Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: AZRedhawk44 on August 08, 2011, 11:52:03 PM
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023514/Lucky-woman-won-lottery-times-outed-Stanford-University-statistics-PhD.html
Yeah, she's a PhD. Yeah, she knows stats and math.
Even if she DID figure out the mystical algorithm used by TX to distribute the winning tickets, I contend it is the State's fault for USING the SAME algorithm for over 15 years. Or using an algorithm at all.
Dumb bureaucrats, catering their stupid lotteries to the poor unwashed masses too dumb to realize that the lotto is a revenue raiser rather than "a great equalizer," deserve to get sideswiped repeatedly by someone savvy enough to take 'em for all they're worth.
The only fault I could find with this woman is if she had some sort of inside information from someone in the dotguv lotto commission.
-
The only fault I could find with this woman is if she had some sort of inside information from someone in the dotguv lotto commission.
This. If she's figuring it out by using math on her own, without insider info...SO WHAT? Good on her...
-
On scratch-off cards though?
-
...poor unwashed masses too dumb to realize that the lotto is a revenue raiser rather than "a great equalizer,"...
Who thinks that? I've never met anyone who thought it was some kind of equalizer. I have met many too dumb to realize their chances of winning are very tiny, even if they purchase 20+ cards at a time.
On scratch-off cards though?
Card counting. There are set numbers of winners in each roll and she figured out the system. Not sure how she determined when to buy hers though.
Chris
-
This has been done before in both Canada and the US. It has to do with a statistical error in "randomizing" the wins vs the serial numbers of the cards. Once that can be determined, you simply buy one card at a variety of stores until you find the right range of SN's, then buy the roll. It's happened enough (usually games that have been around for a while) that it was even the plot of an episode of Numb3rs. It's also not illegal.
-
Not sure how she determined when to buy hers though.
That's the theme of a decent article in the latest "Harper's" if you're interested.
According to the rag, the state doesn't design the algorithms, one of a few national lottery consultants design them.
-
Increasing your win fraction based on math to make something profitable isn't illegal, just like card counting isn't illegal--the cool thing is, unlike a casino who can ask you to leave, the state can't prevent someone from playing the lottery...good on her!
IIRC the most common exploitable information has been scratchers that have numbers printed on the scratch-off material itself--and then statistically exploiting a non-randomness in the correlation of these numbers to the underlying "match these" (or whatever game it is). The problem with exploitation of that error is it only allows you to determine if a card is likely to be a winner--not determine the if a winner is present in a ticket you don't have. Fortunately, due to customer protection laws, most states allow you to return (either exchange or for cash) unscratched tickets--so you buy 100, or 1000, and return those not likely to be winners (stupid state). This has been done numerous times.
Now people say "just don't make those games"--problem is, the type of "game" that is vulnerable to this exploit is also the most popular type--the "poker" or "tic tac toe" or other types that give the "user" (face it, it's a drug) a feeling of both sequential game-play (not just scratch and randomly win), and the illusion of being able to affect the outcome through choice (which isn't true, but hey, if you already are taxing people who are bad at math, why not really run up the profit margin by addicting their addled brains).
Other more complex (and profitable) methods would allow you to exploit any weaknesses in the distribution algorithms, but require far more samples, and are extremely difficult without insider info.
Anyway, I go with "go her", "lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math", and "dumb state". And leave with this interesting opinion--lotteries are one of the oldest ways to appease the unwashed masses--they are bread and circuses--by imposing an extraordinarily regressive tax on the poorest, by giving them a hope in pure chance that the state will make all their wishes come true--while "doing a good thing by helping {schools, etc}" it's just a social control method--why do you think winners are so publiscized, (well, the poor ones), and the wealthy winners (I know a family with millions who has won 250k TWICE) or the long term results of winner are never shown (it's like behind the music on crack).
-
face it, it's a drug
QFT
Some of the users are pretty sad too. They act exactly like addicts. Buy the tickets and they can't even get out of the store before they have to hunch over and use. Hell you are lucky if some of them can sidestep the cash register first.
-
Not going to go into detail, but I like contests that have exploitable loopholes. :angel:
. . . "lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math" . . .
I generally agree with this sentiment - though I will sometimes break down and buy a ticket when the jackpot is big enough that they start talking about it on TV; usually by then, the jackpot is larger than the odds against winning.
(Simplistic argument, as it doesn't consider taxes, reduced payout with cash value option, or the possibility of multiple winning tickets, the holders of which will have to share the jackpot.)
But I figure for a day or two - until they draw SOMEONE ELSE'S numbers - I can dream big.
And besides, my total wagers are probably on the order of $20 - $30/year . . . maybe less. I can afford that. ;)
-
Not going to go into detail, but I like contests that have exploitable loopholes. :angel:
I generally agree with this sentiment - though I will sometimes break down and buy a ticket when the jackpot is big enough that they start talking about it on TV; usually by then, the jackpot is larger than the odds against winning.
The jackpot is sometimes larger than the odds they say on TV. Calculate the probability yourself and see what happens ;)
-
The jackpot is sometimes larger than the odds they say on TV. Calculate the probability yourself and see what happens ;)
You always have the same odds of drawing a winning ticket. When more people play, the odds of the jackpot being split are higher. So when there is a huge jackpot and everyone buys a ticket, you the odds of the pot being split are higher.
-
You always have the same odds of drawing a winning ticket. When more people play, the odds of the jackpot being split are higher. So when there is a huge jackpot and everyone buys a ticket, you the odds of the pot being split are higher.
They'll say something like the "74000000 to 1" when the jackpot is $125 million. So you think the odds are finally in your favor because of all the previous lotteries where there was no winner and the pot just accumulated. But if you calculate it (depending on the game) the actual odds of a winning ticket might be (50^6)/2 or 1:7812500000.
I've never seen a $8 billion jackpot, have you? If you have to account for splitting the pot, that just makes it worse.
-
This. If she's figuring it out by using math on her own, without insider info...SO WHAT? Good on her...
Probably violates the "Barbie" Law.....
=D
-
They'll say something like the "74000000 to 1" when the jackpot is $125 million. So you think the odds are finally in your favor because of all the previous lotteries where there was no winner and the pot just accumulated. But if you calculate it (depending on the game) the actual odds of a winning ticket might be (50^6)/2 or 1:7812500000.
I've never seen a $8 billion jackpot, have you? If you have to account for splitting the pot, that just makes it worse.
For conventional (6 numbers, same pool of N numbers). The odds are 1: N! / (720*(N-6)! Not N^6 since you can't draw the same number twice. For ones like power ball where there is a separate pool of M, it's one in (M * N!) / (120*(N-5)!)... which is usually worse odds... Did I miss something, where did the divide by two come from in your equation? That's why the resulting odds are usually in the 1:50-100million range, not 1:8 billion.
-
Is she single? >:D
-
They'll say something like the "74000000 to 1" when the jackpot is $125 million. So you think the odds are finally in your favor because of all the previous lotteries where there was no winner and the pot just accumulated. But if you calculate it (depending on the game) the actual odds of a winning ticket might be (50^6)/2 or 1:7812500000.
Odds aren't quite that bad - various discussions of computing lotto odds are on the web, one of which is here: http://members.cox.net/mathmistakes/rawdata.htm
You always have the same odds of drawing a winning ticket. When more people play, the odds of the jackpot being split are higher. So when there is a huge jackpot and everyone buys a ticket, you the odds of the pot being split are higher.
I did mention the possibility of multiple winning tickets . . . ;)
Reminds me of an ad I once saw in the local "free" community ad paperL "Old lotto tickets, ten cents each! You save 90% of the cost and still have almost the same chance of winning!" :laugh:
-
For conventional (6 numbers, same pool of N numbers). The odds are 1: N! / (720*(N-6)! Not N^6 since you can't draw the same number twice. For ones like power ball where there is a separate pool of M, it's one in (M * N!) / (120*(N-5)!)... which is usually worse odds... Did I miss something, where did the divide by two come from in your equation? That's why the resulting odds are usually in the 1:50-100million range, not 1:8 billion.
I thought with Powerball you pick 6 numbers; five of them from the same pool of 1-50, then a 1-25 powerball. I didn't throw out the duplicates (d'oh!) so the real odds should be 50x49x48x47x46 (254251200) instead of 50^5 for the regular numbers, then multiply that by 25 for the powerball gives you 1:6356280000 odds.
1:6.4 billion is better than 1:7.8 billion, but...
-
Kind of, there is the divide by 120 part (5!). Because 50!/45! (the 250 million ish one) is the number of combinations not permutations, meaning the 250 millionish is not only the number of different sets of 5 numbers, but it's the number of different orders as well. The factor of 120 corrects this since lottery doesn't care about the order. That's why a 50 number, 5-pick main with a 25 number power ball has odds around 50 million:1, not 6.4 billion to one.
-
So I *should* buy a Powerball ticket when the jackpot is over $53 million...
-
They'll say something like the "74000000 to 1" when the jackpot is $125 million. So you think the odds are finally in your favor because of all the previous lotteries where there was no winner and the pot just accumulated. But if you calculate it (depending on the game) the actual odds of a winning ticket might be (50^6)/2 or 1:7812500000.
I've never seen a $8 billion jackpot, have you? If you have to account for splitting the pot, that just makes it worse.
I disagree. The odds of you pulling a one time draw of a set of numbers should be the same every time.
-
At one time if I could just win $100,000, I would be able to pay off all my debt and have a little left to save.
-
Yep, when I buy gas, I look to see what the lotteries are up to. Anything more then $100million and round my purchase up to nearest $5 with lottery tickets.
Which means I also spend about $20-30 a year to daydream for a couple of days about funding the APS Pirate Hunting Expedition. [ar15] [ar15] [ar15]
-
I disagree. The odds of you pulling a one time draw of a set of numbers should be the same every time.
He's not saying you have a better chance of winning, he's saying that the payout eventually gets high enough that the payout divided by the odds of winning is greater than one.
Or actually he is saying that the lottery promoters are trying to claim this, but it's really not true.
It's like if I offered you 5 to 1 you couldn't roll a 4 on a 6-sided die. You wouldn't take that. But if I offered you 7 to 1, you should play that all day.
-
All I ask in this life is a chance to prove that money won't make me happy. If it doesn't, well, at least the misery will be affordable.
Brad
-
Anyway, I go with "go her", "lotteries are a tax on people who are bad at math", and "dumb state". And leave with this interesting opinion--lotteries are one of the oldest ways to appease the unwashed masses--they are bread and circuses--by imposing an extraordinarily regressive tax on the poorest, by giving them a hope in pure chance that the state will make all their wishes come true--while "doing a good thing by helping {schools, etc}" it's just a social control method--why do you think winners are so publiscized, (well, the poor ones), and the wealthy winners (I know a family with millions who has won 250k TWICE) or the long term results of winner are never shown (it's like behind the music on crack).
So your wealthy winners are also unwashed masses bad at math? :P
there was a guy who won a few months ago, won two million & after tax got 800 thou, he notified the food stamp folks and was told he could still use his benefits.
Glen Beck interviewed him and gave him a hard time.
a few yrs ago some guy who owned his own construction biz won a huge fortune & due to his drinking & family dysfunction it ruined him, his niece ( or daughter or something) even killed herself.
I buy a ticket when its 100 million, what I do is get a quick pick & play advanced play - like 8 to ten bucks - this way if it goes higher I'm still in the game, but I never ever play scratch offs. ... well I did 25 yrs ago & never won more then a buck. When I moved to Reno and went to casino's the odds were much better-back when I was a cab driver I won 1000 bucks one time, 400, another and a bunch of times won between 40 & 200 ... I'm pretty close to even I think.
-
While it looks like the woman did nothing illegal (unless she had insider information), my bet is that they continue to run her through the system, just because they can.
If what she was doing was illegal (using insider info), why didn't she stop after the first prize? If I were doing something of that sort, I wouldn't push my luck by repeating it.
-
You know, it really doesn't surprise me that with the power of home computers nowadays, and people that are really smart enough to figure out these kinds of things, that more algorithms for pseudo-random lotteries haven't been cracked.
-
I look at lotteries as an investment opportunity. Any investment portfolio needs a really long shot/high payoff gamble in it.
And I wanna buy a container ship with a bunch of miniguns on it and sell cruise tickets.
-
QFT
Some of the users are pretty sad too. They act exactly like addicts. Buy the tickets and they can't even get out of the store before they have to hunch over and use. Hell you are lucky if some of them can sidestep the cash register first.
Know a guy that sneers at actual investments, but thinks himself lucky at those scratch off cards. Thing is, folks remember their wins and forget their loses.
I think I dropped $50 in my half dozen trips to Vegas. I've spent maybe another $50 on lotto tickets, as a joke whenever something really good or really bad happened. I don't automatically sneer at gambling, if it's for entertainment value. Thinking one is actually going to win? Yea, not too likely.
-
'bout one a month or so a group of us gets together and we bring beer, booze and snacks and play some poker. $20 buy-in Texas Hold'em (Prizes for 1st, 2nd and 3rd), then $20 worth of Dealer Calls the game. Figure another $5 a head for pizza and your out ~$50 for the nights entertainment. Good Friends, Good Conversations, Lots of Laughs and you may even pocket a couple of bucks (or be out $50 at the most).
Cheaper then going out for a good meal.
-
While it looks like the woman did nothing illegal (unless she had insider information), my bet is that they continue to run her through the system, just because they can.
If what she was doing was illegal (using insider info), why didn't she stop after the first prize? If I were doing something of that sort, I wouldn't push my luck by repeating it.
If she's like most lottery winners, she probably blew all the money from previous wins.
-
QFT
Some of the users are pretty sad too. They act exactly like addicts. Buy the tickets and they can't even get out of the store before they have to hunch over and use. Hell you are lucky if some of them can sidestep the cash register first.
Ah, yes, Lotto Man. Spends forfuckingever picking out the tickets he wants, asking a million questions about each one (dude, it's a *expletive deleted*ing scratchoff...you scratch it off to see that you lost)...then spends 10 minutes scratching his tickets off at the register.
Many times I have wondered if I would get arrested for beaning Lotto Man with a 2 liter coke...
*Lotto Man has a much greater chance of gracing you with his presence if you are in a hurry...
-
When coming back from NO in '05 after Katrina duty at one of our rest stops one soldier dropped a few dollars on scratch off tickets. Low and behold he got one of the $10,000 winners. :laugh:
-
Many times I have wondered if I would get arrested for beaning Lotto Man with a 2 liter coke...
Many times when standing in line to buy gas I've wanted to bean the guy in front of me buying Coke. ;)
-
Yep, when I buy gas, I look to see what the lotteries are up to. Anything more then $100million and round my purchase up to nearest $5 with lottery tickets.
Which means I also spend about $20-30 a year to daydream for a couple of days about funding the APS Pirate Hunting Expedition. [ar15] [ar15] [ar15]
Same here, but I day dream about a farm/deer camp
-
The lottery is simply a tax on those who are too stupid to figure the odds.
Hey Castle Key, did our tickets win us anything, or are we going to our respective jobs in the morning?
-
The lottery is simply a tax on those who are too stupid to figure the odds.
Hey Castle Key, did our tickets win us anything, or are we going to our respective jobs in the morning?
Someone from MN was the jackpot winner and the $1m was from MO. Get your ass to work Mike! Millions on welfare depend on it.
-
I strolled into the office a bit late this morning... 6:44 a.m.
-
Who thinks that? I've never met anyone who thought it was some kind of equalizer. I have met many too dumb to realize their chances of winning are very tiny, even if they purchase 20+ cards at a time.
Card counting. There are set numbers of winners in each roll and she figured out the system. Not sure how she determined when to buy hers though.
Easy; watch for the dummy that buys 20+ cards of one game, then buy the next two of that game.
My system has me still about $80 ahead.
Bonus points for giggling loudly when your $2 buy nets you $23 and their $20 has a whole $2 winner in the whole pile.