1,2,3,4,5,6 in the lottery

[Fast Eddie B]

Actually, Dan O.'s statement that you can pretty much count on a previously drawn set of numbers not coming up again IS technically correct.

I would replace the word "technically" with the word "trivially".

As others have pointed out, you can pretty much count on any set of numbers not coming up. The "again" adds no add'l meaning.

 

[Ladewig]

What's the difference between being a rube and just acting like a rube? I suppose you'd like to have us all believe that you have occasional and momentary lapses of reason that cause you uncontrollably to go out and buy a lottery ticket. Classic denial behavior. You're a rube, buddy, through and through!

OK, I'll own it. I am a rube because I buy lottery tickets. If it'll make you happy, I'll change my avatar title from "Hipster alien" to "turnip-truck rube"

<-----RUBE.

Actually, you're not. You just consider doing the lottery worthwhile now and then, on those rare occasions when you happen to take your mind off maths. Consider it as letting your hair down a little, if you will!

You have it backwards. It is because I think the purchase of tickets is worthwhile that I am a rube. Believing that a game of chance with a 50ish % house advantage is worthwhile is pretty much the definition of a rube.

How odd that you mention letting one's hair down. That is one of the classic taunts that hucksters throw at rubes.

 

[Dan O.]

What everyone so diligently analyzing my post fail to realize is that I hadn't proofread what I had typed and left out a "not". The link was then intended to be proof that the statement itself was wrong.

 

[666]

1,2,3,4,5,6 in the lottery

For years, I've been telling people that it's as likely for you to get the above numbers as something like 35,32,18,16, 28, 21.

People can't seem to believe it. Is this actually the case, or am I making a fool of myself?

I've just belatedly come across this thread. Strangely I bought just such a lottery ticket (1,2,3,4,5) as a potentially life-changing gift for my Secret Santee* last year.

​

I bought an identical one for myself in case it won and I was tempted to run off with the millions myself instead of passing them on.

Surprise! Neither of us became millionaires.



*You know who you are.

 

[Southwind17]

I would replace the word "technically" with the word "trivially".

I disagree; it's a far from trivial point that's being made.

As others have pointed out, you can pretty much count on any set of numbers not coming up.

Wrong. A set of numbers comes up most times, and there's usually a jackpot winner(s). You need to be very careful with your wording.

The "again" adds no add'l meaning.

Without the "again" the point being made has no meaning. The entire point is about a winning set of numbers winning again!

 

[Southwind17]

How odd that you mention letting one's hair down. That is one of the classic taunts that hucksters throw at rubes.

Remind me Ladewig ... what time does the party start? I sure hope you've teed up a bouncy castle!

 

[Dan O.]

Surprise! Neither of us became millionaires.

Are you sure? Many people forget to check the Raffle Numbers after being disappointed in the main draw. There are still 2 outstanding £1 million prizes from December that are unclaimed.

I bought an identical one for myself in case it won and I was tempted to run off with the millions myself instead of passing them on.

It's as if you can't throw your money away fast enough. There was a power ball lottery a few years ago that was won by an office pool. One of the participants in the pool also bought a ticket for himself using the same numbers.

 

[Southwind17]

Are you sure? Many people forget to check the Raffle Numbers after being disappointed in the main draw. There are still 2 outstanding £1 million prizes from December that are unclaimed.

Well then their best hope is that they're each semi-millionaires! That would suck!

 

[AvalonXQ]

Wrong. A set of numbers comes up most times, and there's usually a jackpot winner(s).

Which lottery are we talking about? Because for the American inter-state lotteries (Mega Millions and Power Ball), usually there's not a jackpot winner.

Mega Millions, for instance, has two draws a week -- and exactly one of those draws has had a jackpot winner since last October.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Southwind17,

We must be talking past each other.

I just can't get the points you're trying to make.

Someone said it would be a poor bet to bet numbers that had just come up. It is a fact that those numbers would be exactly as probable as any other.

That's all I was saying, and I don't get how it's wrong.

 

[Dan O.]

Well then their best hope is that they're each semi-millionaires! That would suck!

Perhaps you didn't look it up. The raffle is not a shared prize.

 

[Southwind17]

Which lottery are we talking about? Because for the American inter-state lotteries (Mega Millions and Power Ball), usually there's not a jackpot winner.

Mega Millions, for instance, has two draws a week -- and exactly one of those draws has had a jackpot winner since last October.

I'm referring to the various Australian lotteries (in particular TattsLotto) and the UK National Lottery.

 

[Southwind17]

Southwind17,

We must be talking past each other.

I just can't get the points you're trying to make.

Someone said it would be a poor bet to bet numbers that had just come up. It is a fact that those numbers would be exactly as probable as any other.

That's all I was saying, and I don't get how it's wrong.

This is what you actually wrote that I pointed out is wrong:

As others have pointed out, you can pretty much count on any set of numbers not coming up.

That's patently wrong. A set of numbers usually does come up, at least in relation to the Australian weekly TattsLotto, as these results clearly demonstrate (Division 1 is deemed the jackpot).

 

[Southwind17]

Perhaps you didn't look it up. The raffle is not a shared prize.

My apologies - I failed to realise that the raffle entry numbers (and letters) are completely separate from the Euromillions entry numbers.

 

[Roboramma]

This is what you actually wrote that I pointed out is wrong:

​

That's patently wrong. A set of numbers usually does come up, at least in relation to the Australian weekly TattsLotto, as these results clearly demonstrate (Division 1 is deemed the jackpot).

It's pretty clear that he means any particular set of numbers.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

It's pretty clear that he means any particular set of numbers.

When I read Southwind17's response, I realized how he interpreted my statement, and that I needed to add the word "particular".

Then I scrolled down and you beat me to it. Thanks!

Of course some set of numbers will come up. That seems too obvious to state. And sometimes there will be a player who selected that set and sometimes not.

Hopefully that's straightened out - I really hate to be called "wrong" when what I'm stating is self evident. There are enough other times when I'm legitimately wrong - just ask my wife!

 

[Fast Eddie B]

A set of numbers usually does come up, at least in relation to the Australian weekly TattsLotto, as these results clearly demonstrate (Division 1 is deemed the jackpot).

No, a set of numbers always does come up - nothing "usually" about it.

You're assuming an unstated premise here - that the discussion is whether any given draw will have a winner. Of course, some do and some don't.

To be clearer, you should have said, "A winning set of numbers usually does come up...". And the odds of that happening can be calculated, depending on the type of draw and number of tickets purchased.

Again, sorry if I wasn't clear. Communication is a two way street.

 

[Southwind17]

When I read Southwind17's response, I realized how he interpreted my statement, and that I needed to add the word "particular".

Then I scrolled down and you beat me to it. Thanks!

Of course some set of numbers will come up. That seems too obvious to state. And sometimes there will be a player who selected that set and sometimes not.

Hopefully that's straightened out - I really hate to be called "wrong" when what I'm stating is self evident. There are enough other times when I'm legitimately wrong - just ask my wife!

I don't mean to be harsh Fast Eddie. Call me pedantic, but it's important to be accurate when making claims about such matters as probability. I called you on it rather than assuming. The record's straight now - thanks

 

[Fast Eddie B]

...thanks

WOW! What are the chances of that???

You're welcome, BTW!

 

[Southwind17]

No, a set of numbers always does come up - nothing "usually" about it.

You're assuming an unstated premise here - that the discussion is whether any given draw will have a winner. Of course, some do and some don't.

To be clearer, you should have said, "A winning set of numbers usually does come up...". And the odds of that happening can be calculated, depending on the type of draw and number of tickets purchased.

Again, sorry if I wasn't clear. Communication is a two way street.

I think the problem here is that we seem to be at cross purposes as to exactly what 'come up' means. You seem to be suggesting that you're referring to the numbers drawn, whereas I'm referring to a set of numbers selected and entered. In the context of your original statement, however, it seems clear to me that you were referring to exactly what I am, namely a set of numbers selected and entered:

As others have pointed out, you can pretty much count on any set of numbers not coming up. The "again" adds no add'l meaning.

Ironically, the "again" is now critical to your meaning!