Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 50317	2004-10-17 02:52:00	Lotto Tips	lotto (6285)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
281897	2008-03-20 10:21:00	You've spent a bit of time figuring that out drcspy.... :sleep :lol:	wratterus (105)
281898	2008-03-20 13:32:00	oh yeh it was an interest of mine for about four years ......I developed about 35 systems I think.....	drcspy (146)
281899	2008-03-20 13:53:00	That's right isn't it? You're getting the idea i've got systems for 'full' coverage of 4:x for 9 numbers = 12 lines of 6 10 numbers = 27 lines of 6 12 numbers = 42 lines of 6 14 numbers = 137 lines of 6 and lots of other methods of play also I prefer currently to play 2x groups of 20 numbers (very cheap method) as I KNOW without any doubt that one of those groups will/MUST contain at least 4 winning numbers.....of course cause it's a very cheap game the 'coverage' I get is pretty minimal tho it's done me some good I did win just under $5k four years ago and a few hundred a couple of times since......... The reason for playing 40 numbers is pretty obvious - you MUST have within that group all 7 winning numbers. Your chance of winning is of course dependant on HOW you've 'covered' those numbers. It works like this : say you've decided to play all 40 numbers by using four groups of 10 the possible results will be thus: A 765544432 B 012132132 C 000101112 D 000000101 If you read the numbers vertically you'll see that each column contains 7 numbers this is the possible distribution of winning numbers between the four groups of 10 you've played (A-B-C-D) soooooo.......from those possibilities only two of them will result in losses...(the last two)...... see it does get interesting eh ! basically the possibilites are only limited by your imagination and the structure of the game. Lets see what YOU can come up with ?	drcspy (146)
281900	2008-03-20 20:54:00	I haven't put much thought into it for a new system but I was tinkering with the 4-9 game last night. I found a combination where you can get 84% coverage on the 126 combinations using 9 lines. What I can't get past is that it is still only 106 combinations out of 91,390 4-ball combinations, 30 of which will pay a prize. The expected return is what? About $50-$60 x the average number of double-ups? How many times would you have to spend $5 to earn say $70? To be of benefit the technique would have to be combined with another......?	andrew93 (249)
281901	2008-03-20 21:55:00	well if you are a good programmer try this generate the 91,390 4:40 combinations then compress em into as FEW AS POSSIBLE 6 number sets and see how many you get....... another way to do this is to generate the 5000 (approx) 4:20 number combinations then re-combine em into as FEW AS POSSIBLE 6 number groups......ive actually done this MANUALLY some years ago and ended up with .....um......approx 600 groups of 6 numbers maybe you can improve on this ? cause if you play all 40 numbers by splitting them into two groups of 20 and ensure that you have covered all the 4:20's within your game then you MUST win a prize (or perhaps several due to double ups').......	drcspy (146)
281902	2008-03-20 23:38:00	Ah - I see what you are saying. By splitting the numbers into two, and given there are 7 possible numbers that can give you a 4-ball prize, then at least one half has to have at least 4 numbers and hence a prize. Interesting. But I'm still looking at the expected return versus the investment aspect.....but it is a good way of managing your odds and avoiding having your odds managed for you by the Lotteries Commission through number distribution. I will have a quick look at writing something to work out the combos.	andrew93 (249)
281903	2008-03-21 06:03:00	Look at the lower dividends, then roughly calculate the cost of ensuring a 4 number win - Is not the objective to come out ahead. not to have a winning combination at a significant financial loss. I can remember a friend of mine who is a senior lecturer in statistics making the comment that no professional statistician would buy a lotto ticket. If one must gamble take horse racing, in most races the odds can be dramatically reduced as a fair percentage of the field are outsiders, but about only 65 cents of every dollar wagered is returned as part of the dividends, so even on swings and roundabouts it is hard to break even - betting on horse racing has produced more paupers than rich men. I had a colleague who was a racing fanatic,he was always going on about the $30,000 trifecta he had won, but for a man in his fifties who had always been paid a salary well above the average, he had very little in the way of material possessions compared to most people of his age. There is no such thing as a free meal.	KenESmith (6287)
281904	2008-03-21 06:34:00	Look at the lower dividends, then roughly calculate the cost of ensuring a 4 number win - Is not the objective to come out ahead. not to have a winning combination at a significant financial loss. no one here is stating anything otherwise so what's your point ? Have you actually READ this thread ?	drcspy (146)
281905	2008-03-21 21:36:00	Ah - I see what you are saying. By splitting the numbers into two, and given there are 7 possible numbers that can give you a 4-ball prize, then at least one half has to have at least 4 numbers and hence a prize. Interesting. But I'm still looking at the expected return versus the investment aspect.....but it is a good way of managing your odds and avoiding having your odds managed for you by the Lotteries Commission through number distribution. I will have a quick look at writing something to work out the combos. Thanks drcspy and andrew. You are now getting very close to answering my initial question!!! Andrew I have calculated the "investment return" you mention. It's as follows and is based on historical prize values: If you cover all 4 number combos and can squeeze them into 6 number lines without any double-ups then it will cost $3655.56 (6092.6 lines) Now if you do this you will have the following odds of winning each division: Div 6 = 20 definite Div 5 = 15 definite Div 4 = 1 in 1.27268 = 0.78574 Div 3 = 1 in 3.18186 = 0.31428 Div 2 = 1 in 105 = 0.00952 Div 1 = 1 in 630 = 0.00159 If you add these up by mulitplying the number of prizes by the historical prize values (I only went back 10 draws) you get a total prize of $2901. You have to split this number though into definite and probable. Definite (Div 5 & 6) is $967 and the remainder is just playing the odds. Having said that, your investment return if you play for a million years will be pretty close to: (3655.56-2901)/3655.56 = 0.21% loss And that is why statisticians don't play lotto!!!! :clap	lottogeek (6286)
281906	2008-03-21 21:56:00	ah......but theres probabilities and possibilities assuming your maths is correct the probability is as you've stated It's the possibilities that bring the excitement !	drcspy (146)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12