6 ms·

Gaming the lottery: How one winner used math to overcome the odds

62 points by abeaulne 8y ago

zackkatz 8y ago
The author lays out all the math and practical considerations and then…skips to the conclusion. Did he put it to the test? Seemingly not. And now that the methods are explained, there will likely be too many other people trying this to make any money from it. This article is essentially a white hat hacker disclosing a vulnerability.
- cbruns 8y ago
  He implied the buy-in was about 21k for one attempt with about 5-7% chance of winning. Mocking up some quick analysis for a blog is one thing, taking out a loan for 100k+ is quite another...
  - surdu 8y ago
    The title of the article reads "How one winner used math to overcome the odds"
  - moftz 8y ago
    You can also split the cost of the 21k across many people. You walk away with less money if you win but you also get a chance to play without selling a kidney. The hard part wouldn't be the finding a fraction of the 21k but finding enough people that would agree on the subset of 20 matches from the overall 38 that you should bet on. Depending on what matches they have listed for the week, you might even play a smaller subset than 20. If most of the matches are strong teams vs weak teams, you stand a better chance than many evenly matched teams. Although his data seems to suggest that splitting winnings somehow results in even less winnings than you would normally think so it really does seem to be that high buy-in is the best course of action.
  - C4stor 8y ago
    The guy was a trader in Singapore, odds are he didn't need a loan to spend 21k.
  - TheBeardKing 8y ago
    He also asked the question about citizenship to play the lottery which he never answered in this case. I wonder if at the least he was flying to Australia to purchase tickets.
- silvester23 8y ago
  The first paragraph seems to imply that they played this lottery for 6 until they (I guess) changed the rules in 2018.
  - zackkatz 8y ago
    Ah yes. I have a tendency of skipping the first paragraph to get to the meat of the story. Thanks for pointing it out!
- brynsolomon 8y ago
  The model was in production for 6 years. The lottery has been discontinued, so is no longer viable
truncj 8y ago
That was extremely unsatisfying. Great simplification and overview... then skipped directly to a "conclusion"
- fourseventy 8y ago
  Ya wtf!!
- kieckerjan 8y ago
  Yeah, I feel..eh.. gamed!
- brynsolomon 8y ago
  Thanks for the feedback - seems obvious in hindsight! Updated to include brief 'Results' section
aritmo 8y ago
Strange, can't connect to Https://thelott.com, that lottery website. If there has been a recent change in the rules, then it would give credence to the story. I did not see a comment yet on the post's website.
- detaro 8y ago
  The introductory paragraph mentions that the specific lottery was discontinued.
coldcode 8y ago
Not much payoff for the article. Did it work? But in a general lottery (random) it makes more sense to put $50 into a single lottery than $1 in 50 lotteries. That's the only way to improve your chances.
- thanatropism 8y ago
  Wait, what? If there's any chance at all that the lottery does not draw from an equiprobable distribution and some numbers are privileged - but you don't know what they are, it's best to spread your bets to increase the chance that you bet on the hot number by accident. This is true if a single number has any edge eps>0. Therefore you should almost always (with probability 1) spread your bets.
aboutruby 8y ago
1 May 2018: "Soccer Pools is being AXED after paying out a $1.49 million prize because it was the least popular lottery game in Australia" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5677449/Soccer-Pools-lottery-began-1985-axed-months-paying-1-49-million-jackpot.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5677449/Soccer-Pool... Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotteries_in_Australia#Soccer_Pools https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotteries_in_Australia#Soccer_...
xivzgrev 8y ago
So let me get this straight.. $21k per play 5% chance winning = at LEAST 4m bankroll? It’s still a fun read (except the ending) but that should’ve been near the top to separate casual readers vs imma-get-rich-by-applying-similar-method readers.
- C4stor 8y ago
  No, because he also probably typically had hundreds of wins at lesser ranks, making the thing overall less spiky.
- falsedan 8y ago
  400K, not 4MM
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- brynsolomon 8y ago
  Thanks for the feedback - included 'Results' section with an idea of worst bankroll draw down Also, as mentioned by @falsedan, 20 * 20k = 400k (if that's the math you were attempting, which is not a sophisticated way to determine bankroll, but a good starting point)
ddoran 8y ago
In the early years or Ireland's national lottery, a syndicate was opportunistically assembled (1992) to guarantee a lottery win and positive return on investment. They succeeded [1]. [1] https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-a-secret-syndicate-managed-to-buy-the-lotto-35981173.html https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-a-secret-syndicate...

62 points by abeaulne 8y ago

The author lays out all the math and practical considerations and then…skips to the conclusion. Did he put it to the test? Seemingly not. And now that the methods are explained, there will likely be too many other people trying this to make any money from it. This article is essentially a white hat hacker disclosing a vulnerability.

cbruns 8y ago
He implied the buy-in was about 21k for one attempt with about 5-7% chance of winning. Mocking up some quick analysis for a blog is one thing, taking out a loan for 100k+ is quite another...
- surdu 8y ago
  The title of the article reads "How one winner used math to overcome the odds"
- moftz 8y ago
  You can also split the cost of the 21k across many people. You walk away with less money if you win but you also get a chance to play without selling a kidney. The hard part wouldn't be the finding a fraction of the 21k but finding enough people that would agree on the subset of 20 matches from the overall 38 that you should bet on. Depending on what matches they have listed for the week, you might even play a smaller subset than 20. If most of the matches are strong teams vs weak teams, you stand a better chance than many evenly matched teams. Although his data seems to suggest that splitting winnings somehow results in even less winnings than you would normally think so it really does seem to be that high buy-in is the best course of action.
- C4stor 8y ago
  The guy was a trader in Singapore, odds are he didn't need a loan to spend 21k.
- TheBeardKing 8y ago
  He also asked the question about citizenship to play the lottery which he never answered in this case. I wonder if at the least he was flying to Australia to purchase tickets.
silvester23 8y ago
The first paragraph seems to imply that they played this lottery for 6 until they (I guess) changed the rules in 2018.
- zackkatz 8y ago
  Ah yes. I have a tendency of skipping the first paragraph to get to the meat of the story. Thanks for pointing it out!
brynsolomon 8y ago
The model was in production for 6 years. The lottery has been discontinued, so is no longer viable

truncj 8y ago

That was extremely unsatisfying. Great simplification and overview... then skipped directly to a "conclusion"

fourseventy 8y ago
Ya wtf!!
kieckerjan 8y ago
Yeah, I feel..eh.. gamed!
brynsolomon 8y ago
Thanks for the feedback - seems obvious in hindsight! Updated to include brief 'Results' section

aritmo 8y ago

Strange, can't connect to Https://thelott.com, that lottery website. If there has been a recent change in the rules, then it would give credence to the story. I did not see a comment yet on the post's website.

detaro 8y ago
The introductory paragraph mentions that the specific lottery was discontinued.

coldcode 8y ago

Not much payoff for the article. Did it work? But in a general lottery (random) it makes more sense to put $50 into a single lottery than $1 in 50 lotteries. That's the only way to improve your chances.

thanatropism 8y ago
Wait, what? If there's any chance at all that the lottery does not draw from an equiprobable distribution and some numbers are privileged - but you don't know what they are, it's best to spread your bets to increase the chance that you bet on the hot number by accident. This is true if a single number has any edge eps>0. Therefore you should almost always (with probability 1) spread your bets.

aboutruby 8y ago

1 May 2018: "Soccer Pools is being AXED after paying out a $1.49 million prize because it was the least popular lottery game in Australia" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5677449/Soccer-Pools-lottery-began-1985-axed-months-paying-1-49-million-jackpot.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5677449/Soccer-Pool... Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotteries_in_Australia#Soccer_Pools https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotteries_in_Australia#Soccer_...

xivzgrev 8y ago

So let me get this straight.. $21k per play 5% chance winning = at LEAST 4m bankroll? It’s still a fun read (except the ending) but that should’ve been near the top to separate casual readers vs imma-get-rich-by-applying-similar-method readers.

C4stor 8y ago
No, because he also probably typically had hundreds of wins at lesser ranks, making the thing overall less spiky.
falsedan 8y ago
400K, not 4MM
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
brynsolomon 8y ago
Thanks for the feedback - included 'Results' section with an idea of worst bankroll draw down Also, as mentioned by @falsedan, 20 * 20k = 400k (if that's the math you were attempting, which is not a sophisticated way to determine bankroll, but a good starting point)

ddoran 8y ago

In the early years or Ireland's national lottery, a syndicate was opportunistically assembled (1992) to guarantee a lottery win and positive return on investment. They succeeded [1]. [1] https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-a-secret-syndicate-managed-to-buy-the-lotto-35981173.html https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-a-secret-syndicate...