11–20 of 88 posts
Neither corporate lawyers nor government would ever acknowledge that loophole in a business models does not necessarily equals to fraud.
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
Your EV numbers are high. If the EV was really significantly above 1.0 (say 1.5) then everyone would buy a lot of lotto tickets. It would be simple arbitrage. In reality all of those people buying extra tickets (because of the high perceived EV) would mean a higher chance of splitting the pot. Splitting the pot would reduce the real return by 1/2 for every person that purchased a ticket.
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
I wonder why they care. In fact, they need someone to win big, so as to entice future players...
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
While true, expected value isn't necessarily a useful metric at that point. If I have a one in a googol chance of winning a googolplex dollars, it doesn't really matter that the expected value is going to be huge, I still won't win anything because I'll be insolvent before the requisite number of tries to have a reasonable chance of winning.
It's interesting that Jefferson had thoughts about the original intention of the lottery system. The logistics of buying each ticket seems nightmarish. I wonder if this same gaming can be applied to other things
The basic idea is you bet on every possible outcome of a match (win/lose/draw) with different bookies offering different odds that cover each other.
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
Your EV numbers are high. If the EV was really significantly above 1.0 (say 1.5) then everyone would buy a lot of lotto tickets. It would be simple arbitrage. In reality all of those people buying extra tickets (because of the high perceived EV) would mean a higher chance of splitting the pot. Splitting the pot would reduce the real return by 1/2 for every person that purchased a ticket.
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
While true, expected value isn't necessarily a useful metric at that point. If I have a one in a googol chance of winning a googolplex dollars, it doesn't really matter that the expected value is going to be huge, I still won't win anything because I'll be insolvent before the requisite number of tries to have a reasonable chance of winning.
When I was in my final year of high school, Coca-cola was giving away an iPod Nano to lucky winners who entered codes from plastic bottle caps or glass bottle labels. An iPod was given away once per day, except Monday, when they were given out once per hour. I was competing against the rest of Switzerland. Each code had to be entered on a website, earning 0, 5, 10, 20 or 50 points. You could then choose how many poin…
As a broke kid who has never won anything in his life, getting that Xbox (right at launch no less) was AMAZING. I was literally dancing with excitement which I don't think has ever happened since.
I sold it after a few months (was more of a PC gamer) and the hundreds that I got for it was also awesome.
Seems kind of silly that they hyped it up as some kind of mathematical savant genius story, when it seems like they just took a simple lottery system (x numbers give y combinations, which sell for $1 per combination, for a total payout of >$3y) where the logistics operation was the more impressive aspect.
AFAICT, many jackpot style lotteries get an expected value (EV) above 1 when the jackpots get big. They're set up so their average EV is 0.4 - 0.5, but when a jackpot isn't won, the payout is under 0.1. String a bunch of those together in a row, and the EV creeps above 1.0. The calculations are easy to do. You do need to estimate the number of people who buy the tickets so you can calculate the odds of sharing the ja…
As the article mentions, lotteries protect themselves by making it logistically impossible for anybody to buy every ticket. I wonder why they care. In fact, they need someone to win big, so as to entice future players...