Semi interesting occurrence re NZ lottery this week

[Dr.Sid]

Notice the tricks you're playing on yourself despite your knowledge of the facts!
Roboramma's "1/14,000,000" tells you how close to zero you are. In my book, it equals zero for all practical purposes.
That "every week someone (!) wins some high price," is what the lottery sellers tell you over and over to persuade you to buy more lottery tickets. It's entirely unlikely that that someone will ever be you.
At least, I can rest assured that that someone won't ever be me!

I never said it's likely I would win. I said someone wins, by which I meant, even if the chance is low, it is possible. And think how much you increase your chance by buying the ticket !

 

[Dr.Sid]

The chance of someone winning is related not just to the chance of any individual winning, but also to the total number of people playing. If you had 10 times as many people playing it wouldn't alter your chances of winning at all, but it would change the length of time between anyone winning a jackpot. That suggests to me that your metric is flawed.

What metric ? I only meant that the chances are low, but not impossible. Nothing more.

What's important isn't whether or not anyone wins, but what your chances of winning are. And 1/14,000,000 is very small, regardless of how many other people there are playing the game.

If you have some reasoning that suggests the price is worth that tiny chance of winning, it should be based on those two things (the price and the chance of winning) and not dependant on a third irrelevant quantity (the number of other people playing).

I never said anything like there is third relevant quantity.

Except that your chances of winning are very relevant to both of those games. If you had 99% chance of turning your $100 into $200 you'd probably think it was worth it. If you had a 1/10¹⁰⁰ chance of winning the lottery you'd probably think it's not worth it. So clearly the probabilities are important.

I wasn't talking about 'worth it' as in financial term. Of course, all those games are designed NOT to generate income for players, on average. I was talking about the effect on your life. The attractiveness of the price is different. Extra $100 is nothing compared to extra $1.5M. Also the price of the game is lower. It's lot harder to ruin yourself on $1 lottery (certainly not impossible of course).

 

[Roboramma]

What metric ? I only meant that the chances are low, but not impossible. Nothing more.

The one you used: you said

"But almost every week someone wins some high price. Jackpot streaks, where nobody wins the top price, so it goes to the next, are not very long."
Which is entirely irrelevant to whether or not it's worthwhile for you to play, for the reasons I outlined in my previous post.

I never said anything like there is third relevant quantity.

You implicitly included that third quantity in your analysis.

I wasn't talking about 'worth it' as in financial term.

You need to be talking about worth it in some terms. So what are those terms?

Of course, all those games are designed NOT to generate income for players, on average. I was talking about the effect on your life.

So far you've only mentioned the effect on your life in financial terms, for instance:

The attractiveness of the price is different. Extra $100 is nothing compared to extra $1.5M. Also the price of the game is lower. It's lot harder to ruin yourself on $1 lottery (certainly not impossible of course).

You're just talking about dollar values. Is there something else you thought changed things?

I haven't assumed some linear value to money such that the first dollar won is equal to the millionth dollar won, but you also haven't given are argument for a different scale that you're working from. Whatever that scale is the first $100 isn't nothing.

 

[Dr.Sid]

The one you used: you said

"But almost every week someone wins some high price. Jackpot streaks, where nobody wins the top price, so it goes to the next, are not very long."
Which is entirely irrelevant to whether or not it's worthwhile for you to play, for the reasons I outlined in my previous post.

I never said it is relevant. Not sure what do you mean by 'worthwile for you to play' though.

You implicitly included that third quantity in your analysis.

I did no such things. You are overthinking it.

You need to be talking about worth it in some terms. So what are those terms?

So far you've only mentioned the effect on your life in financial terms, for instance:

You're just talking about dollar values. Is there something else you thought changed things?

I haven't assumed some linear value to money such that the first dollar won is equal to the millionth dollar won, but you also haven't given are argument for a different scale that you're working from. Whatever that scale is the first $100 isn't nothing.

I was talking about entertainment. Fun. Like in "is this movie worth watching ?". Of course you won't make money on watching movie, but it still can be worth it. And I just stated my personal opinion. I don't see appeal in casino games, while I do see some appeal in lotteries, some of them at least.

Of course, English is not my native language and expressing thoughts exactly can be hard, but you seem to miss my points in your desire to nitpick.

 

[Roboramma]

I never said it is relevant.

If it wasn't relevant, why did you mention it?

Not sure what do you mean by 'worthwile for you to play' though.

Define worthwhile however you like. You are talking about something, right? You want to play the lottery for some reason, ie. you think it's worth playing. That can be, as you say below, because it's fun or for any other number of reasons. You wrote a post talking about that.

It's quite possible that you didn't fully explain the reasoning, but I found that the reasoning that you did post to be flawed. That's all.

I did no such things. You are overthinking it.

You quite clearly did, though maybe it wasn't intentional. Feel free to reread your post.

I was talking about entertainment. Fun. Like in "is this movie worth watching ?". Of course you won't make money on watching movie, but it still can be worth it. And I just stated my personal opinion. I don't see appeal in casino games, while I do see some appeal in lotteries, some of them at least.

That's fine, if you find it fun and worth the price, play. I have no problem with that.

The fact that someone wins every week doesn't demonstrate anything with relation to that, and it was your inclusion of that in your reasoning that I'm objecting to.

Of course, English is not my native language and expressing thoughts exactly can be hard, but you seem to miss my points in your desire to nitpick.

If I'm nitpicking something meaningless, sorry. I am just trying to make clear one issue that I do think is meaningful with respect to the lottery: the fact that someone wins isn't a good reason to think the lottery is worth playing, no matter what "worth playing" means or is based on.

 

[Dr.Sid]

If I'm nitpicking something meaningless, sorry. I am just trying to make clear one issue that I do think is meaningful with respect to the lottery: the fact that someone wins isn't a good reason to think the lottery is worth playing, no matter what "worth playing" means or is based on.

Of course it depends on what "worth playing" is based on. For example for the company running the lottery it's most important that people do win time to time. And for me it adds to the thrill, and the thrill is the fun. If the chances were 1:14 billion, nobody would win in a year, and it would become boring.

Anyway .. if you are hungry for silly probability claims, I have one. There is special working system, how to always make money on games like this. It works on all pure probability games. Like lotteries, roulette and so on. It's based on math of course, and it's been confirmed in real life countless times. It made some people billionaires. It works like this: you own the casino.

 

[Roboramma]

I guess for me the fact that it's 1/14million means that the odds are already low enough that it's boring, so I don't really see how the fact that other people win all the time adds to the excitement. I mean, if it were 1/14 billion but you had one thousand times as many people playing, would you find it exciting then?

But that's probably just psychology, if you enjoy playing it I don't have an issue with that.

 

[dann]

There is special working system, how to always make money on games like this. It works on all pure probability games. Like lotteries, roulette and so on. It's based on math of course, and it's been confirmed in real life countless times. It made some people billionaires. It works like this: you own the casino.

Even that system doesn't always work!

Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, lost money every year from 1995 until it went bankrupt in 2004 -- more than $600 million in total losses.
Donald Trump and the art of losing money (CNN, Oct. 2, 2016)

 

[Dr.Sid]

Even that system doesn't always work!

Well even best systems can be implemented wrong, some people just have special talents

 

[marting]

A friend of ours won the state lottery (mid 8 figures and selected the 20 year payout) some decades ago when she was quite young. Years later she was my wife's colleague and close friend for about 10 years when it came up indirectly in conversation. The friend just assumed my wife knew or she had told her some time in the past. Surprisingly, she lives a pretty normal life with a regular job paying 60k or so. She put it gradually into real estate and stocks. Smart woman. What I find most interesting is that it didn't seem to have effected her career. For that matter it isn't even clear anyone there even knew. And this state requires public disclosure of winners and hers was in all the state newspapers and easily found on the web. However, it was many years before she got out of college and started working with my wife.

 

[Scorpion]

I have told you guys how I won on the lottery, but being skeptics you don't believe me.
You have to develop telepathy and tune in to a spirit guide who can see into the future, and get them to give you the numbers. I did this once but I only got five numbers.
The spirit world allowed me special dispensation to win enough to buy a computer.
But normally they will not do this as it is bad karma, and that is why I can't win big.

 

[Pixel42]

I have told you guys how I won on the lottery, but being skeptics capable of rational thought and having a basic understanding of the laws of probability you don't believe me.

FTFY.

 

[Ladewig]

I'm no psychologist, but would imagine it is because every one except 13 can be someones birth month and they are all under 31 so cover days as well.

So think it tends to show people still use birthdates to pick their numbers

I think you have made an error in your reasoning. If it were simply birthday picking, it would not be the most widely-split jackpot in the lottery’s history. I’m sure many, many other winning draws all had Numbers less than 31, but did not split as widely.

I’d love to survey the winners to determine how many thought of this particular series before filling out the playcard and how many looked at the playcard and simply made a pattern.

 

[Ladewig]

In the US, a lot of people seem to buy tickets with numbers in patterns. Back when I worked at a store that sold the lottery, people who wanted to play the daily three number or four number drawings, and wanted 123, 1234, 2468, or something similar, would usually have to buy them a week in advance to get them before they were sold out.

What are you talking about? Why would they have to wait a week?

 

[Ladewig]

I do look at state lotteries with pick three games as a great argument for libertarianism. In the old days when organized crime ran the numbers racquet, they would pay between 600:1 and 750:1 (depending on city and neighborhood).

Now that the government has a monopoly on it, they pay 500:1.