NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

## All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

#### The Lottery6 Comments More | Login | Reply/

Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
• #### I don't understand(Score:1)

by sheriff_p (1577) on 2003.06.26 3:38 (#21437) Journal
I'm probably being exceptionally silly, but why would predictions based on previous draws give you better results than random numbers?
• #### Re:I don't understand(Score:1)

Theoretically they shouldn't, but if there is a set of numbers or even a sequence of numbers that persistantly appear in draws, then using them seems to have a better chance of winning small prizes.

In all the test runs I've done so far there has only one prediction that has made a bonus+5 win, and that was from the predictions based on previous draws.

It doesn't prove anything and I only wrote it to wile away the hours on a Sunday. But it did prove useful for learning about the sorting and other alogrith

• #### Re:I don't understand(Score:1)

It doesn't. The only thing you can maximize by analyzing previous drawings is your possible win (by choosing numbers which are not frequently played by your fellow players).
• #### Re:I don't understand(Score:1)

...waaaait, wouldn't that only be true if there were no pattern in the numbers?
--

------------------------------
You are what you think.
• #### Re:I don't understand(Score:1)

Patterns - Yes... but not in the numbers that are drawn but in the numbers which are chosen by other players.
• #### Re:I don't understand(Score:1)

...so even if there's a pattern in the numbers being drawn, it's irrelevant to trying to win more? Why wouldn't finding that pattern produce increased winnings?

This can't be the Monty Hall problem...what's the deal?

--

------------------------------
You are what you think.