• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Lotto Probability

tkingdoll said:
Exactly. Superstition. You don't do something because you fear something bad will happen.
Click to expand...

No, I don't *fear* that it will happen. I don't think it is at all likely to be *that* day that my numbers are drawn. I just know that if it was to happen that day, I would regret not playing that day for the rest of my life.

If anything, it's only just as dumb as playing the lottery in the first place.

I don't really know what I would do though. I don't have any special numbers because in the lottery, there are no numbers that are special. If I play (only on full moons, of course ....) I usually use the quick tip random numbers.
 
Smart_Cookie said:
I guess if you're going to play, probably best to stick to Quick Picks!
Click to expand...

As long as the thread topic seems to be bouncing around a bit, does anyone know if the quick-pick algorithm that is used purposely avoids combinations consisting of six consecutive numbers? I imagine that the vast majority of people who buy quick-pick lotto tickets would not understand that 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 has the exact same probability of 8, 21, 29, 36, 41, 45. Such people might feel cheated because they would (falsely) believe that they have a smaller chance of winning.
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
As long as the thread topic seems to be bouncing around a bit, does anyone know if the quick-pick algorithm that is used purposely avoids combinations consisting of six consecutive numbers?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think it would have to. The probability of such a combination coming up randomly is only one in 3 million anyway. Although it wouldn't surprise me to find out it did.
 
skeptigirl said:
OK, let's look at this probability problem here and see how it pans out. You guys picked on me, now let me point out this fallacy as well.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think my point and Bob Klase's was that if you played the same numbers every week for 250,000 years you had the exact same chance of eventually winning as anybody who played that long....regardless of the numbers picked....

I was, at any rate, being a bit facetious...

However, it IS a powerful fallacy that always picking the same numbers would somehow increase your odds. Even though it's quite obvious that it can't. That's why I tend to always play "quick picks" when I feel like throwing money away...

However, are your chances of a match the same if you play 13,000,000 unique number combinations in one draw compared to playing 13,000,000 entries of the same combination in one draw? Also, is playing 13,000,000 entries in one draw the same odds as playing one entry every week for 250,000 years?
 
Ladewig said:
As long as the thread topic seems to be bouncing around a bit, does anyone know if the quick-pick algorithm that is used purposely avoids combinations consisting of six consecutive numbers? I imagine that the vast majority of people who buy quick-pick lotto tickets would not understand that 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 has the exact same probability of 8, 21, 29, 36, 41, 45. Such people might feel cheated because they would (falsely) believe that they have a smaller chance of winning.
Click to expand...

Good question. And I don't know the answer, either. I would be very upset to find out that my random tip is not truly random, though.

I shall ask the next time I play, though. I know that if you play your own numbers here, you can cancel the game if you complain immediately after being issued the receipt. So maybe there is an option to do just that in case you don't like your random numbers, too.
 
tsg said:
The other thing it misses is that, yes, you will most likely win after 250,000 years (assuming one game a week), but you will also be several million dollars behind when you do.
Click to expand...

If you play the Finnish lotto with the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, you will be behind in just five and half years. With approximately 4000 persons doing so every week and the average of about 800,000 euro main pot, your winnings will amount to 200 euros.
 
Rasmus said:
I ask people for the lottery numbers, and then I go and play the numbers they told me. That way, they will be the ones kicking themselves for the rest of their lives if I win. I am mean that way ....
Click to expand...

To be really mean you can play the numbers two times ...
 
LW said:
To be really mean you can play the numbers two times ...
Click to expand...

nah .... I dount anyone ever takes record of the numbers they give me and actually plays them. If so, I think they beat me fair and square if we have to share.
 
Ladewig said:
As long as the thread topic seems to be bouncing around a bit, does anyone know if the quick-pick algorithm that is used purposely avoids combinations consisting of six consecutive numbers? I imagine that the vast majority of people who buy quick-pick lotto tickets would not understand that 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 has the exact same probability of 8, 21, 29, 36, 41, 45. Such people might feel cheated because they would (falsely) believe that they have a smaller chance of winning.
Click to expand...

Can't answer your question, but I have read that most (not sure of the margin) winning tickets are Quick Picks.

Can't recall where or when I read it though. We only got the lottery a short time ago (2 years maybe? I suck at remembering "when"s lol). Of course there were a lot of articles in the local papers at that time, giving lottery info. I think it was in one of them. Obviously, I can't vouch for the accuracy. But I felt secure enough in it's validity to decide to use Quick Picks for my waste of money, I mean investment ;)
 
Why does anyone play lotto?

Selecting 1,2,3,4,5,6 has the same chance of winning as selecting
3,8,13,34,41,49. After ten years, my brother-in-law still doesn't believe
this. :mad:

On the other hand, if you want to know just how unlikely your
numbers have of coming up, just think of how unlikely the numbers
1,2,3,4,5,6 have of coming up. It's exactly the same. :(

Playing lotto is like throwing your money away.


BillyJoe
 
I have to agree, Billy Joe. In the UK, we have things called 'Premium Bonds', which are basically a form of lottery, except that it costs nothing to play (apart from lost interest on your stake). You buy premium bonds for £1 each, and each month two are chosen at random to win £1,000,000, and over a million more win smaller prizes. You can sell the premium bonds back for £1 each at any time. The only limit is that an individual can't own any more than 30,000 bonds at a time. Once you have a large enough number of bonds, you'll win small prizes regularly enough that you're effectively getting paid interest on your investment, but with the added benefit of having a chance of winning a million.

Given all that, it doesn't make much sense to buy a UK Lotto ticket.

See www.nsandi.co.uk for more...
 
macgyver said:
....
However, it IS a powerful fallacy that always picking the same numbers would somehow increase your odds. Even though it's quite obvious that it can't....

However, are your chances of a match the same if you play 13,000,000 unique number combinations in one draw compared to playing 13,000,000 entries of the same combination in one draw? Also, is playing 13,000,000 entries in one draw the same odds as playing one entry every week for 250,000 years?
Click to expand...
While it is a fallacy about playing the same numbers, I don't think it is so obvious.

It is hard to reconcile A) the idea that with all numbers having an equal chance, multiple draws should eventually result in all combinations being drawn once with B) the idea that the number you play over and over has the same odds as any number for that drawing.

You can stay awake a very long time thinking about that one.

Playing any unique number combinations > 1 raises your odds of winning over playing > 1 of the same combination. I don't follow your idea there.

Playing 13 million combos in one drawing are indeed > odds than 13 million entries one per week. I see what you are getting at there but there is a difference. In the latter case you have low odds 13 million times. In the former case you have very high odds one time.

If the number of possible combinations is considerably greater than 13 million, then I'd see what someone came up with calculating the odds before betting on that conclusion. But if there were only 13 million combinations, you would raise your odds of winning to 100% if you played 13 million unique numbers.
 
skeptigirl said:
You can stay awake a very long time thinking about that one.
Click to expand...

Which is actually why I started this thread :)

skeptigirl said:
Playing any unique number combinations > 1 raises your odds of winning over playing > 1 of the same combination. I don't follow your idea there.
Click to expand...

What I was pondering was flipping the conditions of the draw to test the idea of random quick picks vs. playing the same numbers.

Assuming 1 : 13,000,000 odds: Would there be any difference in playing 13,000,000 randomly generated combinations in a single draw over playing the same combination over 13,000,000 draws?

Actually, now that I look at it...it's kind of a stupid question....:blush:

Where I was going with it, though, was that I thought randomizing both the draw and the numbers played could possibly be slightly lower odds due to the potential of duplications.
 
skeptigirl said:
While it is a fallacy about playing the same numbers, I don't think it is so obvious.
Click to expand...

True. Actually that was a poor choice of words on my part. It's because it's NOT obvious that I brought it up. I think I should have said "even though it's quite TRUE that it cannot"
 
The reason many people (certainly in the UK) find 1-2-3-4-5-6 more unlikely than a non-sequential set, and the reason they don't think the odds of the same numbers coming up two weeks in a row are the same as two different sets, is because it hasn't happened.
 
tkingdoll said:
The reason many people (certainly in the UK) find 1-2-3-4-5-6 more unlikely than a non-sequential set, and the reason they don't think the odds of the same numbers coming up two weeks in a row are the same as two different sets, is because it hasn't happened.
Click to expand...
But you could say the same about a lot of other combinations. It's just that some combinations are more noticeable.
 
skeptigirl said:
But you could say the same about a lot of other combinations. It's just that some combinations are more noticeable.
Click to expand...

Well, other combinations aren't counter-intuitive. That's my whole point. Many people do not think 1-2-3-4-5-6 has the same odds as 7-12-24-28-36-39 because six numbers in sequential order have not yet come up, let alone the first six numbers in the Western number system.

You and I know that 7-12-24-28-36-39 probably hasn't either, but lots of combinations like that have, so they aren't counter-intuitive to most folk.
 
My qick pick ticket for this past Saturday's 6/49 draw was 2-3-5-6-38-39

Here is what I've wondered about the quick pick algorithm.. since you can play up to 6 sets of numbers on 1 ticket, will the quick pick option allow for the exact same set of 6 numbers to be put on 1 ticket?

Not a likely scenario.. about as likely as winning... but do they make sure it don't hapen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom