Advertisement


Advertisement
No logs  Anonymous IP



05062012, 09:25 PM


Serf


Join Date: Sep 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Communicate
A distributed sequence is more likely to win than a consecutive sequence. There are very few consecutive sequences, there are so many distributed sequences. Any specific distributed sequence is no more likely to win than any specific consecutive sequence.
For everybody making this mistake, it might be more helpful for you to think of balls not in terms of numbers, but say, colours. Let's say 1 is red, 2 is orange, 3 is blue, 4 is green, 5 is purple, 6 is pink, 7 is black e.t.c.
Is RED/ORANGE/BLUE/GREEN/PURPLE/PINK any less likely a combination than YELLOW/BROWN/PURPLE/RED/WHITE/GREY? Of course it isn't.

Any distributive sequence has better odds than a consecutive one, I think we agree there, but there is where you lose your shirt, obviously it doesn't mean that a distributive sequence has the same odds as any other sequence, it may have the same odds as another distributed one but still better than a consecutive.
Again it would take a lot more luck for the colored balls to be numbered in a row, your error is that the numbers in a row are not the same as any sequence of numbers you might choose. Some sequences are more likely to show than others, imagine a 3 by 3 square made of 9 smaller squares and you can choose only two, do you think you will win more by choosing two squares in a row, or by choosing them in a balanced way? No. You are just dividing the square by 9 and that's it, any little square has the same chances. You are forgetting about the composite odds.

05062012, 09:37 PM


Serf


Join Date: Sep 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rust
An individual sequence is not more likely to "win" than any other individual sequence. They all have the same probability of winning.
So if you have problem understanding that (which is the only thing I've said), then yes, you are the retard. Thank you.

So a non random sequence has the same odds as a random sequence in a random draw? I strongly think you are the retard here.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 09:43 PM

Count


Join Date: Oct 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 428 Times in 295 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wampa1
Any distributive sequence has better odds than a consecutive one, I think we agree there, but there is where you lose your shirt, obviously it doesn't mean that a distributive sequence has the same odds as any other sequence, it may have the same odds as another distributed one but still better than a consecutive.
Again it would take a lot more luck for the colored balls to be numbered in a row, your error is that the numbers in a row are not the same as any sequence of numbers you might choose. Some sequences are more likely to show than others, imagine a 3 by 3 square made of 9 smaller squares and you can choose only two, do you think you will win more by choosing two squares in a row, or by choosing them in a balanced way? No. You are just dividing the square by 9 and that's it, any little square has the same chances. You are forgetting about the composite odds.

I'm going to try a different angle.
Why is that 1/2/3/4/5/6 is such an unlikely combination? It's because, after every number, you require a specific number to follow it up, even when it's unlikely. If we have 30 balls, and 1 comes up, there's only a 1 in 29 chance that 2 will follow and the result will remain consecutive. If, unlikely as it is, 2 does come up, there's a 1 in 28 chance that 3 will come up and continue the pattern. We can see then, it's incredibly unlikely for such a pattern to happen, because if we follow it through, the probability is only 1 in 30x29x28x27x26x25. Such an outcome is incredibly unlikely, because each number requires a specific result (results which themselves, are not likely given the range of choice).
Yet, a dispersed pattern suffers from this too. If instead we tried 14/19/2/26/7/9 as our pattern, we find the same issues making our choice unlikely. If 14 comes up, only a in 30 chance in this game, it's very unlikely that 19 will come up next. After all, there are now 29 balls and 19 is only one of those, it has a 1 in 29 chance of occurring just as 2 did. Should 19 come up after 14, we need 2 to come up. Again, this is a 1 in 28 chance, just as 3 was a 1 in 28 chance. For that specific combination to occur then, the chance is 1 in 30x29x28x27x26x25. That's exactly the same likelihood as our consecutive pattern.
It's certainly true that in any lottery game consecutive numbers will almost certainly not come up. It's tremendously unlikely, given the pool of alternatives. The pattern will probably be nonconsecutive. However, you don't harm your chances by picking a consecutive pattern, because each sequence of 6 numbers is equally likely.
The number on a ball has no bearing on how likely it is to end up as a final ball. If the number 1 ball has just rolled out of the machine, it doesn't make number 18 (as an example) any more likely to roll out than number 2. Specific combinations then, will always be incredibly unlikely, whether they are consecutive or not. The reason the result is almost always (possibly historically always) nonconsecutive is because, out of all equally unlikely combinations, they're are vastly more nonconsecutive ones than consecutive.

05062012, 09:46 PM

Banned


Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wampa1
So a non random sequence has the same odds as a random sequence in a random draw? I strongly think you are the retard here.

Who said anything about a nonrandom sequence? We're talking about individual, randomly drawn, sequences. Some of these individual, randomly drawn, sequences will happen to be "all odds/evens" and some will happen to be a "mixture of odds and evens". In the end, the probability of observing an individual sequence is the same.
You're a moron.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 09:50 PM

Count


Join Date: Oct 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 428 Times in 295 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wampa1
So a non random sequence has the same odds as a random sequence in a random draw? I strongly think you are the retard here.

Yes, because the random draw is random. It doesn't seek to avoid patterns which humans can read a consistency into.
Let's say a lottery used coloured balls. RED/YELLOW/GREEN is just as likely to occur as BLUE/PURPLE/RED. I think we'd agree. However, this lottery decides that it wants to stop using coloured balls and use numbers instead.
It renames the red ball to 'Ball 1', the yellow ball becomes 'Ball 2' and the green ball becomes 'BALL 3'. The blue ball becomes 'BALL 10' and the purple ball becomes 'BALL 23'. These are all the balls used in examples.
Now, a new draw is taken. On the last draw RED/YELLOW/GREEN was just as likely as BLUE/PURPLE/RED. Yet, the balls have now been renamed. But, they are the very same balls. Just because the balls are now called something different, does not make it any more likely that they'll be produced as winning balls by the machine.
If we look at how they've been renamed, we see that RED/YELLOW/GREEN which is just as likely as BLUE/PURPLE/RED, now tells us that 1/2/3 is just as likely 10/23/1.

05062012, 09:51 PM

Marquis


Join Date: Dec 2011
Thanks: 202
Thanked 359 Times in 273 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rust
Who said anything about a nonrandom sequence? We're talking about individual, randomly drawn, sequences. Some of these individual, randomly drawn, sequences will happen to be "all odds/evens" and some will happen to be a "mixture of odds and evens". In the end, the probability of observing an individual sequence is the same.
You're a moron.

Nah you're just stupid and you don't get it. I bet you play your families birthdays as numbers. Because how fucking likely is it that the winning number is coincidentally going to be the same date your relatives were born on? That would be some fucking lucky ass ticket.
I bet you're one of those idiots who doesn't understand that 0.9999... to infinity actually equals exactly 1.0.
LEARN TO MATH

05062012, 09:53 PM

Banned


Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Yeah, you made a fool out of yourself in the OP and have been trying to pretend you were trolling ever since. We get it.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 09:54 PM

Count


Join Date: Oct 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 428 Times in 295 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
I'm dubious that you can be serious, though not that it matters.
The give away is constantly bringing up the .99 thing. Maybe it's genuine, but it seems like a character; somebody who has so much (blind) selfconfidence in his mathematically ability on the basis of recognising .99* as 1, and considering the recognition of such as some indicator of elite mathematical ability and therefore a suitable test to grade others upon.
I think I've got you rumbled. If not, you're genuine, and you're very wrong. Sorry.

05062012, 10:00 PM

Marquis


Join Date: Dec 2011
Thanks: 202
Thanked 359 Times in 273 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Communicate
I'm dubious that you can be serious, though not that it matters.
The give away is constantly bringing up the .99 thing. Maybe it's genuine, but it seems like a character; somebody who has so much (blind) selfconfidence in his mathematically ability on the basis of recognising .99* as 1, and considering the recognition of such as some indicator of elite mathematical ability and therefore a suitable test to grade others upon.
I think I've got you rumbled. If not, you're genuine, and you're very wrong. Sorry.

I don't think being able to realize .99=1 makes me good at math, I think not being able to realize it makes you guys (rust) stupid at math. I bet he doesn't even believe its true and that's why he thinks I'm trolling.
You make a good case with your colors examples but I refer you to the skittles example. Yes, it could happen, but is it going to? No. Of course not. And the numbers 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06 are never going to win either. Its that simple.

05062012, 10:09 PM

Banned


Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Buster
I don't think being able to realize .99=1 makes me good at math, I think not being able to realize it makes you guys (rust) stupid at math. I bet he doesn't even believe its true and that's why he thinks I'm trolling.

Except we do know 0.999... = 1. So either you're such a moron that you actually have to make things up about the people you're trying to argue against, or you're trolling.
Quote:
And the numbers 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06 are never going to win either. Its that simple.

No, it's not. The probability of any individual sequence is the same.
Take an Urn and fill it with 99 black balls with numbers 199, and 1 white ball with number 100.
What color is more likely? Black, right? But what's the probability of getting the number 10 or the number 100? 1/100. The same for both.
The error you keep making is saying "Oh, since there are more black balls, I'm going to choose a number from the black balls". It doesn't work that way. Individual balls, black or white, are just as likely as any other.
If we were to do what you're doing there, and provide "evidence" of the draws from this earn of black and white lottery balls, you'd see the same thing: A bunch of black lottery balls being picked, and very rarely a white balls. That doesn't change anything of the fact that individual numbers (or individual sequences of numbers) all have the same probability of being picked when you sample with replacement.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 10:11 PM

Marquis


Join Date: Dec 2011
Thanks: 202
Thanked 359 Times in 273 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?

05062012, 10:12 PM


Serf


Join Date: Sep 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost Buster
if you open a bag of skittles and dump them on the ground, and they going to look scattered or are they going to fall in a perfect circular rainbow?

They are just being dimwitted, if there is a hole in the ceiling and it is raining, the probability will still give you a non zero chance of drops hitting you even far away from the hole. That is just not real.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 10:14 PM

Banned


Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 10:18 PM

Marquis


Join Date: Dec 2011
Thanks: 202
Thanked 359 Times in 273 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Rust if I bought you a lottery ticket what number would you want?

05062012, 10:18 PM

Banned


Join Date: Jan 2009
Thanks: 586
Thanked 1,714 Times in 1,121 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Any.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05062012, 11:14 PM


Serf


Join Date: Sep 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Communicate
Yet, a dispersed pattern suffers from this too. If instead we tried 14/19/2/26/7/9 as our pattern, we find the same issues making our choice unlikely. If 14 comes up, only a in 30 chance in this game, it's very unlikely that 19 will come up next. After all, there are now 29 balls and 19 is only one of those, it has a 1 in 29 chance of occurring just as 2 did. Should 19 come up after 14, we need 2 to come up. Again, this is a 1 in 28 chance, just as 3 was a 1 in 28 chance. For that specific combination to occur then, the chance is 1 in 30x29x28x27x26x25. That's exactly the same likelihood as our consecutive pattern.

The most probable will probably happen, not in any other way, I think you need to see this in different directions. The probabilities add up, say the first number picked is 5 and the second 10, it would be less probable for the next number to be close to the previous numbers and so on. It is most probable that the numbers scatter from eachother and that's what happens. The tendency is to have a balanced draw, as history shows.

05062012, 11:44 PM

Peasant


Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Thanks: 10
Thanked 38 Times in 28 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
oh dear  when did zoklet go full blown retard? Everything Rust said is right, you're all idiots. Amazing how people are willing to throw probability theory out the window based on some vague intuitions.

05062012, 11:51 PM

Peasant


Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Thanks: 10
Thanked 38 Times in 28 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rust
Any.

In fact you'd be better off picking something like 5,6,7,8,9,10 as you won't have to share the winnings with all the other idiots in the world who, after careful analysis, have decided this combination isn't going to come up.

The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":


05072012, 12:09 AM


Comrade Question


Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: ☵☵☵☵
Thanks: 1,553
Thanked 1,034 Times in 711 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
People assume “random” means “evenlyspaced”, he says. ‘But very often random events will be clumped together.’ It is very common for consecutive numbers to come up in the Lottery. Marcus says: ‘You might think this is weird because it forms a pattern, but you don’t notice when 31 and 37 come up together because they’re not consecutive.’ As part of his research into these patterns and coincidences Marcus studied results from the Lottery for his book The Number Mysteries. ‘My advice is to pick consecutive numbers, like 31, 32, 33. Not many people do, but it is just as likely as any other combination. In fact, if you do win the jackpot with consecutive numbers, you probably won’t have to share it with as many other winners.’
The logic behind this was used by Apple to redesign its iTunes ‘shuffle’ software (the program that plays your library songs in a random order).
Some customers complained their iPod played some tracks more often than others. So Apple made the randomiser software ‘less random’, arranging that after the device had played a track once it wouldn’t play it again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...yjackpot.html
I don't get how people can't see this...

05072012, 04:22 AM


Igor Deckman


Join Date: Jun 2011
Thanks: 2,463
Thanked 2,963 Times in 1,729 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HTS
Blunderful wants me to tell you all that The Greek is right, and anybody who says otherwise is stupid.

Haha, you fag.

05092012, 11:51 PM

Wealthy Merchant


Join Date: Jan 2012
Thanks: 60
Thanked 61 Times in 43 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
No way to increase you chances of winning.
Ways to increase your winnings.

05102012, 10:44 AM

Count


Join Date: Oct 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 428 Times in 295 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psych

I'm going to go ahead and say that 1/2/3/4/5/6 won't make your potential jackpot any larger, and will in fact make it smaller, because, contrary to what that article says, many people will use those 6 numbers.
Something like 12/13/14/15/16/17 would probably be better off.

05112012, 06:30 PM


LongDickHipHopPerfection


Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: thizz or die
Thanks: 2,447
Thanked 4,164 Times in 2,412 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
If I flip a coin 5 times in a row and it comes up heads everytime i should wager on tails for the next flip because it's more likely now.
just kidding.
__________________
You have read one of my posts. Congratulations, Zoklet user, on this daring decision to better yourself.

05112012, 06:40 PM

Wealthy Merchant


Join Date: Jan 2012
Thanks: 60
Thanked 61 Times in 43 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Communicate
I'm going to go ahead and say that 1/2/3/4/5/6 won't make your potential jackpot any larger, and will in fact make it smaller, because, contrary to what that article says, many people will use those 6 numbers.
Something like 12/13/14/15/16/17 would probably be better off.

Random is guaranteed to be the highest pot. By nature.
1/2/3/4/5/6 and 12/13/14/15/16/17 are both awful choices.
Then I can say with 100% certainty that you will never win the lottery.

05112012, 06:56 PM

Marquis


Join Date: Dec 2011
Thanks: 202
Thanked 359 Times in 273 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by curioushat
Then I can say with 100% certainty that you will never win the lottery.

derp derp

05112012, 07:25 PM

Count


Join Date: Oct 2011
Thanks: 0
Thanked 428 Times in 295 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by curioushat
Random is guaranteed to be the highest pot. By nature.
1/2/3/4/5/6 and 12/13/14/15/16/17 are both awful choices.
Then I can say with 100% certainty that you will never win the lottery.

The theory is, because of the prevalance of the kind of views expressed here, that certain sequences (say, 1/2/3/4/5/6) are much less likely to win, nobody will pick them.
But it's flawed, because things like 1/2/3/4/5/6 will be common picks anyway by people who disdain the lottery but play anyway. The best sequence then, I think, would be a nonrandom one (so people would avoid it), yet that people wouldn't pick if rejected the idea of trying to pick 'random' numbers.
12/13/14/15/16/17 probably isn't the best example of that, but there would be better examples if I cared to think.

05152012, 12:09 PM

Duke


Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The 45th Southern Parallel
Thanks: 131
Thanked 842 Times in 604 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
Hmm, I'm surprised this is still going on; I think Ghost Buster is a troll.
But just in case... unlike some people in this thread, I don't have any formal higher education in mathematics, so I won't be using any mathematical terms. I'll explain it in layman's terms:
It's true that all odd/all even sequences appear less often than 'mixed' sequences, but this doesn't mean that they are any more likely to be picked. The attributes of odd and even are arbitrary; they're simply more noticeable to our brain, which is probably why you're focusing on them. There are other equally arbitrary attributes which you could ascribe to the balls; see my earlier thread about picking numbers containing the letter E.
When you pick lottery numbers, you're picking a one specific combination out of a possible thirteen million combinations. You are not picking by the attributes of the numbers! The chances of picking a specific combination are the same regardless of the numbers it contains:
The chances of picking
1/2/3/4/5/6 = 1/13 million
1/2/3/4/5/7 = 1/13 million
1/2/3/4/5/8 = 1/13 million
32/47/2/15/23/48 = 1/13 million
15/11/28/49/27/6 = 1/13 million
2/4/6/8/10/12 = 1/13 million
1/3/5/7/9/11 = 1/13 million
and so on.
If you were to write down every specific combination there would indeed be many more 'mixed' combinations than all even/all odd combinations, but the chances of any one specific combination occurring is still 1/13m.
If you refute this, you can only be a troll. Even a child would understand this.

05152012, 12:25 PM

Duke


Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: NSFW, Australia
Thanks: 1,502
Thanked 641 Times in 484 Posts


Re: testing the probability of lottery numbers?
I thought this was going to be an Actor thread, and I must say, this thread most certainly does NOT deliver in that regard.
__________________
syphilis.stdx [at] gmail [dot] com
"Wow, STD has really gone off the deep end. He's like a oneman, polydrug, chronic toxicity study"



Posting Rules

You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:58 AM.


Hot Topics 
              
Join our Chatroom! 
Users: 8
Messages/minute: 0
Topic: "Only rule: be nice or I'll cut your fucking face off, dumbshit"

Users: 27
Messages/minute: 1.6
Topic: "http://codelove.org :: Below is above in 2 codes 1 love. :: wh..."

Users: 18
Messages/minute: 5
Topic: "http://www.literotica...."

Advertisements 
Your ad could go right HERE! Contact us!

