What would you do?

Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Mike

--
.................................................. .........
Royal Naval Electrical Branch Association
www.rnshipmates.co.uk
www.nsrafa.com

Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Mike

Statistically it makes not the slightest difference to your chances of
winning if you keep them or change numbers every week - in much the same way
as tossing a (balanced) coin - like getting four heads in a row doesn't
change the likelihood of getting either head or tails the next toss both
exactly 50:50.
The only thing to bear in mind about selecting lottery numbers is to avoid
having sequences that are likely to have also been picked by other people
eg. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30. Such sequences have exactly the same odds of
being the jackpot as a more random sequence such as 6, 17, 19, 34, 42, 49
BUT you would be likely to share the jackpot with more people with the
former sequence. I wonder how many people have silly sequences like
1,2,3,4,5,6? I bet a lot do and if it came up as the jackpot they would
probably all get about 10p each!
--
David
.... Email address on website http://www.avisoft.co.uk
.... Blog at http://dlts-french-adventures.blogspot.com/

"Mike" wrote in message
...
: What would you do?
:
: Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
: tonight.
:
: Would you now change numbers or stick with them?
:
: Mike

What a sickener that is. I would keep them myself, unless you can forget
what they are

"David (in Normandy)" writes
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Doesn't make much difference. This is what John Haigh of Sussex
University says about your chances of winning:

"It is hard to appreciate how small this figure is: for example, the
chance of death within one year for a middle-aged healthy man might be
one in 1,000. If so, the chance he dies within the next week is one in
52,000; within the next day about one in 365,000, within the next hour
about one in nine million - still bigger than the chance of a jackpot
share. Indeed, on these figures, he is about as likely to win a jackpot
share with one ticket as he is to die in the next 40 minutes."

For me, what is more telling is that, if I were rich enough to buy one
ticket in every possible combination, and thus guarantee a share in the
jackpot, the maximum I would win would be 25% of what I put in (since
IIRC that is the proportion of the money that goes to prizes).

Statistically it makes not the slightest difference to your chances of
winning if you keep them or change numbers every week - in much the same way
as tossing a (balanced) coin - like getting four heads in a row doesn't
change the likelihood of getting either head or tails the next toss both
exactly 50:50.
The only thing to bear in mind about selecting lottery numbers is to avoid
having sequences that are likely to have also been picked by other people
eg. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30. Such sequences have exactly the same odds of
being the jackpot as a more random sequence such as 6, 17, 19, 34, 42, 49
BUT you would be likely to share the jackpot with more people with the
former sequence. I wonder how many people have silly sequences like
1,2,3,4,5,6?

At one stage about 10,000 chose the first six digits - see
http://plus.maths.org/issue29/features/haigh/index.html.

This article discusses commonly chosen patterns and suggests strategies
for avoiding having to share your win.
--
Kay

"K" wrote in message
...
"David (in Normandy)" writes
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Doesn't make much difference. This is what John Haigh of Sussex
University says about your chances of winning:

It's not your chances of winning that matters. Its the admittedly
highly unlikely possibility of your numbers coming up very soon after
you give up entering. Or after you changed your numbers. And how you
would feel if that ever happened, even in the case of relatively minor
prize.

The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they stopped.

The moral being, to choose a different set of numbers every week.


michael adams

....





"It is hard to appreciate how small this figure is: for example, the
chance of death within one year for a middle-aged healthy man might be
one in 1,000. If so, the chance he dies within the next week is one in
52,000; within the next day about one in 365,000, within the next hour
about one in nine million - still bigger than the chance of a jackpot
share. Indeed, on these figures, he is about as likely to win a jackpot
share with one ticket as he is to die in the next 40 minutes."

For me, what is more telling is that, if I were rich enough to buy one
ticket in every possible combination, and thus guarantee a share in the
jackpot, the maximum I would win would be 25% of what I put in (since
IIRC that is the proportion of the money that goes to prizes).

Statistically it makes not the slightest difference to your chances of
winning if you keep them or change numbers every week - in much the same
way
as tossing a (balanced) coin - like getting four heads in a row doesn't
change the likelihood of getting either head or tails the next toss both
exactly 50:50.
The only thing to bear in mind about selecting lottery numbers is to
avoid
having sequences that are likely to have also been picked by other people
eg. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30. Such sequences have exactly the same odds of
being the jackpot as a more random sequence such as 6, 17, 19, 34, 42, 49
BUT you would be likely to share the jackpot with more people with the
former sequence. I wonder how many people have silly sequences like
1,2,3,4,5,6?

At one stage about 10,000 chose the first six digits - see
http://plus.maths.org/issue29/features/haigh/index.html.

This article discusses commonly chosen patterns and suggests strategies
for avoiding having to share your win.
--
Kay

In message , "David (in
Normandy)" wrote
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Mike

Statistically it makes not the slightest difference to your chances of
winning if you keep them or change numbers every week - in much the same way
as tossing a (balanced) coin - like getting four heads in a row doesn't
change the likelihood of getting either head or tails the next toss both
exactly 50:50.
The only thing to bear in mind about selecting lottery numbers is to avoid
having sequences that are likely to have also been picked by other people
eg. 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30. Such sequences have exactly the same odds of
being the jackpot as a more random sequence such as 6, 17, 19, 34, 42, 49
BUT you would be likely to share the jackpot with more people with the
former sequence.

As a lot of people will use birth dates for their entries selecting six
number above 31 could also improve your chances of not having to share
the prize with anyone with the same numbers.
--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

michael adams writes

"K" wrote in message
...
"David (in Normandy)" writes
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Doesn't make much difference. This is what John Haigh of Sussex
University says about your chances of winning:

It's not your chances of winning that matters. Its the admittedly
highly unlikely possibility of your numbers coming up very soon after
you give up entering. Or after you changed your numbers. And how you
would feel if that ever happened, even in the case of relatively minor
prize.

The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they stopped.

The moral being, to choose a different set of numbers every week.

I think the moral is - don't start.
--
Kay

"michael adams" wrote in message
...
The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they stopped.
michael adams


That happened to my wife (before I met her). She always had the same numbers
on the pools every week, year in year out. However, she missed one week due
to being too busy moving house. Her numbers came up! Apparently nobody dared
to speak to her for days after.
--
David
.... Email address on website http://www.avisoft.co.uk
.... Blog at http://dlts-french-adventures.blogspot.com/

On 1/10/06 13:17, in article , "K"
wrote:

michael adams writes

"K" wrote in message
...
"David (in Normandy)" writes
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Doesn't make much difference. This is what John Haigh of Sussex
University says about your chances of winning:

It's not your chances of winning that matters. Its the admittedly
highly unlikely possibility of your numbers coming up very soon after
you give up entering. Or after you changed your numbers. And how you
would feel if that ever happened, even in the case of relatively minor
prize.

The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they stopped.

The moral being, to choose a different set of numbers every week.

I think the moral is - don't start.

My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....

--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 1/10/06 13:17, in article , "K"
wrote:

michael adams writes

"K" wrote in message
...
"David (in Normandy)" writes
Since the Lottery started I have had the same 6 numbers. 5 have come
up
tonight.

Would you now change numbers or stick with them?

Doesn't make much difference. This is what John Haigh of Sussex
University says about your chances of winning:

It's not your chances of winning that matters. Its the admittedly
highly unlikely possibility of your numbers coming up very soon after
you give up entering. Or after you changed your numbers. And how you
would feel if that ever happened, even in the case of relatively minor
prize.

The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they
stopped.

The moral being, to choose a different set of numbers every week.

I think the moral is - don't start.

My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....

--
Sacha
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/


Well you would say that wouldn't you? I started the thread :-))

Mike

:-))

In article ,
"Mike" writes:
| "Sacha" wrote in message
| ...
|
| My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....
|
| Well you would say that wouldn't you? I started the thread :-))

Well, so would I - and it has nothing to do with you personally. As
many of us predicted, the promise that it would be only for things
that were not appropriate for funding out of taxation was kept only
for a couple of years. And the fact that much (most?) of the money
isn't spent for extended periods is definitely a hidden form of
taxation.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...

In article ,
"Mike" writes:
| "Sacha" wrote in message
| ...
|
| My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....
|
| Well you would say that wouldn't you? I started the thread :-))

Well, so would I - and it has nothing to do with you personally. As
many of us predicted, the promise that it would be only for things
that were not appropriate for funding out of taxation was kept only
for a couple of years. And the fact that much (most?) of the money
isn't spent for extended periods is definitely a hidden form of
taxation.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Fair comment and I agree with you, BUT, a tax if you like which we have the
choice to subscribe to. Do you smoke? I wonder if Sachas Step Daughter
smokes. There is a tax for you if you like, well the smokers like :-))

Mike

"Sacha" wrote in message
...
On 1/10/06 14:47, in article , "Nick
Maclaren" wrote:


In article ,
"Mike" writes:
| "Sacha" wrote in message
| ...
|
| My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....
|
| Well you would say that wouldn't you? I started the thread :-))

Well, so would I - and it has nothing to do with you personally. As
many of us predicted, the promise that it would be only for things
that were not appropriate for funding out of taxation was kept only
for a couple of years. And the fact that much (most?) of the money
isn't spent for extended periods is definitely a hidden form of
taxation.

Sigh....I hadn't even seen the start of the thread but never mind... The
way in which the money is currently misused has put enormous numbers of
people off buying tickets. And IMO, it would attract more buyers not just
by improving the distribution to good causes but by making more and
smaller
prizes instead of one huge one of e.g. £8 mill. Eight prizes of £1 mill.
each would be more attractive in terms of 'possibility'.

--
Sacha
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/


So, don't buy tickets!!

Easy!

Just as I don't smoke.

But I don't make derogatroy comments and statements about those who DO
smoke.

Mike

On 1/10/06 14:47, in article , "Nick
Maclaren" wrote:


In article ,
"Mike" writes:
| "Sacha" wrote in message
| ...
|
| My step daughter describes Lotto as 'a tax for the stupid'.....
|
| Well you would say that wouldn't you? I started the thread :-))

Well, so would I - and it has nothing to do with you personally. As
many of us predicted, the promise that it would be only for things
that were not appropriate for funding out of taxation was kept only
for a couple of years. And the fact that much (most?) of the money
isn't spent for extended periods is definitely a hidden form of
taxation.

Sigh....I hadn't even seen the start of the thread but never mind... The
way in which the money is currently misused has put enormous numbers of
people off buying tickets. And IMO, it would attract more buyers not just
by improving the distribution to good causes but by making more and smaller
prizes instead of one huge one of e.g. £8 mill. Eight prizes of £1 mill.
each would be more attractive in terms of 'possibility'.

--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
http://www.discoverdartmoor.co.uk/

"David in Normandy" wrote in message
...
"michael adams" wrote in message
...
The same question used to arise with the football pools. As apparently
many people only carried on entering regularly week after week, for fear
that their chosen numbers would come up the very first week they stopped.
michael adams


That happened to my wife (before I met her). She always had the same
numbers on the pools every week, year in year out. However, she missed one
week due to being too busy moving house. Her numbers came up! Apparently
nobody dared to speak to her for days after.
--

There have been all manner of unfortunate results. A friend of mine had two
lines per draw, one for him and one for her. Then one day, he had three
numbers, and she had the other three. Not impressed.

Steve