total balls) =  12

  Calculating chi for 2X where observed = 16 and expected = 12:

  x² = (16-12)²/12 = 1.3333

  p-value is essentially 1, Excel says 0.9982

  Other chi results:

  • x² = 0.0667 for 5X
  • x² = 0.0667 for 4X
  • x² = 1.4222 for 3X

  Naturally, none of which are significant.

  • 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?
  • I believe Joan Ginther ("world's luckiest woman") merely played lottery as a tax strategy. Evidence: zero prize claims through 10 years after her last Lotto Texas annuity payment!
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 15, 2014, 10:15 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to LottoMetro

  Quote: Originally posted by LottoMetro on Apr 15, 2014

  There are 10 total "virtual" PowerPlay balls:

  • 1 for 5X
  • 1 for 4X
  • 3 for 3X
  • 5 for 2X

  5X = 1/10 = 10%

  4X = 1/10 = 10%

  3X = 3/10 = 30%

  2X = 5/10 = 50%

  Total 100%

  Aside from the simple method, using percentages above, you can use the E_i = N/n like so: E(2X) = 24 (drawings) * 5 (x2 balls) / 10 (total balls) =  12

  Calculating chi for 2X where observed = 16 and expected = 12:

  x² = (16-12)²/12 = 1.3333

  p-value is essentially 1, Excel says 0.9982

  Other chi results:

  • x² = 0.0667 for 5X
  • x² = 0.0667 for 4X
  • x² = 1.4222 for 3X

  Naturally, none of which are significant.

  Hmm.

  Hmm, hmm.

  Hmm, hmm, hmm.

  Yes.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 16, 2014, 6:07 am

  ▲▼

  However, we see a problem.

  We'll get back in a bit.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• THRIFTY

  

  NEW YORK
  United States
  Member #90,529
  April 29, 2010
  13,411 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 16, 2014, 11:21 am

  ▲▼

  Winning the lottery is a numbers game. Buy more lottery tickets per drawing to increase your chances of winning instead of playing Powerplay.
• THRIFTY

  

  NEW YORK
  United States
  Member #90,529
  April 29, 2010
  13,411 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 16, 2014, 12:10 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to mypiemaster

  Quote: Originally posted by mypiemaster on Apr 5, 2014

  Been all pi$$ed off about the PB not having a multiplier for 2nd prize, and the stupid 2x multiplier which makes absolutely no sense. When I think about it, I get all-pi$$ed-off again, so I quit thinking about it. Now I'm all pi$$ed off again.

  Time to take a break from playing the lottery? You can still buy 1 Powerplay ticket monthly or yearly.
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 19, 2014, 1:32 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to JADELottery

  Quote: Originally posted by JADELottery on Apr 16, 2014

  However, we see a problem.

  We'll get back in a bit.

  we're working on it.

  we just had a very intense work week.

  just another $X,000.00 take home pay check.

  the X you'll have to guess.

  

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• CARBOB

  

  COLUMBUS,GA.
  United States
  Member #4,924
  June 3, 2004
  6,719 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 19, 2014, 1:36 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to JADELottery

  Quote: Originally posted by JADELottery on Apr 19, 2014

  we're working on it.

  we just had a very intense work week.

  just another $X,000.00 take home pay check.

  the X you'll have to guess.

  

  x=10
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 19, 2014, 1:44 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to CARBOB

  Quote: Originally posted by CARBOB on Apr 19, 2014

  x=10

  No, but good guess.

  We're not quite that greedy.

  Just enough to keep us happy and pay the bills; with a little leftover for fun.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 19, 2014, 1:45 pm

  ▲▼

  Now the problem.
  
  We'll start with a simple view of odds.
  
  When odds are stated, they generally refer to the likely chance the event or selection will happen, not it won't happen.
  
  Examples are:
  
  You don't hear it phrased as "Your odds of Not being struck by lightening are ...", it's "Your odds of being struck by lightening are ..."
  
  You don't hear it talked about as "Your odds of Not dieing in a plane crash is .."
  
  You don't read about "Your odds of Not being in a car accident is ..."
  
  When you hear or read about odds of something, it's expressed as what is chance it will happen.
  
  Anyone that tells us otherwise, we tend to think of them as having behavior consistent with a scam or con artist.
  
  So, as we move forward, keep in mind we are talking about the odds of a multiplier being selected, not the odds it won't be selected.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• JADELottery

  

  Eagle Sun

  IA, MN, WI
  United States
  Member #21
  December 7, 2001
  5,177 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 20, 2014, 11:17 am

  ▲▼

  Alright, here we go.
  
  Throughout this topic odds have made an appearance and have been used to explain the occurrences of the various multiplier selections.
  
  The Megaplier does have problems, but it seems to benefit the player more than the Power Play multiplier does.
  
  For now we'll focus on the Power Play multiplier.
  
  There are 3 different odds to work with: Stated, Calculated and Estimated.
  
  The Stated and Calculated should always be in exact agreement with each other.
  
  The Estimated odds should be very close to the Stated and Calculated odds.
  
  If we state the odds of something is 1 in 50 and a 100 selections later we estimate the odds to be 1 in 3, something is wrong.
  
  Overall, all 3 of these odds need to be in general agreement of each other.
  
  The Stated odds for the Power Play are fixed by the lottery and they are:
  

  Power Play	Odds
  2	1 in 2
  3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 10
  5	1 in 10

  
  
  LottoMetro has given us some virtual bias values for a possible explanation of the high number of x2 selections, with the Power Play in ascending order:
  

  Power Play	Number of Virtual "Power Play" Balls
  2	5
  3	3
  4	1
  5	1

  
  
  From these values we can Calculate the odds of each Power Play.
  
  A = 5, B = 3, C = 1, D = 1
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in (B + C + D) / A	1 in 2
  3	1 in (A + C + D) / B	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in (A + B + D) / C	1 in 10
  5	1 in (A + B + C) / D	1 in 10

  
  
  Substitute the values it becomes:
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in (3 + 1 + 1) / 5	1 in 2
  3	1 in (5 + 1 + 1) / 3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in (5 + 3 + 1) / 1	1 in 10
  5	1 in (5 + 3 + 1) / 1	1 in 10

  
  
  This becomes:
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in 5 / 5	1 in 2
  3	1 in 7 / 3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 9 / 1	1 in 10
  5	1 in 9 / 1	1 in 10

  
  
  Finally, make the fractions decimal values.
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in 1	1 in 2
  3	1 in 2.33	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 9	1 in 10
  5	1 in 9	1 in 10

  
  
  Based on LottoMetro's biased virtual ball counts, there's a problem with the calculated odds matching up with the stated odds.
  
  Both of these Must be exactly equal for each of the Power Play odds.
  
  So, which is correct in values.
  
  Simple, test them using the formula we gave earlier: w·x·y·z - w·x - w·y - w·z - x·y - x·z - y·z - 2·w - 2·x - 2·y - 2·z - 3 .
  
  This formula will always be 0 if the odds have been stated or calculated correct.
  
  We have already done Power Play's stated odds using the formula and it does not become 0.
  
  Let's run LottoMetro's virtual odds.
  
  If w = 1, x = 7 / 3, y = 9, z = 9, then the formula works out to the following:
  
  1 · (7 / 3) · 9 · 9 - 1 · (7 / 3) - 1 · 9 - 1 · 9 - (7 / 3) · 9 - (7 / 3) · 9 - 9 · 9 - 2 · 1 - 2 · (7 / 3) - 2 · 9 - 2 · 9 - 3
  
  189 - (7 / 3) - 9 - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (560 / 3) - 9 - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (533 / 3) - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (506 / 3) - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (443 / 3) - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (380 / 3) - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (137 / 3) - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (131 / 3) - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  39 - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  21 - 18 - 3
  
  3 - 3
  
  0
  
  Looks like LottoMetro's assertion the virtual biased ball counts are correct, however, the odds do not match the stated odds.
  
  Therein lay the problem, the stated and calculated odds do not match Exactly.
  
  It's our assertion, you will never find any combination of virtual ball counts that can produce the exact same odds as the ones stated by the lottery.
  
  Since we have shown the test for odds correctness works when odds are calculated and stated correctly, it becomes fairly obvious, the stated Power Play odds appear to be bogus.
  
  This is also demonstrated by the Estimated odds.
  
  As of 2014-04-20, the frequency of the Power Play for this run of the game's version is:
  

  Power Play	Frequency
  2	16
  3	5
  4	2
  5	3

  
  
  The estimated odds based on this frequency and compared to the stated odds is:
  

  Power Play	Frequency	Estimated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	16	1 in 0.63	1 in 2.00
  3	5	1 in 4.20	1 in 3.33
  4	2	1 in 12.00	1 in 10.00
  5	3	1 in 7.67	1 in 10.00

  
  
  The odds are fairly close except Power Play 2 appears stick out as being bogus.
  
  When we look and compare LottoMetro's virtual odds to the sampled estimated odds we can see they are a much better fit:
  

  Power Play	Frequency	Estimated Odds	LottoMetro's Odds
  2	16	1 in 0.63	1 in 1
  3	5	1 in 4.20	1 in 2.33
  4	2	1 in 12.00	1 in 9
  5	3	1 in 7.67	1 in 9

   

  The x2 value is much closer to 1 in 1 than 1 in 2.
  
  So, this boils down to a simple assertion.
  
  The stated odds are most likely Not Correct.

  With more drawings, we can see how the Estimated odds fair against both the Stated and LottoMetro's odds.

  We'll monitor this for a bit and may post a reply or two as there are more drawings to estimate odds.

  For now, you can debate this among yourselves.

  We've said all we have to up to this point.

  The One Over None
  I Know...
• LottoMetro

  

  Happyland
  United States
  Member #146,336
  September 1, 2013
  1,182 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 20, 2014, 12:22 pm

  ▲▼

  I've never seen a lottery that had a number frequency matching its odds of appearance exactly. Randomness keeps this from happening. As such anything is game for the short run.....streaks, skips, whatever.

  There's only been 26 draws of Power Play and you already believe it's rigged/bogus/biased....despite me providing statistical evidence to the contrary. Honestly I don't think there have been enough draws to reach this conclusion. Last night Power Play number 5 came up.

  On an unrelated note, yesterday I heard via recording of a panelist in November that they are going to change Powerball again. Apparently an average of 14 jackpots per year is too many, so they will probably raise the bonus ball pool from 35 to 45 but keep the price $2. Don't know when this will take place though, but it came from the horse's mouth.

  • 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?
  • I believe Joan Ginther ("world's luckiest woman") merely played lottery as a tax strategy. Evidence: zero prize claims through 10 years after her last Lotto Texas annuity payment!
• Jon D

  

  Los Angeles, California
  United States
  Member #103,807
  January 5, 2011
  1,530 Posts
  Offline
  Apr 20, 2014, 12:53 pm

  ▲▼
  In response to JADELottery

  Quote: Originally posted by JADELottery on Apr 20, 2014

  Alright, here we go.
  
  Throughout this topic odds have made an appearance and have been used to explain the occurrences of the various multiplier selections.
  
  The Megaplier does have problems, but it seems to benefit the player more than the Power Play multiplier does.
  
  For now we'll focus on the Power Play multiplier.
  
  There are 3 different odds to work with: Stated, Calculated and Estimated.
  
  The Stated and Calculated should always be in exact agreement with each other.
  
  The Estimated odds should be very close to the Stated and Calculated odds.
  
  If we state the odds of something is 1 in 50 and a 100 selections later we estimate the odds to be 1 in 3, something is wrong.
  
  Overall, all 3 of these odds need to be in general agreement of each other.
  
  The Stated odds for the Power Play are fixed by the lottery and they are:
  

  Power Play	Odds
  2	1 in 2
  3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 10
  5	1 in 10

  
  
  LottoMetro has given us some virtual bias values for a possible explanation of the high number of x2 selections, with the Power Play in ascending order:
  

  Power Play	Number of Virtual "Power Play" Balls
  2	5
  3	3
  4	1
  5	1

  
  
  From these values we can Calculate the odds of each Power Play.
  
  A = 5, B = 3, C = 1, D = 1
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in (B + C + D) / A	1 in 2
  3	1 in (A + C + D) / B	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in (A + B + D) / C	1 in 10
  5	1 in (A + B + C) / D	1 in 10

  
  
  Substitute the values it becomes:
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in (3 + 1 + 1) / 5	1 in 2
  3	1 in (5 + 1 + 1) / 3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in (5 + 3 + 1) / 1	1 in 10
  5	1 in (5 + 3 + 1) / 1	1 in 10

  
  
  This becomes:
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in 5 / 5	1 in 2
  3	1 in 7 / 3	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 9 / 1	1 in 10
  5	1 in 9 / 1	1 in 10

  
  
  Finally, make the fractions decimal values.
  

  Power Play	Calculated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	1 in 1	1 in 2
  3	1 in 2.33	1 in 3.33
  4	1 in 9	1 in 10
  5	1 in 9	1 in 10

  
  
  Based on LottoMetro's biased virtual ball counts, there's a problem with the calculated odds matching up with the stated odds.
  
  Both of these Must be exactly equal for each of the Power Play odds.
  
  So, which is correct in values.
  
  Simple, test them using the formula we gave earlier: w·x·y·z - w·x - w·y - w·z - x·y - x·z - y·z - 2·w - 2·x - 2·y - 2·z - 3 .
  
  This formula will always be 0 if the odds have been stated or calculated correct.
  
  We have already done Power Play's stated odds using the formula and it does not become 0.
  
  Let's run LottoMetro's virtual odds.
  
  If w = 1, x = 7 / 3, y = 9, z = 9, then the formula works out to the following:
  
  1 · (7 / 3) · 9 · 9 - 1 · (7 / 3) - 1 · 9 - 1 · 9 - (7 / 3) · 9 - (7 / 3) · 9 - 9 · 9 - 2 · 1 - 2 · (7 / 3) - 2 · 9 - 2 · 9 - 3
  
  189 - (7 / 3) - 9 - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (560 / 3) - 9 - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (533 / 3) - 9 - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (506 / 3) - 21 - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (443 / 3) - 21 - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (380 / 3) - 81 - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (137 / 3) - 2 - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  (131 / 3) - (14 / 3) - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  39 - 18 - 18 - 3
  
  21 - 18 - 3
  
  3 - 3
  
  0
  
  Looks like LottoMetro's assertion the virtual biased ball counts are correct, however, the odds do not match the stated odds.
  
  Therein lay the problem, the stated and calculated odds do not match Exactly.
  
  It's our assertion, you will never find any combination of virtual ball counts that can produce the exact same odds as the ones stated by the lottery.
  
  Since we have shown the test for odds correctness works when odds are calculated and stated correctly, it becomes fairly obvious, the stated Power Play odds appear to be bogus.
  
  This is also demonstrated by the Estimated odds.
  
  As of 2014-04-20, the frequency of the Power Play for this run of the game's version is:
  

  Power Play	Frequency
  2	16
  3	5
  4	2
  5	3

  
  
  The estimated odds based on this frequency and compared to the stated odds is:
  

  Power Play	Frequency	Estimated Odds	Stated Odds
  2	16	1 in 0.63	1 in 2.00
  3	5	1 in 4.20	1 in 3.33
  4	2	1 in 12.00	1 in 10.00
  5	3	1 in 7.67	1 in 10.00

  
  
  The odds are fairly close except Power Play 2 appears stick out as being bogus.
  
  When we look and compare LottoMetro's virtual odds to the sampled estimated odds we can see they are a much better fit:
  

  Power Play	Frequency	Estimated Odds	LottoMetro's Odds
  2	16	1 in 0.63	1 in 1
  3	5	1 in 4.20	1 in 2.33
  4	2	1 in 12.00	1 in 9
  5	3	1 in 7.67	1 in 9

   

  The x2 value is much closer to 1 in 1 than 1 in 2.
  
  So, this boils down to a simple assertion.
  
  The stated odds are most likely Not Correct.

  With more drawings, we can see how the Estimated odds fair against both the Stated and LottoMetro's odds.

  We'll monitor this for a bit and may post a reply or two as there are more drawings to estimate odds.

  For now, you can debate this among yourselves.

  We've said all we have to up to this point.

  JADE,

  I think the discrepancy you're seeing is just due to the fundamental problem with the lottery industry referring to probability as odds.

  I posted about this many times before, eg:
  https://www.lotterypost.com/news/267366/3307806

  Basically:

  probability = chances for / total chances (or x in y)
  odds = chances for : chances against (or x to y)

  So for Powerplay, what the lottery calls "odds" is really the probability:
  2x - 1 in 2 (or 5 in 10)
  3x - 1 in 3.33 (or 3 in 10)
  4x - 1 in 10
  5x - 1 in 10

  The equivalent *actual* odds for Powerplay:
  2x - 5 to 5 (or 1:1, aka "50:50")
  3x - 3 to 7 (or 1:2.33)
  4x - 1 to 9
  5x - 1 to 9
  Which you have confirmed, and your assessment is technically correct based on proper terminology.

  Have a Happy Easter! 

  
  P.S. Don't mind LottoMetro's arrogant condescending remark from above:
  "There's only been 26 draws of Power Play and you already believe it's rigged/bogus/biased....despite me providing statistical evidence to the contrary."
  LottoMetro can't help acting like a jerk if anyone dares question him. He has even admitted this himself in a previous post: I admit my social skills are lacking.
  But since LottoMetro lacks that sensitivity chip, he's the last one to be evaluating wherther or not he's being offensive.