Louis Theroux: Gambling in Las Vegas
05 February 2007, 11:22 AM
#31
It's going to funny watching people in the new casino, every man and his dog will be pretending to be a gangsta and a high roller. All the women being like footballers wives etc. You know what northerners are like with their designer brands etc.
05 February 2007, 11:29 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things that are more likely to happen to you than winning the national lottery:
-Spontaneous Combustion
-Alien visitation
-QPR winning the champions league.
Of course the other fundamental error people make is assuming that buying two lottery tickets doubles your chances of winning the jackpot, or that buying 5 tickets means you have a far better chance of winning.
05 February 2007, 11:33 AM
#33
People make mistakes, not errors.
05 February 2007, 11:37 AM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another fundamental error is not understanding basic mathematics i find.
05 February 2007, 11:39 AM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a lottery ticket gives you a 1:14,000,000 chance of winning the lottery.
Buying two tickets does not give you a 1:7,000,000 chance - it gives you a 1:13,999,998 chance.
To take your example - 2 rows two would mean you have a 1:998 chance of winning.
If it did reduce you chances by half each time, you would only need to buy 10 tickets to be guaranteed the jackpot - doesn't work like that.
05 February 2007, 11:41 AM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 February 2007, 11:47 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No you've over-simplified it Pete, as the lottery relies on combinations of numbers, ie three out of six, four out of six, five out of six. Your logic is perfectly correct if it's just the Jackpot we're talking about.
05 February 2007, 11:50 AM
#38
Even if you bought 100 rows in the UK lottery then you would have a 1/140,000 chance of winning - even then you are more likely to be murdered.
Last edited by KiwiGTI; 05 February 2007 at 11:53 AM.
05 February 2007, 11:50 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The amount of times I have had to explain to my mother that the fact might as well spend a pound a week rather than a fiver (with a view to winning the jackpot) doesn't bear thinking about
05 February 2007, 11:56 AM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you but 100 tickets in the uk lottery, your chances of winning are 1:13,999,900 (or 100/14,000,000) you can't reduce the equation like you woulkd a fraction - its a probability measure..
Here is a site that explains it..
Math Forum: Ask Dr. Math FAQ: Probability in the Real World
What would happen if you bought 7 million tickets?
If you picked a different combination of six numbers for each of those 7 million tickets, you'd have 7 million of the possible winning combinations and the numerator of your probability fraction would therefore be 7 million. Given the second lottery, with a sample space of 14 million possible combinations, the probability of winning the lottery is 7 million/14 million, a probability of 50%.
Thus you can see that the more tickets you buy, the better your chances of winning the lottery. However, you need to buy lots and lots of tickets before the number of tickets you hold really makes a difference. Even if you buy 100 tickets (which might cost you $100), your chances of winning would still only be 100/14 million - not even close to a 1% chance.
If you picked a different combination of six numbers for each of those 7 million tickets, you'd have 7 million of the possible winning combinations and the numerator of your probability fraction would therefore be 7 million. Given the second lottery, with a sample space of 14 million possible combinations, the probability of winning the lottery is 7 million/14 million, a probability of 50%.
Thus you can see that the more tickets you buy, the better your chances of winning the lottery. However, you need to buy lots and lots of tickets before the number of tickets you hold really makes a difference. Even if you buy 100 tickets (which might cost you $100), your chances of winning would still only be 100/14 million - not even close to a 1% chance.
05 February 2007, 12:03 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THe simplest way to explain it is this -
There are 14 million different possible combinations of draw from the lottery. If you buy 100 tickets, you are predicting what 100 of those combinations are. Leaving 13,999,900 other possibilities. That does not equal 140,000:1
05 February 2007, 12:05 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BHP Club
Posts: 4,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who gives a flying **** about this new super casino.
Instead of worrrying about people having a laugh and spanking some cash think about the massive drugs/immigration/terrorist threat/deteriorating health service and poor schooling problem this country has!!
Secondly if some old lady wants to spank $4million of her own money then good luck to her. It's her money and she can do whatever she wants with it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also regarding the comment about giving to charity ... why should she?? People always use that argument when they see people frittering money away. I'd love to see how much money the people who use that argument gave to charity if they were to come into $4million!!!
Instead of worrrying about people having a laugh and spanking some cash think about the massive drugs/immigration/terrorist threat/deteriorating health service and poor schooling problem this country has!!
Secondly if some old lady wants to spank $4million of her own money then good luck to her. It's her money and she can do whatever she wants with it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also regarding the comment about giving to charity ... why should she?? People always use that argument when they see people frittering money away. I'd love to see how much money the people who use that argument gave to charity if they were to come into $4million!!!
05 February 2007, 02:14 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hull
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KIWI is correct Peter,
And the quote to the math forum contradicts what you have already said.
Given a 1000 possibilities, and you buy 2 of those possibilities your chances become 2/1000 or 1/500 NOT 1/998
so buying 2 different lines for the lottery does double you chances of winning the jackpot.. still terrible odds though
And the quote to the math forum contradicts what you have already said.
Given a 1000 possibilities, and you buy 2 of those possibilities your chances become 2/1000 or 1/500 NOT 1/998
so buying 2 different lines for the lottery does double you chances of winning the jackpot.. still terrible odds though
05 February 2007, 04:00 PM
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Interesting program, looked like people having fun to me. Louis was shocked that he enjoyed winning the $1.5k so much 
I thought it wss decent of the yank he was playing with to make Louis walk away/cash in when he was up before he could lose it.
I think all this nonsense and worrying about the super-casino is a load of rubbish. There have been casinos around for years, my small town now has Three and there are loads in B'ham/London. I think 'problem gambling' is much worse on the net, that's what people should be worried about.
I thought it wss decent of the yank he was playing with to make Louis walk away/cash in when he was up before he could lose it. I think all this nonsense and worrying about the super-casino is a load of rubbish. There have been casinos around for years, my small town now has Three and there are loads in B'ham/London. I think 'problem gambling' is much worse on the net, that's what people should be worried about.
05 February 2007, 04:20 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KIWI is correct Peter,
And the quote to the math forum contradicts what you have already said.
Given a 1000 possibilities, and you buy 2 of those possibilities your chances become 2/1000 or 1/500 NOT 1/998
so buying 2 different lines for the lottery does double you chances of winning the jackpot.. still terrible odds though
And the quote to the math forum contradicts what you have already said.
Given a 1000 possibilities, and you buy 2 of those possibilities your chances become 2/1000 or 1/500 NOT 1/998
so buying 2 different lines for the lottery does double you chances of winning the jackpot.. still terrible odds though
It doesnt say that at all
Christ, how do some people get through the day, this is pretty basic maths. In fact it's not even that, it's common sense.
Last edited by PeteBrant; 05 February 2007 at 04:23 PM.
05 February 2007, 04:30 PM
#47
05 February 2007, 04:39 PM
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
[This doesn't take into account multiple winners of the same ticket or lesser prizes for incomplete matches as lotto does - but the theory holds].
As you say, common sense ......
Dave
05 February 2007, 04:45 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hull
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given you theory Peter if you bought all possible lottery combinations apart from two your odds would by 1/2 which is clearly not correct, you odds would in fact be around 13999998/14000000
You may be getting confused with the tossing theory i.e. a 1 coin toss does not influence that of another.. A lot of people suspect that if a coin lands heads say 4 times in row it is more likely to land tails next when in fact the odds are still ½, as the previous results do not influence the next.
Say 25 comes up 4 times in a row on a roulette table, it still has a 1/37 chance of coming up again just as the number 32 does for instance.
So what I’m saying is buying 2 tickets for the lottery a single draw DOES doubles your chances, buying 2 tickets for separate drawers does not!
So rather than spend a pound a week on the lottery were your chances are approx. 1/14000000 every week you’d have higher odds (I was going to say better off, put you’d probably wouldn’t be financially) purchasing them all at once 52/14000000 or around 1/269231
You may be getting confused with the tossing theory
i.e. a 1 coin toss does not influence that of another.. A lot of people suspect that if a coin lands heads say 4 times in row it is more likely to land tails next when in fact the odds are still ½, as the previous results do not influence the next.Say 25 comes up 4 times in a row on a roulette table, it still has a 1/37 chance of coming up again just as the number 32 does for instance.
So what I’m saying is buying 2 tickets for the lottery a single draw DOES doubles your chances, buying 2 tickets for separate drawers does not!
So rather than spend a pound a week on the lottery were your chances are approx. 1/14000000 every week you’d have higher odds (I was going to say better off, put you’d probably wouldn’t be financially) purchasing them all at once 52/14000000 or around 1/269231
05 February 2007, 04:47 PM
#51
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Next door to the WiFi connection
Posts: 16,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 February 2007, 04:48 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your making exactly the same mistake
i.e. assuming 100:14,000,000 = 1:140,000
In the land of ratios - yes, in the land of probability, no.
I'll try and explain it using lesser numbers.
Imagine you have a wheel with the numbers 1-50. You spind the wheel to get a number.
What are the odds of having one ticket and getting it right?
1:50 of course.
What are the odds if you have two tickets?
If you said 1:25, then you are wrong.
It is 2/50 that is - 2 desired outcomes out of 50 possible outcomes. Which is definitely not the same as one possible outcome out of 25 possible.
i.e. assuming 100:14,000,000 = 1:140,000
In the land of ratios - yes, in the land of probability, no.
I'll try and explain it using lesser numbers.
Imagine you have a wheel with the numbers 1-50. You spind the wheel to get a number.
What are the odds of having one ticket and getting it right?
1:50 of course.
What are the odds if you have two tickets?
If you said 1:25, then you are wrong.
It is 2/50 that is - 2 desired outcomes out of 50 possible outcomes. Which is definitely not the same as one possible outcome out of 25 possible.
05 February 2007, 04:49 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What i always struggle with, is that statistically, 1-2-3-4-5-6 is just as likely to come up as 3-14-22-36-41-43 for example.
But if you look at the historical results, even though we're introducing "human" patterns and groupings into the numbers, it always seems as if there's a fairly even distribution over the 1- 49 spectrum, give or take.
Are there programs to tell you which numbers are statistically under-drawn? I suppose so?
But if you look at the historical results, even though we're introducing "human" patterns and groupings into the numbers, it always seems as if there's a fairly even distribution over the 1- 49 spectrum, give or take.
Are there programs to tell you which numbers are statistically under-drawn? I suppose so?
05 February 2007, 04:52 PM
#54
So by your logic, are you telling me that if I buy 10 tickets for a wheel that has 50 numbers, I have a better chance than if I buy 20 numbers on a wheel that has 100?
No!
It's 1/5 for both wheels!
No!
It's 1/5 for both wheels!
05 February 2007, 04:54 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hull
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong again peter.. if you pick 2 numbers on a single spin your odds are indeed 1/25 if there are 50 numbers on the wheel
If you talking 2 seperate spins then you would be correct in saying each has an equal 1/50 chance of winning, but that does not equate to 2 tickets to a single lottery draw!!!
OMG!!!!!
If you talking 2 seperate spins then you would be correct in saying each has an equal 1/50 chance of winning, but that does not equate to 2 tickets to a single lottery draw!!!
OMG!!!!!
Last edited by THORPEM; 05 February 2007 at 05:00 PM. Reason: ..
05 February 2007, 04:58 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THORPEM is quite right. Say the odds are 1000 to 1 of picking a winning combination. (1 prize only to keep it simple - 1000 possible combinations of numbers). Your chance of winning with one ticket/line (call it what you will) is 1 in a 1000. If you bought two tickets (2 different combinations) then your chances of winning are 2 in a 1000. Or, to put it another way, your chances of winning have just doubled - from 0.001 to 0.002.
That's exactly what I have been saying. The thing people have been getting wrong is equating a 2 in a 1000 chance to be 1 in 500.
05 February 2007, 05:01 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong again peter.. if you pick 2 numbers on a single spin your odds are indeed 1/25 if there are 50 numbers on the wheel
If you talking 2 seperate spins then you would be correct in saying each has an equal 1/50 chance of winning, but that does not equate to 2 tickets to a single lottery draw!!!
OMG!!!!!
If you talking 2 seperate spins then you would be correct in saying each has an equal 1/50 chance of winning, but that does not equate to 2 tickets to a single lottery draw!!!
OMG!!!!!
That does not equal a 25 to 1 chance.
It a 2 in 50 chance - not the same thing at all.
05 February 2007, 05:03 PM
#59
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Hull
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the issue, in the fact this is not an fundamental error its correct
05 February 2007, 05:03 PM
#60