This is comments page 3. Read the full post here:-Analysing Lottery Results Reveals Unusual Pattern…
LG // Dec 16, 2009 at 10:15 pm
The longest running lottery in the world has had less than 15,000 draws. Most have had less than a couple of thousand draws. And there are nearly 14 MILLION combinations in a 6 from 49 lottery.
So it’s actually no surprise at all at this stage that there are combinations that have never been drawn anywhere in the world.
In fact, there will be millions of them!
Of course the newspaper headlines will explode with how amazing, astounding and incredibly improbable it is when 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is drawn somewhere… But they won’t when 6, 23, 27, 34, 35, 37 is drawn for the first time anywhere in the world…
The only difference is the lack of what our brains recognise as a pretty pattern..!
Dave // Jan 8, 2010 at 4:01 pm
I understand what you are saying but every Pick 5 and Pick6 lottery has the numbers 1,2,3,4,5 in addition to 2,3,4,5,6,7 and several more five consecutive combinations.
I’ve never heard of a 5 consecutive number winning combination. It’s just interesting that out all the lotteries combined, none, have had this occurrence to my knowledge.
Wonder what the odds are when you combine all the lotteries in the world of having one five consecutive winning combination.
If you took the lottery with the lowest number of playable numbers and based it on that with the all the drawings to date with every lottery with at least that minimum number of playable numbers.
LG // Jan 8, 2010 at 6:26 pm
What are the odds when you combine all the worlds lotteries of having five consecutive numbers?
Exactly the same as them having any other combination!
The only reason it’s even on your mind is because you’re attaching significance to a ‘pretty pattern’. There are millions of other combinations that have never been drawn anywhere in the world.
Remember, it’s actually balls that come out of the machine, not numbers – the numbers printed on them just help us decide who won.
Dave // Jan 9, 2010 at 2:15 am
What ‘pretty pattern’ would that be? I’m merely suggesting out of the MILLIONS of drawings that have occurred since the lottery became a concept of man, I nor anyone I know has EVER seen or heard of a consecutive winning combination.
LG // Jan 9, 2010 at 7:28 pm
Consecutive numbers = “pretty pattern”
I agree, it’s never been drawn. But just like millions of other combinations (literally millions) that have never been drawn. You’re not wondering about most of those purely because they don’t make a pattern when you put them in numerical order.
Like I said above, the longest running lottery in the world has only had 15,000 draws. Most have been running a lot less than that.
There are many millions more lottery combinations than there have been draws.
So it’s actually of no surprise, or significance that consecutive numbers have yet to be drawn.
AlmaSam // Sep 2, 2011 at 1:06 pm
Lottery-Guy, I understand what your saying, but I also think what Dave is saying has merit.
The closest I’ve seen to a straight was on May 6, 1989. The Arizona Lotto ‘The Pick’, a 6/44 lotto, had the following draw: 1,2,3,4,5,17. That’s pretty close.
However, even if it had ben 1,2,3,4,5,6, it would have been extremely rare, and I believe playing those numbers is less likely to give me a 4 or 5 out of 6 on a regular basis. Therefore, it’s not a combination I would play.
For me, it makes sense to eliminate some of the combinations, not because they are impossible, but because they are less likely to happen tomorrow. For example, in a Lotto 6/44 you get six numbers drawn. One of those numbers will be the lowest, and one the highest. The others will be somewhere in between. I’m not talking about the order of the draw, just about arranging the numbers from lowest to highest, giving you 6 positions. Now in the previously mentioned Arizona Lotto ‘The Pick’, the lowest high number since 11/2/1988 (I don’t go further back because the previous numbers are not sorted from low to high) was 13. Therefore, while 6 – 12 could, in theory, appear as the high numbers, the history tells me they are less likely to appear in that position tomorrow. Of course I would still play those numbers for a lower position, just not the highest position. Likewise, during that same period, the highest low number was 29. It seams to me unlikely that a number higher than that would appear, in the lowest position, tomorrow, though not impossible. Therefore, I would not play a number larger than 29 in the low position.
Does my logic make any sense Lottery-Guy?
LG // Sep 4, 2011 at 5:26 am
Sorry, but no, it doesn’t make any sense 🙂
The numbers are just markings on the balls. There is no reason that any particular combination of balls should be any less likely than any other. What if the balls were just different colours instead of numbers? See what I mean?
Dave // Jan 26, 2010 at 9:35 pm
I’ve given what you have said some thought. If the longest running lottery in the world has only 15,000 drawings then I should be looking for the short-term patterns. I understand randomness, but randomness often occurs in clusters. If you look at all the possible combinations that can occur you are applying a long-term analysis to a short-term game which would be my lifetime.
Also, I concede there are no perfect patterns to be found in past lottery drawings but I can’t help but see occurrences, like numbers that repeat the very next drawing or numbers that are dormant and become awake hitting several times once they hit twice within a few drawings.
There is no perfect sure fire way to predict the lottery but I believe there are smarter ways to pick numbers than out of thin air. I can often pick at least one or two numbers that I’m sure are going to hit and they often do. I just need to get lucky on the other four or five. But I only need to get lucky once.
Besides, I’m learning a lot about Microsoft Excel in the process, that alone is worth the time spent investigating patterns and occurrences. To me, it’s fun, maybe one day it will pay off.
LG // Jan 27, 2010 at 12:14 am
Yes you can see historical patterns in randomness. But any patterns, long or short term, are entirely useless for predicting what comes next. It’s how lottery games are designed, and there simply is no evidence to prove otherwise.
Enjoy learning Excel though. It won’t help you win but spreadsheets are pretty cool – all hail Visicalc that brought the spreadsheet to the masses.
Rabelais // Jan 26, 2011 at 6:45 am
Some random browsing brought me here. Lottery-Guy, I enjoy and applaud your calm insistance that people are deluding themselves. The best strategy with lotteries is not to indulge and thus save hundreds of pounds. I’ve checked my hypothetical set of (arbitrary) numbers and I have saved £1,220. And that IS a fact 🙂
Joe // Feb 2, 2011 at 5:32 am
I refer to numbers 1 to 45 as a spectrum (reference or domain), I call it as such because of my engineering background.
One has to keep in mind that the SIX drawn balls from the barrel HAS NO IDENTIFICATION. In other words, six blank being dropped out of the barrel.
If one wants to look for patterns out of the past draws then he will not get anywhere. This is because ALL POSSIBILITIES (Patterns) have EXACTLY equal chance of dropping out of the barrel. Even 1,2,3,4,5,6 and 45,44,43,42,41,40.
Each set of 6 numbers that are being drawn are actually part of the 1-45 spectrum JIGSAW.
Like a jigsaw puzzle, there are over 8 million jigsaw pieces that need to put together in its exact location (spectrum) in order to complete the picture.
Suppose your child was given a homework to draw a picture of a house a car some trees some clouds a sun etc. Once the drawing is complete, now cut the picture into 8 million different pieces of different WEIRD SHAPES. Each of these pieces represent a 6-number lottery draw.
Weird shapes is a metaphore for lotto PATTERNS.
I wanted to elaborate more, but have run out of time for now, perhaps some other time.
Hope the above is of some value !!!
LG // Jul 1, 2011 at 12:52 am
Agreed! I use a similar model to explain why patterns are not significant.
Think of the lottery as a huge draw machine with one ball for every set of possible results. So each ball has a combination of 6 numbers written on it. That’s how lotteries work.
Now does it make sense to analyse lottery numbers… 🙂
Dave // Jul 1, 2011 at 1:11 am
“Randomness” occurs in clusters and averages catch-up when behind. I see this happen all the time. I agree with your big picture long-term view of lottery randomness, however, my life-time compared to the lottery’s life-time will be very short. Playing randomness clusters and chasing numbers that are behind averages helps to hit a few numbers in order to break even until I hit the big one, if that ever occurs.
LG // Jul 1, 2011 at 1:49 am
But you can’t predict when a ‘cluster’ has ended, or when the averages are going to ‘catch-up’ :-).
So you’re just back to randomness again.
Dave // Jul 1, 2011 at 3:58 pm
False, you can predict. If a number has been out for an abnormal number of drawing, say 30+, when it does hit, it most likely will hit again within a few drawing. If not, then once it hits again, it will come alive and begin its cycle to catch-up the average. I’ve seen this and used it many, many times, hitting the number.
Also, look at most of your Pick 5 lotteries. How many times do you see numbers that repeated in the previous drawing or skip one drawing? Lots.
I know you belittle “pretty patterns” as a means to hit the lottery and suggest that the same chance of success can be achieved playing random numbers, but I can assure you identifying abnormal variances or occurrences is not less successful than choosing random number. After all, your random picks may happen to follow another’s pretty pattern pick. To each his own.
LG // Jul 1, 2011 at 8:33 pm
But Dave, your definition here is so general that it lets you see what you want to see.
What is an abnormal number of draws for a number not to appear? 30+? What about 20..? Then you have a rule for if it hits, it will hit again. But it’s only ‘likely’ and within a ‘few’ draws. But it’s ‘likely’ that any number will appear within a ‘few’ draws.
If you’re only looking for something on occasions where you’ve determined it’s significant, then sometimes you’ll see the result you’re looking for. And where you don’t see it, you’ve got another rule to fall back on! (It’s the infrequency illusion)
I agree your approach is not less successful than using random numbers, but it’s no better either.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Subscribe To Comments? Notify me of followup comments by email (you can also subscribe without commenting)
Categories: Lottery Questions
© 2003–2020 Lottery-Guy.com