READ THE FOLLOWING POST AND PLEASE COMMENT ON MY THEORY...
WOW! HAVE I EVER DRAWN AN INTERESTING CONCLUSION REGARDING THE LOTTERY...
ok, people, get ready for my REVELATION OF A LIFETIME:
this is how i think the lottery system works:
when playing a lottery, like Canada's Lotto 649, ANYTHING can happen (within set limits, 6 different numbers, arranged in acending order, from 1 through 49, inclusively), but, in my opinion, the true ODDS of this game have a great deal to do with the SUM of these six numbers:
take for example a series of dice (die?), six in fact:
the task: you are asked to toss these 6 dice in an attempt to make up a sum which you will decide before rolling the dice; the player may roll a same number an unlimited number of times;
only a fool would choose the sum of 6 as there would only be one sole possibility of winning: 1-1-1-1-1-1, just as this fool would choose the sum of 36, as, again, only one sole combination would be possible, this being 6-6-6-6-6-6;
a more educated guess would be, i am thinking, a series of numbers whose sum is found between these two extremes, perhaps right smack down in the centre, so, i would do the following calculation:
36(max. sum) - 6(min. sum) = 30(span of max. and min. sum)
30/2 (to find the middle, the median) = 15 (here are my calculations : 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-30-31-32-33-34-35-36, 31 numbers or sums in total, so find the middle one, which would be 16)
more math...
16:
1-1-1-1-6-6
1-1-1-2-5-6
1-1-1-2-6-5
1-1-1-3-5-5
1-1-1-3-6-4
1-1-1-3-4-6
1-1-1-4-6-3
1-1-1-4-3-6
1-1-1-4-5-4
1-1-1-4-4-5
1-1-1-5-4-4
1-1-1-5-5-3
1-1-1-5-3-5
1-1-1-5-2-6
1-1-1-5-6-2
1-1-1-6-4-3
1-1-1-6-3-4
1-1-1-6-2-5
1-1-1-6-5-2
1-1-1-6-6-1
1-1-1-6-1-6
1-1-2-6-5-1
1-1-2-6-1-5
1-1-2-6-4-2
1-1-2-6-2-4
i have no idea where this is going, nor do i feel like continuing, but i do feel as though i am ONTO SOMETHING HERE...
has anyone any opinions as to my work?
i am a total NOVICE, obviously, but this is something i figured out on my own...
ur comments, so long as they are POLITE, are more than welcome.
jack pawt
1-1-2-6-3-3
so, a sum of 15 would, or should have the most possibilities, but one would have to produce some sort of table of values to verify this assumption (i don't feel like doing the table; just thinking about producting such a table is exhausting).
however, could anyone give me some sort of INSIGHT as to this theory of mine, which, again would be a theory, and subject to anomalities and exceptions...
be in touch!
jack pawt
the smarter person would probably choose a sum found, well, i am thinking, in the middle of these two extremes
P.S. I AM CURRENTLY CONDUCTING SOME RESEARCH TO SEE IF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE...
STAY TUNED...
WOW! HAVE I EVER DRAWN AN INTERESTING CONCLUSION REGARDING THE LOTTERY...
ok, people, get ready for my REVELATION OF A LIFETIME:
this is how i think the lottery system works:
when playing a lottery, like Canada's Lotto 649, ANYTHING can happen (within set limits, 6 different numbers, arranged in acending order, from 1 through 49, inclusively), but, in my opinion, the true ODDS of this game have a great deal to do with the SUM of these six numbers:
take for example a series of dice (die?), six in fact:
the task: you are asked to toss these 6 dice in an attempt to make up a sum which you will decide before rolling the dice; the player may roll a same number an unlimited number of times;
only a fool would choose the sum of 6 as there would only be one sole possibility of winning: 1-1-1-1-1-1, just as this fool would choose the sum of 36, as, again, only one sole combination would be possible, this being 6-6-6-6-6-6;
a more educated guess would be, i am thinking, a series of numbers whose sum is found between these two extremes, perhaps right smack down in the centre, so, i would do the following calculation:
36(max. sum) - 6(min. sum) = 30(span of max. and min. sum)
30/2 (to find the middle, the median) = 15 (here are my calculations : 6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-30-31-32-33-34-35-36, 31 numbers or sums in total, so find the middle one, which would be 16)
more math...
16:
1-1-1-1-6-6
1-1-1-2-5-6
1-1-1-2-6-5
1-1-1-3-5-5
1-1-1-3-6-4
1-1-1-3-4-6
1-1-1-4-6-3
1-1-1-4-3-6
1-1-1-4-5-4
1-1-1-4-4-5
1-1-1-5-4-4
1-1-1-5-5-3
1-1-1-5-3-5
1-1-1-5-2-6
1-1-1-5-6-2
1-1-1-6-4-3
1-1-1-6-3-4
1-1-1-6-2-5
1-1-1-6-5-2
1-1-1-6-6-1
1-1-1-6-1-6
1-1-2-6-5-1
1-1-2-6-1-5
1-1-2-6-4-2
1-1-2-6-2-4
i have no idea where this is going, nor do i feel like continuing, but i do feel as though i am ONTO SOMETHING HERE...
has anyone any opinions as to my work?
i am a total NOVICE, obviously, but this is something i figured out on my own...
ur comments, so long as they are POLITE, are more than welcome.
jack pawt
1-1-2-6-3-3
so, a sum of 15 would, or should have the most possibilities, but one would have to produce some sort of table of values to verify this assumption (i don't feel like doing the table; just thinking about producting such a table is exhausting).
however, could anyone give me some sort of INSIGHT as to this theory of mine, which, again would be a theory, and subject to anomalities and exceptions...
be in touch!
jack pawt
the smarter person would probably choose a sum found, well, i am thinking, in the middle of these two extremes
P.S. I AM CURRENTLY CONDUCTING SOME RESEARCH TO SEE IF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE...
STAY TUNED...
~~~ 
