Is the lotto a fools tax

RayCun

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

And for the measly €50notes for the game you play, you'd have to spend even more!

If you have the option to win 50euro or 30,000stg (for only slightly wider odds), which route would you take?

here's the thing - I don't have to throw my money away on either!

and I'm certainly not going to fool myself into thinking there are hot numbers, or Fibonacci sequences, or elasticity principles, or golden radial arcs that can predict which numbers will be drawn.

4068ac1elhodqr

RayCun wrote: »

here's the thing - I don't have to throw my money away on either!

and I'm certainly not going to fool myself into thinking there are hot numbers, or Fibonacci sequences, or elasticity principles, or golden radial arcs that can predict which numbers will be drawn.

But were you, or were you not earlier defending the odds of (peak) €150m euro at sky high odds of around 130,000,000/1 ?

Frankly even at this peak prize, (the highest since April), expecting any chance to get 7 correct balls is pure fantasy.

RayCun

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

But were you, or were you not earlier defending the odds of (peak) €150m euro at sky high odds of around 130,000,000/1 ?

No, I wasn't.
I entered this thread to ask about a lottery that you suggested had 13000:1 odds of a 30k payout :pac:

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

Frankly even at this peak prize, (the highest since April), expecting any chance to get 7 correct balls is pure fantasy.

Expecting to win money on the lottery is pure fantasy. In some daydreams the purple unicorns have wings, in others they don't - neither are realistic.

4068ac1elhodqr

RayCun wrote: »

No, I wasn't.
I entered this thread to ask about a lottery that you suggested had 13000:1 odds of a 30k payout :pac:

Fair enough corrected that, those 13,000 odds were from the 6balls, using 4balls (hotpicks) the odds are slightly higher.

RayCun wrote: »

Expecting to win money on the lottery is pure fantasy. In some daydreams the purple unicorns have wings, in others they don't - neither are realistic.

Agree with this (to an extent) my neightbour won 1.5m in the 80's (when it was easier) and know of several that won 10-30 using 4balls using non-conventional approaches.

My point was that if are going to play it for leisure, gift to someone, or simply as an experiment or otherwise, then do choose the method to do so carefully.

e.g. If you target the more (realistic) 4 balls, your price earnings ratio would be:

Method 1 - regular lotto: 0.00144801621778 (basically 0.001% OTE).
Method 2 - hotpicks method: 0.43419738613174 (but assuming no advantage)

RayCun

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

My point was that if are going to play it for leisure, gift to someone, or simply as an experiment or otherwise, then do choose the method to do so carefully.

If someone is holding a gun to your head and making you play a lottery then yes, some have better odds than others.

If someone is forcing you to play the same numbers every week, then you should play numbers that are not selected frequently*, so if you win a prize you are less likely to share it.

But beyond that, it's a matter of chance. There is no way to predict which numbers will come up. There are no numbers that are more likely to come up because they are 'hot', or 'cold', or the month has an 'r' in it, or two prime numbers came up last time.

You might think you are smarter than other lottery players because you play a game with better odds, but if you think you have a system then you are actually more foolish than they are.

* afaik, newspapers publish this every now and again

RayCun

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

Method 2 - hotpicks method: 0.43419738613174 (but assuming no advantage)

facepalm

Beasty

It's a quicker way to get poor than going to the bookies (where the odds are stacked against you in an area where skill/knowledge can help out. With the lotto your odds of losing are guaranteed however skilful or knowledgeable you think you are)

4068ac1elhodqr

RayCun wrote: »

If someone is holding a gun to your head and making you play a lottery then yes, some have better odds than others.

That was really the only point I was making, the odds are 'signifcantly better' and by rather some margin (for ALL prize amounts up to and inc. 1m).

RayCun wrote: »

If someone is forcing you to play the same numbers every week, then you should play numbers that are not selected frequently*, so if you win a prize you are less likely to share it.

The sharing factor is largely meaningless, hotpicks is fixed prize, not dependant on amount of prize winners. Thus regular lotto tickets are at even more of an disadvantage for upper end prizes.

RayCun wrote: »

But beyond that, it's a matter of chance. There is no way to predict which numbers will come up. There are no numbers that are more likely to come up because they are 'hot', or 'cold', or the month has an 'r' in it, or two prime numbers came up last time.

Yes, technically every number has the same chance. I can also tell you that every galaxy formed in the universe will follow very close to the ratio pattern of 1.61803398875. That stock traders seek out fibonacci arcs when projecting peaks and lows when trading large amounts.

RayCun wrote: »

You might think you are smarter than other lottery players because you play a game with better odds, but if you think you have a system then you are actually more foolish than they are.

I only play it as a light-hearted experiment, and at a lower cost base than the average player.

Can also agree my 'default odds' of winning <1m, are 'better than every single other in Europe' playing the regular shop lottos.

Only those who actually win the peak 130m prize at 130,000,000/1, can expect a better PE ratio or performance on average.

4068ac1elhodqr

Beasty wrote: »

It's a quicker way to get poor than going to the bookies (where the odds are stacked against you in an area where skill/knowledge can help out. With the lotto your odds of losing are guaranteed however skilful or knowledgeable you think you are)

Perhaps, the bookies in an AvB even will usually set price at 1.83 for two even matched players in an event. I.e. No win scenario.

You can occasionally outwit them, but only by very specific knowledge, skills or foresight. e.g. Backing Trump & Brexit.

RayCun

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

Yes, technically every number has the same chance.

Stop there. Just stop. Every number has the same chance. That's it.

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

I can also tell you that every galaxy formed in the universe will follow very close to the ratio pattern of 1.61803398875. That stock traders seek out fibonacci arcs when projecting peaks and lows when trading large amounts.

Bollocks
Bull****
Horsepucky.
Nonsense upon stilts.

I don't know if you're trying to sell this crap to anyone else or if you actually believe it, but IT ISN'T TRUE.

Emerson Swift Quid wrote: »

Only those who actually win the peak 130m prize at 130,000,000/1, can expect a better PE ratio or performance on average.

You know who has a better PE ratio than you?
Grannies who hide their money under the mattress.

4068ac1elhodqr

RayCun wrote: »

You know who has a better PE ratio than you?
Grannies who hide their money under the mattress.

Perhaps, but the fact remains I have a better chance at <1m targets than every other player in Europe playing Euromillions through regular shop tickets, every week.

That's 80-100m people approx, in a worse default position for this target.

Again, agree there is no distinct advantage in any lottery, that's the very nature of them. There was only one case (way back in the 80's) of a syndicate which took a technical advantage, of a very large state rollover event.

But if you are going to play for entertainment, as a gift for someone else, or other reason then do actually choose the most efficient method.
Why do people eat chocolate, drink or smoke - sure none of these activities offer them any benefits (well maybe except for Chillean Red Wine).

Also be sure to give 10% of any significant wins direct to good causes - that you actually choose to select and can verify from.

Turbohymac

Never did it but my late father was addicted.. great pastime for dreamers.but some of us still live in the real world.

Steve F

RayCun wrote: »

Stop there. Just stop. Every number has the same chance. That's it.



Yep...because as anyone with any intelligence knows "chance has no memory"

super_furry

RayCun wrote: »

but its okay you have a system!

That looks like someone tried to draw an aneurysm.