LOL @ the California Lottery

[MongGrel]

hell, I might look for a job at a gas station soon.

 

[Blanky]

I know three people in the past have hit lotto, so might bork my odds anyways, one was a big one.

People really think like this? You know somebody around you winning doesn't impact you at all, right?

I can't read anymore of this thread. I'm done. It's painful.

 

[mizzou]

Last I remember, the actual scratching of a card is useless. You just scan the barcode on the back to see if you won anything or not. A lot of people just buy them and ask the cashier to just scan them immediately.

 

[RaistlinZ]

Lottery is evil, a tax on the poor.

No, it's a tax on people who are bad at math. The poor don't have to play if they don't want to.

In fact, you'd think they wouldn't want to throw away what little money they have in the first place. Go figure.

 

[BUTCH1]

We still buy 3 regular lotto ticket picks with numbers we set up decades ago.

Buy em and see what happens a day or two later.

I know three people in the past have hit lotto, so might bork my odds anyways, one was a big one.

Scratch off's I don't mess with myself I guess, they are usually the people in line at a convenience store holding the line up.

what kills me is people who have bought a variety of cash 3, play 4, fantasy 5 tickets and show up at Publix with a stack of 'em and ask the counter-person to scan every one for a winner while everyone else has to wait. Last time it happened I started whistling the "Jeopardy" final question ditty REALLY loud.

 

[VirtualLarry]

This is sad. I mean not like bad, but like truly I feel sad that you said it. You said it as if it makes up for the fact you're pissing your money away--like you figured out a responsible way to play the lottery.

The only conclusion is that you don't understand statistics enough. Nobody who understands them will play scratch tickets.

I understand that, long term, scratch-off tickets are a losing proposition. That's pretty easy to figure out. Then again, I know of someone that hit, not one, but *two* million-dollar winners. *shrug*. Some people win, some people don't. More people don't, than do, but that doesn't mean that I couldn't win. Can't win unless you play. As long as I don't let it get out of control, I don't think it's all that harmful. Unlike some of my other vices (I'm looking at you Newegg!), scratch-off tickets won't fill my small apt with junk. (Hoarding!)

 

[VirtualLarry]

People really think like this? You know somebody around you winning doesn't impact you at all, right?

That might be true, if it was truly random/chaotic (like the lotto drawings with spinning balls of numbers), but scratch-off tickets aren't random, they're engineered. They have "patterns".

I can't read anymore of this thread. I'm done. It's painful.

Suit yourself.

 

[foghorn67]

And?, he's working for a living, that's all that matters, you the fuck are you to judge someone by where they work.

I was under the impression he did IT.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Last I remember, the actual scratching of a card is useless. You just scan the barcode on the back to see if you won anything or not. A lot of people just buy them and ask the cashier to just scan them immediately.

I guess that depends on whether or not you want the "entertainment value" of the scratch-off tickets. Some of them are somewhat fun. (In my state, they have a crossword-style scratcher with letters, and you have to make words. It's at least minimally intellectually-stimulating. At least more than just matching numbers.)

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Lottery is evil, a tax on the poor.

Nope. A tax on the uneducated, for the educated.

 

[Jeff7]

That might be true, if it was truly random/chaotic (like the lotto drawings with spinning balls of numbers), but scratch-off tickets aren't random, they're engineered. They have "patterns".
...

1) Humans are good at finding patterns where none exist.
2) You can engineer something that makes random numbers.

I don't know what the lottery uses for their random number source, but I'd hope that it is truly random.


If there is a pattern, don't you think that someone like an investment company would make use of that? These companies have access to immense computing resources that try to find and exploit patterns in stocks, bonds, and commodities. If lotteries truly had mathematical patterns, you'd buy mutual funds that invest in lottery winnings. (Or rather, the people who run these companies would "invest" by only buying winning lottery tickets, and then retire very early.)


You may personally know two people who won big, but there are many more who don't.
It's the same thinking you see when a single person survives an airline crash that killed everyone else on board: "I must have survived for some divine reason!" The 100+ others who died? Screw them, I guess. Same with those on other airline crashes where everyone died. Our perceptions are biased; we pay greater attention to things that our ancient brains deem significant, and can ignore everything else. Or "I danced for rain, and it rained the next day, therefore my dancing must have influenced the weather," while forgetting about the 500 other rain dances that failed to bring about any rain.

Someone can play the lottery 100 times and win a small amount twice, but still think "But I'm so close!" No, you failed to win big 100/100 times, and failed completely 98/100. That's not "close," but you are still more likely to remember those two wins, and assign them excessive value.

 

[videogames101]

This is sad. I mean not like bad, but like truly I feel sad that you said it. You said it as if it makes up for the fact you're pissing your money away--like you figured out a responsible way to play the lottery.

The only conclusion is that you don't understand statistics enough. Nobody who understands them will play scratch tickets.

Yes because it's not possible to pay for entertainment?

 

[lxskllr]

1) Humans are good at finding patterns where none exist.
2) You can engineer something that makes random numbers.

I don't know what the lottery uses for their random number source, but I'd hope that it is truly random.


If there is a pattern, don't you think that someone like an investment company would make use of that? These companies have access to immense computing resources that try to find and exploit patterns in stocks, bonds, and commodities. If lotteries truly had mathematical patterns, you'd buy mutual funds that invest in lottery winnings. (Or rather, the people who run these companies would "invest" by only buying winning lottery tickets, and then retire very early.)


You may personally know two people who won big, but there are many more who don't.
It's the same thinking you see when a single person survives an airline crash that killed everyone else on board: "I must have survived for some divine reason!" The 100+ others who died? Screw them, I guess. Same with those on other airline crashes where everyone died. Our perceptions are biased; we pay greater attention to things that our ancient brains deem significant, and can ignore everything else.
Someone can play the lottery 100 times and win a small amount twice, but still think "But I'm so close!" No, you failed to win big 100/100 times, and failed completely 98/100. That's not "close," but you are still more likely to remember those two wins, and assign them excessive value.

He's not completely wrong, but I don't think it's as engineered as he states. Ping pong ball lottery could theoretically go forever without a winner. Scratch offs have specific winning tickets in specific quantities, but I don't know how evenly they're distributed.

 

[Jeff7]

Yes because it's not possible to pay for entertainment?

I very much doubt that most people play them for purely entertainment.
Let me check something....


"State lotteries sold $53 billion in tickets in 2010."
$53B in, $3B in administrative costs, $18B to the states, leaving the remaining $~33B for prizes. Problem is, it's not evenly distributed, both in terms of who buys the most tickets, and in terms of how it's paid out. Sure, that's a big payout percentage versus the amount paid in, but because it's not evenly distributed, you don't even have a good chance of recouping your expenses over the long term.

"Box office spending annually: Over $10 billion."


I don't think that most people consider lottery tickets to be more entertaining than seeing a movie at the theater. (With some notable exceptions.)
The normal buyer is going to be someone who doesn't understand statistics, or doesn't understand how random numbers really work.

He's not completely wrong, but I don't think it's as engineered as he states. Ping pong ball lottery could theoretically go forever without a winner. Scratch offs have specific winning tickets in specific quantities, but I don't know how evenly they're distributed.

Control the odds of each winning category, and you can improve the statistical likelihood of an outcome. (Example: If the game is to pick a winning number from 0-9, make it so that 0-7 are low-yield winners, 8 is moderate-chance, and 9 is the top prize. If no one knows what the winning conditions are, and the lottery administrator uses a true random number generator to pick the winner, then the game was still random, and simply biased.)
I still wouldn't necessarily call that a "pattern" though. To me, a "pattern" implies very specific predictability. The only predictable thing about random numbers is that they aren't.

 

[BUTCH1]

I was under the impression he did IT.

Sorry, I guess the vulgarity was uncalled for. I just see someone has either employed and contributing or a lazy bum mooching off others or the government. It's irrelevant to me if someone makes $20K or 200K, they both earn the same amount of respect in my book.

 

[Craig234]

No, it's a tax on people who are bad at math. The poor don't have to play if they don't want to.

In fact, you'd think they wouldn't want to throw away what little money they have in the first place. Go figure.

And you are bad at public policy. One question matters. One. Not 'if they don't want to'. Not your ideology. How are the revenues from the lottery actually distributed by income? Poor.

 

[foghorn67]

Sorry, I guess the vulgarity was uncalled for. I just see someone has either employed and contributing or a lazy bum mooching off others or the government. It's irrelevant to me if someone makes $20K or 200K, they both earn the same amount of respect in my book.

I get you brother, I feel the same way.

Earlier, I was honestly trying to think of CA Lottery resellers.

I thought of one. My old roommate sold mattresses at Sears. He actually made decent money for it. Anyway, one day he told me a story about not being able cash some guys lotto scratcher. I thought that was odd.

 

[lxskllr]

Control the odds of each winning category, and you can improve the statistical likelihood of an outcome. (Example: If the game is to pick a winning number from 0-9, make it so that 0-7 are low-yield winners, 8 is moderate-chance, and 9 is the top prize. If no one knows what the winning conditions are, and the lottery administrator uses a true random number generator to pick the winner, then the game was still random, and simply biased.)
I still wouldn't necessarily call that a "pattern" though. To me, a "pattern" implies very specific predictability. The only predictable thing about random numbers is that they aren't.

There should be a loose pattern(don't know if there is) that every ticket roll has N winners. That's best for the government because it generates/holds interest in the game. If there is a pattern, a series of losers from a specific roll, should increase the odds of a winner for subsequent purchases from the same roll.

 

[tential]

virtual larry you should use a personal finance app to track your expenses. Would shed some light on how you piss money away.

 

[Jeff7]

There should be a loose pattern(don't know if there is) that every ticket roll has N winners. That's best for the government because it generates/holds interest in the game.

This might be partially into semantics now.

I still don't regard that sort of thing as a "pattern."

Maybe there's nothing stopping them from tweaking the numbers to yield a set number of winners. I would hope that they are randomly distributed though, so that you wouldn't get a single convenience store which carries all of the winning numbers from a single production run.

If there is a pattern, a series of losers from a specific roll, should increase the odds of a winner for subsequent purchases from the same roll.

But that still sounds like it would have to assume a nonrandom geographic distribution of the winning tickets. And even if what you say is the case, the only way that one could reasonably know what their odds are in the remaining roll would be if they also knew how many tickets are left in that roll versus where the roll was in the production run, and how many winners were already in the roll, and how many winners could be expected in that particular roll in the first place.

 

[madoka]

hell, I might look for a job at a gas station soon.

Judging by your contributions to this forum, you aren't qualified.

 

[QueBert]

Moral of the story: OP works at a gas station.

I work at a craft beer liquor store that has lottery. We also have uber rare $30 bottle of sour beer and thousand dollar bottles of tequila. I work for a living, regardless of it's a gas station or not.

And maybe I own the store I work at. you ever think of that hummmm? The snobbery on ATOT cracks me up.

I was under the impression he did IT.

I do IT part time, and I detail cars part time. I work a 6 days a week, sometimes 7. I'd hate to do the same job for 40+ hours a week every week until I retire. I work part time at a craft beer store because I <3 beer and my pay there + my discount on all the expensive beer I drink makes it worth it. *shrug*

 

[ImpulsE69]

Depending on the ticket price and type of prizes, it is like slot machines. % of total numbers paid out, they then divide that number (randomly) to rolls to give it an overall percentage of payout across a certain # of tickets. The highest % is distributed as $1 (or price of card) or multiples of free tickets. This is done to hook the buyer that 'the big one is coming'. Very much like how slot machines work. Depending on the rules of a particular game, this can vary to a degree. Some games have guaranteed $$ winners in every roll and are advertised as such.
It is designed to nickel and dime you to death.

While it is possible for someone to buy 1 ticket and win big (or medium), they rely on the addictive players. The chance of winning is the same but a person who just buys 1 card, wins and takes the cash wins more than the person who turns around and buys more tickets, however in most peoples minds the more they spend the higher chance they have of winning bigger. It is alot like the old people sitting at 1 slot machine for hours on end.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

Not lotto related but similar - last year I won the max prize on a penny slot at the Oxford ME casino. Lights were blinking like nuts. Music played, etc. I was very excited because the machine said the top prize was $2500. That is, until, a desiccated old woman who reeked of BO and cigarette smoke leaned over and told me that I won a whopping 10 bucks. Turns out on that slot you could play up to 25 lines on that machine (required 25c), and I only played 1 line (1c).

 

[QueBert]

The state always wins when it comes to lottery, with that said the store I work @ had $500k in winners last year. And I've personally sold about 25 1 or 2k winners and countless $500 and less ones. I sold an $8k Hot Spot (like Keno) $2 quick pick last week. She hit 7/7 with the hot spot. She plays almost every day, since she hit 7/7 again this time without the hot spot ($500) and last month she hit for $650 iirc. People do win, it's just most don't...