Frank
Member
Have you ever wondered how you can improve your chances of winning a lottery without having a system but relying on chance alone ? Of course you have and you already know the answer. Buy more tickets.
So you double the number of tickets and double your chances of a win. If the Lottery Operator has 2 draws on the day and your tickets are valid for both draws then your chances of winning are further doubled, improving your chances by a factor of four.
Taking it further, if you bought three tickets and the operator held three draws and all your tickets were valid for all the draws then your chances would improve by 3 x 3 = 9.
Its beginning to look like a square law, related to (number of tickets) x (number of valid draws for your tickets) where I just happen to have made the two multiples equal so its a square law.
So what if you bought 2000 tickets and in some parallel universe they actually held 2000 draws on the same day and all your tickets were valid for those draws. Would you agree that your chances of a win might be improved by 2000 x 2000 = 4 Million ? It makes sense to me anyway.
Ok, then suppose you were a lottery analyst looking back over 2000 draws of your lottery history and you decided to compare every past result with every other past result. Would your chances of finding matches be the same as the published normal odds ? A simple way of looking at it, is to pretended that one result is a 'ticket' and decided to compare that with each of the 1999 other draws. That's an improvement over the odds by a factor of 1999 for that one draw matching the others. Agreed ? But wait, you've got another 1999 'tickets' and you need to check each one against the remaining 1999 draws from that ticket. So a rough and ready calculation would suggest that your chances are improved by 2000 x 1999. Just short of 4 million.
Some of the more astute readers will have spotted that in this process each pair is compared twice, e.g draw 10 with draw 1560 and later, draw 1560 with draw 10, so the above shows twice as many matches as you would actually get. If there were prizes for the matches then it’s the matching pairs you need, That's how many prizes you would get.
So you really need to ask how many pairs of 'ticket and a draw'' do you need to compare and the answer is = COMBIN(2000,2) which works out at 1,999,000 pairs of draws being compared, about 2 million pairs. So that is actually how many times better you have a chance of finding whatever match you are looking for in your past results set, compared with the odds of a match for comparing one draw with one other draw.
If you just listed the draw numbers of any draws that had at least one match to any other draw then there would be 2 x COMBIN(2000,2) x the raw odds - the number of draws mentioned your list would be 3,999,800 x the raw odds of that match.
I refer to the raw odds as the original published or calculated odds for a comparison of 1 draw with 1 ticket.
To quote a specific example, say the UK lotto 649 and you were looking for match 5's between your 2000 old results then the raw odds of a match 5, 1 ticket, 1 draw are 1 in 55,492.
I predict that on average, you would find =COMBIN(2000,2) x 1/55,492 match 5's with those 2000 compared draws = 36 matched pairs which involve 72 named draws with at least one match to another draw.
In turn this means the actual odds of finding a match 5 within 2000 draws are =COMBIN(2000,2) x 2000 / 55,492 = 55.5 to 1. This is also equal to the raw odds x 2000.
You can test this theory by Downloading the match 5 finder https://www.mediafire.com/?10j88uk6ca9s753 and see for yourself.
This compares 2000 results, (click the button) each with the other and finds match 5's consistent with the above rules. It has a feature built into the counter to prevent double counting of matched pairs, so it only displays one of the two (or more) draw numbers that match. You can check back from any draw number in the result by typing in that number (to cell B1 and using the filter to find match 5's. This will show you all the found matches to that draw.
Try any random set of 2000 draws 649 format, see what happens. According to Moses you won't find any matches as there aren't enough draws for a 1 in 55,492 event to happen. I think the UK set has 32 such matches, within the normal range.
Other events with higher odds against them as illustrated below are subject to the same rules as I have described. Just multiply their chances of happening (one draw compared with one draw) by the number of draws in his database. I have a spreadsheet that tackles this type of low probability match, shows you the matches in position and works out the TRUE odds of this type of thing happenning when you have free reign to cherry pick over thousands of draws, choosing ticket and results.
I understand that some of you will be reluctant to comment in this thread if you have been keeping up with developments. That is if you agree with me. You may not. However you are perfectly welcome to contact me privately on this work, most of you will know how to contact me via e-mail.
Thank you, the truth is out there.
So you double the number of tickets and double your chances of a win. If the Lottery Operator has 2 draws on the day and your tickets are valid for both draws then your chances of winning are further doubled, improving your chances by a factor of four.
Taking it further, if you bought three tickets and the operator held three draws and all your tickets were valid for all the draws then your chances would improve by 3 x 3 = 9.
Its beginning to look like a square law, related to (number of tickets) x (number of valid draws for your tickets) where I just happen to have made the two multiples equal so its a square law.
So what if you bought 2000 tickets and in some parallel universe they actually held 2000 draws on the same day and all your tickets were valid for those draws. Would you agree that your chances of a win might be improved by 2000 x 2000 = 4 Million ? It makes sense to me anyway.
Ok, then suppose you were a lottery analyst looking back over 2000 draws of your lottery history and you decided to compare every past result with every other past result. Would your chances of finding matches be the same as the published normal odds ? A simple way of looking at it, is to pretended that one result is a 'ticket' and decided to compare that with each of the 1999 other draws. That's an improvement over the odds by a factor of 1999 for that one draw matching the others. Agreed ? But wait, you've got another 1999 'tickets' and you need to check each one against the remaining 1999 draws from that ticket. So a rough and ready calculation would suggest that your chances are improved by 2000 x 1999. Just short of 4 million.
Some of the more astute readers will have spotted that in this process each pair is compared twice, e.g draw 10 with draw 1560 and later, draw 1560 with draw 10, so the above shows twice as many matches as you would actually get. If there were prizes for the matches then it’s the matching pairs you need, That's how many prizes you would get.
So you really need to ask how many pairs of 'ticket and a draw'' do you need to compare and the answer is = COMBIN(2000,2) which works out at 1,999,000 pairs of draws being compared, about 2 million pairs. So that is actually how many times better you have a chance of finding whatever match you are looking for in your past results set, compared with the odds of a match for comparing one draw with one other draw.
If you just listed the draw numbers of any draws that had at least one match to any other draw then there would be 2 x COMBIN(2000,2) x the raw odds - the number of draws mentioned your list would be 3,999,800 x the raw odds of that match.
I refer to the raw odds as the original published or calculated odds for a comparison of 1 draw with 1 ticket.
To quote a specific example, say the UK lotto 649 and you were looking for match 5's between your 2000 old results then the raw odds of a match 5, 1 ticket, 1 draw are 1 in 55,492.
I predict that on average, you would find =COMBIN(2000,2) x 1/55,492 match 5's with those 2000 compared draws = 36 matched pairs which involve 72 named draws with at least one match to another draw.
In turn this means the actual odds of finding a match 5 within 2000 draws are =COMBIN(2000,2) x 2000 / 55,492 = 55.5 to 1. This is also equal to the raw odds x 2000.
You can test this theory by Downloading the match 5 finder https://www.mediafire.com/?10j88uk6ca9s753 and see for yourself.
This compares 2000 results, (click the button) each with the other and finds match 5's consistent with the above rules. It has a feature built into the counter to prevent double counting of matched pairs, so it only displays one of the two (or more) draw numbers that match. You can check back from any draw number in the result by typing in that number (to cell B1 and using the filter to find match 5's. This will show you all the found matches to that draw.
Try any random set of 2000 draws 649 format, see what happens. According to Moses you won't find any matches as there aren't enough draws for a 1 in 55,492 event to happen. I think the UK set has 32 such matches, within the normal range.
Other events with higher odds against them as illustrated below are subject to the same rules as I have described. Just multiply their chances of happening (one draw compared with one draw) by the number of draws in his database. I have a spreadsheet that tackles this type of low probability match, shows you the matches in position and works out the TRUE odds of this type of thing happenning when you have free reign to cherry pick over thousands of draws, choosing ticket and results.
I will make those available later after you have had time to digest and test this for yourself.Moses said:
I understand that some of you will be reluctant to comment in this thread if you have been keeping up with developments. That is if you agree with me. You may not. However you are perfectly welcome to contact me privately on this work, most of you will know how to contact me via e-mail.
Thank you, the truth is out there.
