Perhaps I sould not have revealed The Method™, but this is way more fun than cheating for sure.
My bid is 86
The interesting thins is that if an algorithm existed to provide the best number, you shouldn’t use it. You should assume other people will also be determining the best number and therefore that number will be disqualified.
Yes. The humor in my post (and his) is that @Pardel-Lux’s “algorithm” is nothing of the sort.
A real sorta-algorithm that actually worked would have to include an awareness of the behavior of others and would still defeat them anyhow. But would necessarily fail at meeting the technical definition of an algorithm.
Doubly funny that so far there are two pairs of people disqualified by duplication and @Pardel-Lux and I are the second of those pairs. Clearly our “algorithm” needs work.
The fact the current leader is a much lower number than we chose is icing on the ironic cake.
I’ll bid the loneliest number 1
Comment: I mean someone had to. We’d all feel pretty silly if no one bid 1, right. So this is my boon to all of you not to feel silly. And me not winning requires someone else to be as "self-sacrificing as I.
I bid by using a hundred-sided dice.
I once read an article by Penn Jillette explaining why, when asked to choose a number between 1 and 100, a surprising number of people will pick 37.
I found it especially interesting, because 37 is my favorite number to pick, although for none of the reasons outlined by Jilette. I have synesthesia, and 3 & 7 go better together than other pairs of numbers, for one thing, and there are other things about 37 that just makes it look and feel right-- 4 & 2 go well together, but I don’t like either of those numbers, and I like three a lot, while 7 is probably my very favorite. (On the whole, I like odd numbers better than even ones, and a great deal of it has to do with the colors they tend to be.)
Yes, I know that sounds strange, but it’s how synesthesia feels.
I think that makes four the current ‘leader’.
This is known as the Unexpected hanging paradox
btw : 00014
That was my inspiration Interesting Number paradox is also interesting…at least it was until everyone heard about it.
Please forgive my foggy head-- are you indicating there is something wrong with picking 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 in a lottery? I’ve never done that but I’d assume very few people ever pick that set because your average person assumes it’s less likely to come up.
That’s my assumption but I very much could be wrong. After all, people also love patterns. And shiny, loud things. And bacon.
[ETA : LOUD RECORD-PLAYER SCREEEEEEEEECH!!!]
Oooh… wait. I think I see what you’re saying. That it’s a sort of “bluff, double-bluff” kind of thing? Where a significant number of people using the logic I did above all end up choosing “1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6” and therefore it is not a good pick?
So then the optimal pick remains any random number 32 or higher for each of the six number selections?
A new, different thought on the game:
ISTM that the outcome of this experiment can be manipulated by an entrant attracting or dissuading other Dopers to visit and participate in this thread.
It’ll be interesting to watch for that. Especially, considering which entrants might have the biggest opportunity to gain that way. Probably a good thing there is nothing of value at stake here.
Vast numbers of people play 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. It is exactly as likely to win as is 4, 12, 17, 23, 45, 61 or any other list of six numbers in the appropriate range.
The difference is if you play 4 … 61 and hit it you get the whole jackpot. But if you play 1 … 6 and hit it you share the jackpot with 10,000 other morons. Which converts your $100 million windfall into $10K. After taxes that’s about $7K. It’ll buy a nice week’s vacation, but not a nice car. $70M OTOH is serious yacht money for life.
I hope you realize I understand that 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 is just as likely to win as any other combo. But in my experience not that many other people know or believe that. Since these anti-vaxxer-level-thinkers “feel in their gut” that combo is less likely than others to come up (in a “Now what are the chances of THAT?!?” kind of way) they avoid playing it.*
So I could see how that might lead still other people to play it because they doubt anyone else would. Bluff/double-bluff.
There is a better strategy than that to avoid splitting jackpots. As I mentioned in my previous post:
The best chance of keeping the whole pot for yourself is to choose only from the numbers 32 through 50 or 60 or whatever the highest number is. That way you avoid all the millions of people who include their birthday in their pick.
*Their problem is they don’t say: “Now what are the chances of THAT?!?” when 4, 12, 17, 23, 45, 61 or thing else comes up.
(post withdrawn by author, will be automatically deleted in 24 hours unless flagged)
I don’t even know how i multi-posted. sorry
You also need to consider the layout of the grid - lots of people make X’s and other patterns using the grid. You need to find unpopular numbers that also don’t make any symmetric shapes; there’s probably an art to that. Also avoid “famous” numbers above 31, such as the uniform number of a famous baseball player, the XXth president of the United States, or a famous year in history. And probably include one number in 1-31 to guard against other contrarians who pick only high numbers.