# Interesting thing i heard about lottery systems **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 24, 2001, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617 "2001-07-24T13:20:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/1 "2001-07-24T13:20:11Z")
Reading this magazine, where the publishers indicated there was a degree of truth to some of the claims about choosing winning lottery number, not 6 for 6, mind you, but generally 4 out of 6. Im a huge sceptic and I understand the whole Bernoulli trial thing. But I got to wondering how lotteries were chosen these days. Do they all still use the ping pong ball method, or not so randomizing number generator that can be reversed engineered to some extent. This mag, which had nothing to do with selling lotto systems, or gambling for that matter, talked to a guy from the lottery commission and said if you print this stuff we will haul your ass into court and we Will win." The publishers that tried in out said they had one 150k during the test. How are they picking numbers these days. I went to a website about the method and its pretty indepth statistics stuff. The programs to download are free. And yes, I am as much a skeptic as you, but if a randomizer wasnt randomn, it could be exploited. The guy from the lottery commisioin indicated it would probably work for the next 6 months till they changed the system. ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/2 "2001-07-24T13:47:55Z")
Kid, you need to directly reference the magazine and clean up your points. Your first line isn’t even a sentence. C’mon… ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/3 "2001-07-24T13:56:48Z")
Give me a break philster, the mag was on paper and if you need pristine grammar to understand the questions above, then im not the one needing the tutoring. If you were really interested in answering my question i would clear up the points for you. But, as your sig indicates, it appears your only purpose here is to reap some sort of pathetic sense of self from putting down the grammar of other’s posts. BTW is philster a play on philistine? And remember - truly powerful people couldnt give a rat’s ass about grammar, but you probably dont read the new york times. ---
**Author:** ![Slacker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6bbea6/32.png) [@Slacker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slacker)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/4 "2001-07-24T14:01:32Z")
Whoa easy there… What I think Philster is saying is that it’s a pretty daunting task trying to discern your point in the OP. Are you asking if randomizers can be beaten? ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/5 "2001-07-24T14:06:59Z")
1. You can reference a paper mag 2. Pristine grammar is not required for me to understand your post 3. You are not the judge of whether or not your post is sufficiently explanatory to get back some good responses. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/6 "2001-07-24T14:15:13Z")
Countdown to intervention by moderator: 10…9…8… ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2001, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/7 "2001-07-24T18:19:14Z")
As I understand it, the OP is asking whether the system he read about in a magazine would really work. **KidCharlamagne** , if you want an answer, you really need to either tell us what the magazine was, or give a more detailed description of the method. An improvement in your grammar would also help, though I think I understood what you were asking. This is not speaking as a moderator, by the way, just as a poster trying to help the OP. ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/8 "2001-07-25T00:54:45Z")
Granted the grammar is ludicrous. But there is only one question in it - “Do they all still use the ping pong ball method, or a not so randomizing number generator that can be reversed engineered to some extent.” Still not a paragon of prose style certainly intelligible. My point was that people often look to jump down other’s throat on this board instead on genuinely wanting to help. ---
**Author:** ![eunoia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eunoia/32/97_2.png) [@eunoia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eunoia)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/9 "2001-07-25T01:46:11Z")
If they don’t, they [should.](http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/15.80.html) I’m pretty sure also that Mr. Corriveau now works for Loto-Quebec, the “bank” he broke. All Keno at the casino is “ping pong ball” generated since this incident. ---
**Author:** ![ZRUDEDOG13](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/51bf81/32.png) [@ZRUDEDOG13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZRUDEDOG13)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/10 "2001-07-25T01:46:12Z")
Fist off let me say that I agree with kidcharlemagne. People on this board do seem to be overly eager to jump down others throat. Hmm, I guess these people feel free to act like this since they know they will never see you face to face. I can only woder if they would have the moxie to say so in person. As for the lotto, I caught a special on TLC about lotto’s and from what they said on there show is that the norm is to use the old ball system. an i aint no gramaricly correct niether! ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/11 "2001-07-25T02:40:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ZRUDEDOG13 \* > **Fist off let me say that I agree with kidcharlemagne. > People on this board do seem to be overly eager to > jump down others throat. Hmm, I guess these people > feel free to act like this since they know they will > never see you face to face. I can only woder if they would > have the moxie to say so in person.** Listen, he wasn’t jumping down anybody’s throat. He simply said that the kid needed to clean up his points, which he did. I can count several run on sentences just glancing over the OP. Question marks and apostraphies are your friends. One and won mean two different things. Stuff like that. Then **Kid** comes back with a snappy reply. Don’t blame this at all on Philster, he hasn’t done anything out of line. As for the question in the OP, though difficult to discern, I believe if you’d like more information you could contact your local state lottery agency. Other than that, I am not sure if they are still using the ping pong ball method, or if it was even a method to begin with. I haven’t yet heard of any true way to “trick” the lottery system, but if I could see the cite mentioned, I’d like to read it. ---
**Author:** ![Lockz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Lockz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lockz)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/12 "2001-07-25T03:25:52Z")
This is probably edging us closer to the Pit; I agree proper grammer is useful. Not necessary, but it is welcome to be able to read posts clearly. As **Kid Charlemagne** said, _" … if you need pristine grammar to understand the questions above, then im not the one needing the tutoring."_ Since the Internet is world-wide, I’m sure people from many different nations are reading the SDMB. Not all of those people have English as their first, or even second language. I know if I were to read a post of a language I was not fully used to, I would appreciate proper grammer in order to understand what was being discussed. Sorry, but I can’t really answer the OP. I will add that in a statistics class I attended, a example was brought up of a lottery that was poorly worded. It required of a winning ticket, any of six numbers, instead of all six numbers IIRC. I don’t remember the exact thing, but I’m just mentioning it as another way to ‘beat’ lotteries: look for a flaw, if one exists. ---
**Author:** ![eunoia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eunoia/32/97_2.png) [@eunoia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eunoia)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/13 "2001-07-25T03:32:17Z")
[This page](http://users.tru.eastlink.ca/~brsears/notrand.htm) is probably closer to the truth. Corriveau was reported by reputable local news sources to be a mathematical _wunderkind_. Try using a translator on some of the french-language news stories. It’s definitely possible, but I’d like to look at your sources as well. If you cracked an algorithm for computer generating “random” numbers, why would you only hit 4 out of 6? Sounds more like a statistical method for betting to maximize gain, or a scam: bet on numbers we tell you to play, if you win, we look good and get more suckers. **ladyfoxfire** Who wrote your sig? It sounds familiar. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/14 "2001-07-25T04:54:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by eunoia \* > **ladyfoxfire** Who wrote your sig? It sounds familiar. \*\* That sig is the work of TN\*hippie, and I haven’t yet given him credit for it, (sorry hun!) but I will promptly do that, now that you have reminded me. I don’t have a thread to direct you to either, sorry. I thought it was hilarious, and it almost sent me into a fit of hysterics the first time I read it. ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/15 "2001-07-25T14:36:18Z")
Lottery sytems that use ping pong balls also run trial tests with mock set ups and test the random distribution of the numbers. They also weigh the balls, and now refrain from touching them. What the lottery commisions have learned is that even when creating a process that creates randomness, that doesn’t mean that all runs of numbers will be distributed evenly, even over a 20 year period of time. In Pennsylvania, the number 444 is the most frequently appearing number in state history. Unfortunately, all triple numbers are the most heavily played. Folks who might believe in a system will tell you this means something. But, what about all the other lottery systems, and all the combinations that have been drawn? The distribution will look more random with more drawings. In the US, the Pennsylvania state lottery runs the “daily number”, where the goal is to pick three in a row, from three bins with numbers 0-9 in each. The odds are 1000-1, but if your odds come up, you get 500-1. They also lock down numbers that are played heavily. They know that it is likely that a day would come where one number is played heavily and it just happens to come out. So, they protect themselves. Even if you find a lottery where their is a small payout for getting 4 out of 6, the odds of getting them are much greater than the payouts. A mathemtics teacher at a local college worked as a consultant for the lottery, and the most daunting challenge was trying to explain to state officials that the odds of losing money were say 72,000 to 1 on a certain day on the 4/6 payout…yet the day did come, and the lottery finds itself in the hole somedays, even when the odds are heavily stacked in their favor. My understanding is that no official is afraid of any “system” that could be used. There are two legit threats to gambling oraganizations: Card counting in black jack, and out right fraud, especially by lottery officials (happened in PA with weighted ping pong balls). No other method is a threat. (No apologies for asking that the OP be cleaned up. Some call themselves “powerful”, I call them lazy and short sighted. A good OP gets good responses. I’ll let the weak response to the OP speak for itself. Never was a nit picker, but the OP was confusing. Don’t know English? Just pardon yourself instead of acting eccentric and “powerful” …try forming your own ideas instead of adopting the notions of some bums who pump that crap. Loose grammar in vocal convo is healthy, but the crap in the OP is laziness, or just a misunderstanding of Englsih…I suspect it’s the former) ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/16 "2001-07-25T14:54:07Z")
Ok, dont laugh at the source, but it was Maxum magazine, August 2001. Now I understand that many articles in Maxim are tongue in cheek, I don’t believe this one was. They printed the method to go about beating the lottery, but put fake “water stains” over the important parts. They did quote Don Baylor of the Interstate Lottery Commission as saying (regarding the info they blacked out), "If you print this we will definately haul your publishing company into court and we will win. " More from the magazine - “Daily lottery numbers fall into an obscure but perfectly predictable pattern know to mathematicians as (blacked out)…‘The fact that this secret has gotten out will make all the lotteries change how they do business.’, says John Thomas, head of Lottery Investigations for the Better Business Bureau. ‘But it will be a good six months until this method no longer works (black out).’” What I do doubt is the publisher’s test indicating they won $150k - from what i’ve seen on web sites, you win around 1500 dollars a pop, and thats when you win. I doubt they had enough trials to win that amount, unless, they got lucky and hit say 5 out of 6 numbers. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/17 "2001-07-25T14:59:23Z")
All mathematical random number generators can be reverse engineered to some extent. This is because there is no such thing as a function that generates random numbers, only pseudo-random numbers, or numbers that appear random until you generate a sufficiently large quantity. The only way to get real random numbers, therefore, is from Nature, such as using the ping-pong ball machines. The last time I watched the lotto drawing on TV, they were still using this method. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/18 "2001-07-25T15:09:25Z")
Dude, the article in _Maxim_ was a joke. Maxim publishes exactly one serious article per issue, and that issue’s was an excerpt from a book written by some freaky coroner. I think the things you’ve seen on the web are wholly unrelated nonsense, but nonsense just the same. ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/19 "2001-07-25T15:26:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by KidCharlemagne \* > \*\*Ok, dont laugh at the source, but it was Maxum magazine, August 2001. Now I understand that many articles in Maxim are tongue in cheek, I don’t believe this one was. They printed the method to go about beating the lottery, but put fake “water stains” over the important parts. They did quote Don Baylor of the Interstate Lottery Commission as saying (regarding the info they blacked out), "If you print this we will definately haul your publishing company into court and we will win. " More from the magazine - “Daily lottery numbers fall into an obscure but perfectly predictable pattern know to mathematicians as (blacked out)…‘The fact that this secret has gotten out will make all the lotteries change how they do business.’, says John Thomas, head of Lottery Investigations for the Better Business Bureau. ‘But it will be a good six months until this method no longer works (black out).’” > What I do doubt is the publisher’s test indicating they won $150k - from what i’ve seen on web sites, you win around 1500 dollars a pop, and thats when you win. I doubt they had enough trials to win that amount, unless, they got lucky and hit say 5 out of 6 numbers. \*\* I saw the article, and my simple conclusion was that the article was fake, and the water stains (more obviously) were fake. The lottery commissions fear tampering, and take steps to ensure randomness. There is no fear of any system. I am resisting the urge to laugh at the source. Since you mentioned you saw the system on some web sites, I give you the benefit of the doubt that you saw something that made you post. However, in light of the fact that the Maxum “article” was the source you cited, I suggest you come back with some cites from the web. ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2001, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617/20 "2001-07-25T16:55:32Z")
Here is a thread I was taking a look at. > **[Lottery Software, Lottery Strategies, Lotto Systems, Wheels](https://saliu.com/LottoWin.htm)** > > Lottery software creates the first winning lotto systems, lottery strategies based on mathematics, statistics, past drawings. Download programs, reduced lottery systems, lotto wheels. btw of course the wet ink blotches were fake. But Im not sure the article is entirely fake though im sure that the test run which won them 150k. is bullshit. I also dont think the reason that lottery employees cant play, is because they know the formula. I read maxim all the time and many articles are fake, but the humorous aspect to be derived from this is that they blotched out the important parts as if it got water smeared. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-thing-i-heard-about-lottery-systems/73617.md?page=2)