If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

•       •       •

1353 clicks; posted to Business » on 30 Nov 2012 at 10:41 AM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:    more»

 Paginated (50/page) Single page, reversed Normal view Change images to links Show raw HTML
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

"Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

Over time, you would in fact win the same amount of money: more frequent wins, but with less of a payoff. The thing is, that line of thinking assumes that you're playing consistently over time and continue to play even after you win. I'm not sure how many lottery players actually fit that pattern.

doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

Yeah, I don't think she thought her plan all the way through. The mathematical expected value would remain the same, sure, but the odds of you receiving a "life changing" amount of money would increase 10-fold.

doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

You'll win \$0 or \$0. See it's the same!

aelat: doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

Yeah, I don't think she thought her plan all the way through. The mathematical expected value would remain the same, sure, but the odds of you receiving a "life changing" amount of money would increase 10-fold.

The odds of winning are 50% -- you either win or you do not win.
But I think she meant to say the odds of picking same numbers as the winning numbers.

minoridiot: The odds of winning are 50% -- you either win or you do not win.

Uh, no. That's not how math works. I think you meant to say, "The odds of winning are either 0% or 100%, you don't know which."

Are these the same experts that say you shouldn't play a lot of numbers between 1 & 31? Did they happen to look at the winning numbers from powerball Wednesday?

So they are saying that the odds of winning can go from 1 in a few trillion to 1 in a teensy bit better than a few trillion. Sounds good to me.

abhorrent1: Are these the same experts that say you shouldn't play a lot of numbers between 1 & 31? Did they happen to look at the winning numbers from powerball Wednesday?

That's only if you don't want to split it. Most people play birthdays, important dates, etc. So there is a greater chance of splitting the pot if a lot of 31 and under numbers are hit.

As was the case here, 2 winners and lots of million dollar winners.

aelat: doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

Yeah, I don't think she thought her plan all the way through. The mathematical expected value would remain the same, sure, but the odds of you receiving a "life changing" amount of money would increase 10-fold.

Considering that there are 2 drawings per week, that makes 5200 drawings in a 50-year period. I think it's safe to say that the expected value wouldn't be reached in a lifetime. Therefore "winning" should be seen as a one-time-only event. One tenth of \$500M at 10x odds is vastly superior to the alternative.

DoBeDoBeDo: That's only if you don't want to split it. Most people play birthdays, important dates, etc. So there is a greater chance of splitting the pot if a lot of 31 and under numbers are hit.

As was the case here, 2 winners and lots of million dollar winners.

I'd be happy to split it and take \$192 million. Or even a million.

I'm not really a lottery player, but I will drop a few bucks when the pot gets really big.

I was thinking last night, it seems when the jackpot gets ginormous, there is often a split between multiple tickets. Next time it gets to half a billion, instead of getting a few random tickets, I'm going to get one random ticket, then several more tickets using the exact same numbers.

That way, if (ha!) I win and another person has the winning numbers as well (as happened Wed.), instead of having 1 of 2 winning tickets, I'll have 10 of 11. Seems to be a "smarter" option, since 10 out of 175MM isn't appreciably better odds than 1 out of 175MM, and this way I'll still get most of the full jackpot.

thoughts?

/yah, kind of a "jerk" move, but wtf
//I always use random picks; if "my numbers" hit when I didn't play (which is most of the time), I'd cry
///you don't to see me cry

GRCooper: I'm not really a lottery player, but I will drop a few bucks when the pot gets really big.

I was thinking last night, it seems when the jackpot gets ginormous, there is often a split between multiple tickets. Next time it gets to half a billion, instead of getting a few random tickets, I'm going to get one random ticket, then several more tickets using the exact same numbers.

That way, if (ha!) I win and another person has the winning numbers as well (as happened Wed.), instead of having 1 of 2 winning tickets, I'll have 10 of 11. Seems to be a "smarter" option, since 10 out of 175MM isn't appreciably better odds than 1 out of 175MM, and this way I'll still get most of the full jackpot.

thoughts?

/yah, kind of a "jerk" move, but wtf
//I always use random picks; if "my numbers" hit when I didn't play (which is most of the time), I'd cry
///you don't to see me cry

http://news.sky.com/story/529423/double-bonus-one-man-two-winning-ti ck ets

So there are "lottery experts" who can help you improve your chances of winning? And people actually believe them?

I hope most of the lottery revenue in this country goes back into public schools because we really really need it.

abhorrent1: Are these the same experts that say you shouldn't play a lot of numbers between 1 & 31? Did they happen to look at the winning numbers from powerball Wednesday?

Maybe they looked at the numbers from the previous Saturday.

Slightly off point: Is it true that if you pick the annuity instead of the lump sum:

A) The payout is always over 30 years.

B) The payout does not outlive you. When you croak, the payments do NOT continue to your heirs

Does anyone ever pick the annuity? What are their stories? It seems like that might be the financially more prudent route.

I suspect that the numbers 1-2-3-4-5-6 are never going to come up. Specifically, while they have exact same odds of being picked as any other set of numbers, if they came up, there would be tremendous outrage from anumeric people who would claim that the game was rigged/the computer that chooses* the numbers had a virus/etc. Even live lottery broadcasts are on a delay. I bet they would use it and pick a second set of numbers for the "real" broadcast.

*yes, I know that's not how it works

Theaetetus: abhorrent1: Are these the same experts that say you shouldn't play a lot of numbers between 1 & 31? Did they happen to look at the winning numbers from powerball Wednesday?

Maybe they looked at the numbers from the previous Saturday.

I'm working on my own utility theory project (mostly for the mathematecal curiosity) about the balance between doubling up and pooling. My gut would say that doublinig up is only worth it for numbers between 1 and 31, but certainly no number is to be avoided.

Huck And Molly Ziegler: It seems like that might be the financially more prudent route.

Only in the sense that lottery players are typically poor at managing their money, and the annuity won't let you spend it all on hookers and blow in a single session.

Any remotely sane person will likely be better off taking the lump sum.

Honest Bender: [i2.kym-cdn.com image 553x342]

Came for this leaving with 5 lotto tickets!

And the carryver only has to be \$287,280,900 for you to break even. If you are the only jackpot winner. Pre-tax.

Prize Ways to win Net
5W 1,000,000.00 34.00 34000000
4W&PB 10,000.00 270.00 2700000
4W 100.00 9,180.00 918000
3W&PB 100.00 14,310.00 1431000
3W 7.00 486,540.00 3405780
2W&PB 7.00 248,040.00 1736280
1W&PB 4.00 1,581,255.00 6325020
PB 4.00 3,162,510.00 12650040
Net Value 63166120
Cost 350447020
Net 287280900

And the carryver only has to be \$287,280,900 for you to break even. If you are the only jackpot winner. Pre-tax.

And pray no one else picked the same numbers.

minoridiot: aelat: doyner: "Johnson rebuts: If you buy one ticket, you have 1 chance in 175,223,510 to win. If you pool your bet with nine other people, you have 10 chances in 175,223,510. And if you win, you'll split the pot 10 ways. Which obviously means you'll win the same amount either way; pooling your bet has no effect."

LOL WUT?

Yeah, I don't think she thought her plan all the way through. The mathematical expected value would remain the same, sure, but the odds of you receiving a "life changing" amount of money would increase 10-fold.

The odds of winning are 50% -- you either win or you do not win.
But I think she meant to say the odds of picking same numbers as the winning numbers.

That would be the buzzer. You're only correct if you don't apply the correct weights to the binary outcomes - this is not a fair coin toss. How about you guess "win" half the time and I guess "lose" 100% of the time (based on a ticket with unknown values). Guess who will be correct 99.9999999999999999999% of the time?

IF we did the same exercise on a truly binary outcome which involves an event which is weighted equally (50% chance of occurring) - like a coin toss - than you're correct.

But you could play using your odds...100 events (drawings) should be netting you 40-60 wins (50% would only apply to an infinite set of events). Sounds like a real money-maker - go for it.

Lottery experts say that strategies to enhance your chances of winning will increase the odds from "impossible" to "ridiculously hopeless"

Also known as buying a single ticket.

Huck And Molly Ziegler: Slightly off point: Is it true that if you pick the annuity instead of the lump sum:

A) The payout is always over 30 years.

B) The payout does not outlive you. When you croak, the payments do NOT continue to your heirs

Does anyone ever pick the annuity? What are their stories? It seems like that might be the financially more prudent route.

a) Powerball is 30 years for the payout, Megamillions is 25 years. Do you understand the cash vs. annuity system? If the jackpot is \$500 million (or \$350 million cash)....The lottery is telling you, they have \$350 million cash on hand, that they will give you today...or you take the annuity, let the money grow, and they'll give you \$500 million over 30 years.

Generally it's something like \$30,000 for each \$1 million won...per year. Thus, at \$500 million jackpot (500 *30,000) = \$15 million per year before taxes. (sort of)

b) The annuity is transferable to heirs, just like any other monetary asset.

Does anyone ever pick the annuity? What are their stories? It seems like that might be the financially more prudent route.

The problem with annuity is taxes.... and the fact that the annuity isn't 30 equal payments. It's graduated payments...increasing at 4% a year.

Imagine having won \$500 million...but only getting a check for \$10 million, half of which goes to uncle sam. Then in year 2, you get another 11 million...half of which goes to uncle sam...then in year 3, you get 12 million....half of which goes to uncle sam (you see where this is going).

Also realize that most people win smaller jackpots (the 500million was split 2 ways)..So in reality each is going to get \$250 million or around 150 million Cash. Annuity payments are going to be much smaller and taxed very highly.

The big reason: Taxes.

Taxes are changing. What is the IRS tax code going to be in 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? I sure don't know....What I do know...is that income is currently taxed very high, but capital gains is only 15%. Also, it's hard for someone to take back what they already ave to you...much easier to switch up the rules and take something not in your possession.

All you have to do is earn more than 4% a year on your money and you'll have more money than the annuity paid out...

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.