Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
Babyblade - a group of 24 of us have got together and found the average of our decision on if you're correct or not.
You're incorrect.
Do you believe us now?
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nath
Cosmo
At which point...the fact Ive emailed it him or that 24 of us have averaged out that he is wrong?
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
Both.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
Yes it matters, its basic english, YOUR native language.
well then you should probably change your location from "Im the real one!"
Last time I checked it's "I'm".
Right, so YOU'RE comparing missing out the ' to you just using the wrong damn word?
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nath
Both.
WIN WIN
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
New sig 
|
BabyBlade
Member
Registered: 5th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Rides: Ninja 600
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
Right, so YOU'RE comparing missing out the ' to you just using the wrong damn word?
I personally havn't got a problem with it.
It's very hypercritical if you think poor spelling is any worse than poor punctuation.
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
I bet Derren Brown is a grammar Nazi.
[Edited on 11-09-2009 by Nath]
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
Right, so YOU'RE comparing missing out the ' to you just using the wrong damn word?
I personally havn't got a problem with it.
It's very hypercritical if you think poor spelling is any worse than poor punctuation.
Actually what you posted was a grammatical error.
Either way, back to the maths (which YOU'RE also bad at)....
|
Paul_J
Member
Registered: 6th Jun 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by Nath
Fucking A+
Oh my god - that's brilliant 
Posted on Facebook 
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
Add it to your Youtube vid at the end Paul
|
Paul_J
Member
Registered: 6th Jun 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
I wish I could change the vid!
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
Just add it as a reply with that as the 10 second vid!
|
BabyBlade
Member
Registered: 5th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Rides: Ninja 600
User status: Offline
|
It could just be a dodgy keyboard to be fair, I guess you better weigh up the odds ?
At the end of the day I havn't disagreed with the odds, I'm just putting another point of view on things, each to their own.
I do believe there are ways you can help your chances (considering its not a one off draw).
On the offical website it even tells you the most popular balls and least popular.
By using these balls does it mathematcially give you a better chance of winning ? No
However it has shown that at that time they've made the most appearances, so why would it be wrong to chose one or two of those numbers for the next few draws after?
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive, but the odds are heavily stacked against anyone winning.
[Edited on 11-09-2009 by BabyBlade]
|
Danny P
Member
Registered: 20th Nov 02
Location: Cleckheaton, West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive, but the odds are heavily stacked against anyone winning.
Every single one of the 13,983,816 possible combinations has the same chance of coming out.
FACT.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
It could just be a dodgy keyboard to be fair, I guess you better weigh up the odds ?
At the end of the day I havn't disagreed with the odds, I'm just putting another point of view on things, each to their own.
I do believe there are ways you can help your chances (considering its not a one off draw).
On the offical website it even tells you the most popular balls and least popular.
By using these balls does it mathematcially give you a better chance of winning ? No
However it has shown that at that time its the made the most appearances, so why would it be wrong to chose one or two of those numbers for the next few draws after?
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive, but the odds are heavily stacked against anyone winning.
I dont even know where to start with this post!
Genuinely, what grade did you get in GCSE maths?
Probability states, that no matter what numbers have been drawn the most, or least, the next draw that happens all 49 balls have EXACTLY the same chance as being drawn.
You could pick the most drawn 6 balls in the whole history of the lottery, but your chances of winning would be the same as if you had picked the least 6 drawn balls in the history of the lottery.....or 1,2,3,4,5,6.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive
Actually, given there are less possible sequential combinations than random, it is more likely you'll win with a sequential than a random number combination.
[Edited on 11-09-2009 by Cosmo]
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
It could just be a dodgy keyboard to be fair, I guess you better weigh up the odds ?
At the end of the day I havn't disagreed with the odds, I'm just putting another point of view on things, each to their own.
I do believe there are ways you can help your chances (considering its not a one off draw).
On the offical website it even tells you the most popular balls and least popular.
By using these balls does it mathematcially give you a better chance of winning ? No
However it has shown that at that time they've made the most appearances, so why would it be wrong to chose one or two of those numbers for the next few draws after?
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive, but the odds are heavily stacked against anyone winning.
[Edited on 11-09-2009 by BabyBlade]
You just contradict your way all through the post. You either understand odds or you don't and from where i'm sat it looks like you don't understand them at all.
|
BabyBlade
Member
Registered: 5th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Rides: Ninja 600
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cosmo
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
It could just be a dodgy keyboard to be fair, I guess you better weigh up the odds ?
At the end of the day I havn't disagreed with the odds, I'm just putting another point of view on things, each to their own.
I do believe there are ways you can help your chances (considering its not a one off draw).
On the offical website it even tells you the most popular balls and least popular.
By using these balls does it mathematcially give you a better chance of winning ? No
However it has shown that at that time its the made the most appearances, so why would it be wrong to chose one or two of those numbers for the next few draws after?
each to their own, i personally think choosing 6 consecutive numbers is less likely to win the jackpot, than non consecutive, but the odds are heavily stacked against anyone winning.
I dont even know where to start with this post!
Genuinely, what grade did you get in GCSE maths?
Probability states, that no matter what numbers have been drawn the most, or least, the next draw that happens all 49 balls have EXACTLY the same chance as being drawn.
You could pick the most drawn 6 balls in the whole history of the lottery, but your chances of winning would be the same as if you had picked the least 6 drawn balls in the history of the lottery.....or 1,2,3,4,5,6.
B in Maths
C in English
although this was 9 years ago.
I have a HNC in Mechanical Engineering and use maths every day in my job. I don't claim to be the brightest lad around but you really don't know anything about me, other than my views on the lottery..
Like I said I don't disagree on the odds, in one of my very first posts I said I see where your coming from.
You seriously need to let your issues go, is it just luck that 6 consecutive numbers has never come out? What is the most? 3 ?
Considering the lotto draw is on 1400 draws and the most thats come out is 3 consecutive numbers, I still feel I have a valid point.
Before you say I know the odds are just under 1 in 14mil and 1400 draws doesnt dent that. 1400 draws is still a relatively large set of data to make a few face value assumptions.
If the number 5 had only come out half as many times as the next number, mathematically it still has the same odds of being drawn, however it still wouldn't be a bad assumption, that it doesnt stand a chance of coming out in the next draw.
Call it probability on a valid set of data ?
|
DaveyLC
Member
Registered: 8th Oct 08
Location: Berkshire
User status: Offline
|
Derren Brown 11/09/09:
"If anyone asks me how I predicted the lotto I'll just say it was a trick"
Well he doesnt want to be accused of blatantly lying to the public does he 
|
BabyBlade
Member
Registered: 5th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Rides: Ninja 600
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Carl
You just contradict your way all through the post. You either understand odds or you don't and from where i'm sat it looks like you don't understand them at all.
I get them, I honestly do, its not rocket science. I know what I mean obviously I havn't expressed my point across in the right manner.
|
BabyBlade
Member
Registered: 5th Feb 03
Location: Hereford Rides: Ninja 600
User status: Offline
|
I just like looking at things differently, its part of my job and its good not just to take things at face value.
At the end of the day the odds are stacked against you anyway so why play the game in the first place?
The very fact your playing means your not paying attention to the odds..
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
B in Maths
C in English
although this was 9 years ago.
I have a HNC in Mechanical Engineering and use maths every day in my job. I don't claim to be the brightest lad around but you really don't know anything about me, other than my views on the lottery..
I dont claim to know anything about you, Im just wondering what I am dealing with when trying to explain BASIC probability. You seem a bright guy with at least basic maths knowledge, so Im a bit confused why you dont get what we are all (yes not just me) saying.
quote:
Like I said I don't disagree on the odds, in one of my very first posts I said I see where your coming from.
You seriously need to let your issues go, is it just luck that 6 consecutive numbers has never come out? What is the most? 3
Considering the lotto draw is on 1400 draws and the most thats come out is 3 consecutive numbers, I still feel I have a valid point.
Before you say I know the odds are just under 1 in 14mil and 1400 draws doesnt dent that. 1400 draws is still a relatively large set of data to make a few face value assumptions.
Yeah, none of this matters really. Im not sure what point you're trying to make really.
I suppose you may be trying to say that their is more chance of a random number sequence coming out than a sequential number sequence. This is part ture and part rubbish.
If you are the 'normal' person on the street putting 1-5 lines on a week then the odds of any six random numbers coming up (sequential or not) are the same.
Now if you had put all approx 14m combinations on, then yes, their is more chance of the random number combination coming up than the sequential combination coming up as there are more of the random combinations. The only problem is this theory is flawed as you will win no matter what the outcome.
quote:
If the number 5 had only come out half as many times as the next number, mathematically it still has the same odds of being drawn, however it still wouldn't be a bad assumption, that it doesnt stand a chance of coming out in the next draw.
Call it probability on a valid set of data ?
Yes it would be a horrendous presumption. Your theory is absolutely flawed, amazingly flawed in fact.
5 could of come out ZERO times in the last 10yrs, but its chances of coming out in the next draw are the same as a ball thats been drawn every week for the last 10yrs.....49 to 1.
|
Carl
Member
Registered: 9th May 04
Location: Jimmy Bennett's la la land.
User status: Offline
|
14,000,000 to 1 compared to 1400 draws.
Each draw 1,2,3,4,5,6 has 14,000.000 in one chance. so that so 19600000000 to 1400
not 13998600 to 1.
|
Cosmo
Member
Registered: 29th Mar 01
Location: Im the real one!
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BabyBlade
I just like looking at things differently, its part of my job and its good not just to take things at face value.
At the end of the day the odds are stacked against you anyway so why play the game in the first place?
The very fact your playing means your not paying attention to the odds..
WTF are you spouting now?
The lottery is purely a set of fixed odds. Nothing changes this. Although Derren, and YOU, are trying to argue that a group of 24 people can change these fixed odds.
Its nothing about looking at things differently, as if you do that in this case the only way you are looking at it is WRONGLY. Its the last time I'll tell you, but you are 100% factually incorrect in all the points you are saying. The maths proves you wrong totally, and no amount of arguing will prove otherwise.
|
