[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
I don’t think the OP is suffering from a false sense of randomness.
What he’s asking is… let’s say you have a 9 balls in a lottery. 1 1 1, 2 2 2, 3 3 3. Is 222 any less likely than 123?
Well, if you think about it in terms of a consecutive series - the first ball is a 2 (1/3rd chance), so you now have 2/8 chances to draw a 2 with the remaining ball. You do. Now you have 1/7 chances of drawing the last 2. It appears that, from that perspective, the odds of that happening are 1/3 * 1/4 * 1/7 = roughly 1.1%.
On the other hand, the 123 drawing appears to be 3/9 * 3/8 * 3/7 = roughly 5.1%.
In other words, if there are a fixed number of each type of ball, every time you draw one of those numbers, it becomes less likely that the number will be drawn again.
And… this is fundamental stuff to me, but I’m up past my bed time and am unable to think clearly, so I’m not able to figure out the error here. I’ll revisit this tomorrow if no one has offered an explanation.
Some of the explanations in this thread seem faulty, though. If you roll a die 3 times, you’re as likely to get a single number all three times as any other combination of numbers, because one die roll doesn’t affect the next. However, when you’re taking lottery balls away from a lottery as you pick them, you’re affecting the future probabilities. I think some people are trying to explain the former, rather than the latter.
[/QUOTE]
He said “the balls are replaced in the bowl”, so I think you’re the one trying to explain the wrong model, dude. And you’re right, this is fundamental stuff, in this case RTFOP. 