HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 18:20:07 GMT

In article <BrwKvA.84L@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> pmfusari@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Fusari) writes:
>For anyone out there who is interested in spotting trends in the winning Lotto 
>6/49 numbers, I have just completed a study on 10 years of 6/49 draws. 
>It includes analysis on number occurrences (how often each number is drawn),
>how often certain numbers come up together, as well as range analysis (how
>often the numbers fall within a certain range).  I've also included the 
>winning numbers for the past 10 years and some tips on combining.  I've 
>put all of this into a book and I would like to offer it to anyone who is
>interested.  In order to cover the cost of the copies and binding, I am
>charging a fee of $7.95 per copy.  Satisfaction is guaranteed.  If you  
>would like a copy, send cheque or m/o to P. Fusari, P.O.Box 26094
>King Value Station, Kitchener, ON N2G 4V8.
>
>
The only problem with using past patterns is that they are transient.
Hindsight..,etc

They only value that this book might have would be the tips on combining.
Or in other words spreading your bet over as wide a range as possible.

Question: If this works why aren't you rich?? :-)

Matthew

Newsgroups: rec.gambling,ont.forsale,misc.forsale
From: yy@cbnews.cb.att.com (alan.j.lapenn)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 14:48:01 GMT
Summary: confirmed

In article <29JUL199209363928@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov>, kimnach@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (GREG KIMNACH) writes:
> In article <1992Jul28.193737.23555@isrc.sandia.gov>, smlacke@isrc.sandia.gov (Scott M Lackey) writes...
> >From article <Bs3w79.7L8@ecf.toronto.edu>, by ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice):
> >> In article <1992Jul27.223555.14651@isrc.sandia.gov> smlacke@isrc.sandia.gov (Scott M Lackey) writes:
> >> 
> >> Actually the odds of a number a number being chosen in 6/49
> >> is 1 in 49 :-?
> >Lines deleted
> >> Matthew
> > 
> >	Looking at my original posting, it wasn't clear what I was trying
> >to say.  If you look around for a lottery in which any number ( not
> >any specific number) has come up an inordinate number of times, you
> >will surely find many instances. To then calculate the odds of that
> >number coming up that many times (or more) in that lottery will give
> >you a very small probability.  This is far from proving that the
> >odds of the lottery being random are this small.  
> > 
> >Scott Lackey.
> > 
> 
> A couple of years ago we went to the Ohio Lottery offices to get a print-
> out of all the Super Lotto numbers that were drawn.  We found that the 
> distribution of the numbers was uniform--as expected--and that any such 
> gimmick to pick a set of "best numbers" is absolutely absurd.  Except for 
> the people collecting money from such software and book sales!
> 
> Greg

I did this for the Mass lottery also and found it to have a uniform distributionalso.
-- 
Alan LaPenn      att!mvuxd!yy          .signature not found!
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:08:44 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.234704.15065@r-node.gts.org> yung@r-node.gts.org (Amos Yung) writes:
>In article <Bs239F.7v1@ecf.toronto.edu> ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice) writes:
>>Could you do us one favour Paul,
>>
>>If anyone actually sends you the money Could you send us their address :-)
>>
>
>Oh, cut it out guys. It takes a lot of effort to compile the data and he
>has every right to charge people for it. Besides, lottary has always been
>a legitimate study of statistics and probability. U of T did a research
>on that when Lottario was first set up. So go poke fun at them.
> 
>
Nah. There are a lot more things that we could poke fun
at Uof T for, believe me.

>>Matthew
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: wallace@dtc.hp.com (David Wallace)
Subject: Trip Report - Low Stakes BJ at Tahoe
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:11:12 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Design Technology Center, Santa Clara, CA

My wife and I were up in Tahoe the weekend of 7/25-26.  Although this was
not primarily a gambling trip, we did stop off at the Nugget, which was
advertising $1 single-deck BJ.  The Nugget is at the northern end of the
Tahoe casinos at the south end of the lake.  They have a single pit with
5-6 BJ tables, one of which had the $1 minimums.  Despite the presence of a
bus tour group, seats at the $1 table were readily available while I was
there (5-6 PM on Saturday).  Also present was a $1 craps table with 5x odds.

Rules seemed to be standard Northern Nevada: H17, D10-11 only.  Penetration
was a consistent 2 rounds to 5, 6, or 7 spots, 3 rounds to 4 spots.  $2
minimum to play 2 hands.  I didn't get to check out DAS or RSA, since the
relevant hands never came up while I was there.

Promotions: The folks from the bus got some $1 "Lucky Bucks" coupons that
increased the payoff by $1 when bet with a regular bet.  We were offered
$30 ($20 chips and $10 quarters) + Continental Breakfast + 2 Prime Rib
Dinners to hear a timeshare presentation the next morning, but declined
(married couples only, both spouses must attend).

Results: Betting $1-2, I wound up +$4.  This was mostly just luck (and
counting practice), since I don't think a 1:2 spread w/o strategy
variations is enough to overcome NN rules.

Dave W.		(dwallace@dtc.hp.com)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling,ont.forsale,misc.forsale
From: dinn@ug.cs.dal.ca (Michael 'Moose' Dinn)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:12:13 GMT

In article <BrwKvA.84L@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> pmfusari@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Paul Fusari) writes:
>interested.  In order to cover the cost of the copies and binding, I am
>charging a fee of $7.95 per copy.  Satisfaction is guaranteed.  If you  
>would like a copy, send cheque or m/o to P. Fusari, P.O.Box 26094
>King Value Station, Kitchener, ON N2G 4V8.
Can you send me just the raw numbers via email/FTP?

--
 Michael Dinn, Sysop of the Moose's Swamp - Nova Scotia's largest Amiga BBS
 +1 (902) 492-1035 * HST/V.32 & V.42bis * 300-14,400 baud * 220 Megs online
 dinn@ug.cs.dal.ca * moose@swamp.UUCP       | The best way to accelerate a
 Moderator of comp.[sources|binaries].amiga | Mac is at 9.8 m/s/s.
From: breid@pyrhard2.eng.pyramid.com (Bill Reid)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: video poker simulations
Date: 30 Jul 92 00:13:44 GMT
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation, Mountain View

In article <1992Jul29.190008.22307@fs7.ece.cmu.edu> jka@ece.cmu.edu (Jay Adams) writes:
>
>Final question: how do progressive jackpots grow?  Is it a percentage
>of the take?  What percentage?
>
Ah, a question I can answer with some authority, since I actually worked 
on the progressives.  They increment as a percentage of the "drop", which 
is what people drop into the machines (the coins).  Every coin dropped, 
a certain amount is added to the progressive (may take a few drops 
before the amount registers as a unit on the display).  The amount that 
is added is selectable by the user (the casino).  There are probably 
popular percentages of the drop that are added by most casinos, which 
can be determined by watching how fast the display increments compared 
to how many coins are put in.

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Subject: Re: New Video Poker Machine
In-reply-to: stank@cbnewsl.cb.att.com's message of Mon, 20 Jul 1992 21:11:43 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
Date: 21 Jul 92 11:42:10

In article <1992Jul20.211143.14891@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> stank@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Stan Krieger) writes:
> I saw a "double" Video Poker game in Reno last week, and I'm curious
> as to expected payout.
>
> It was a 9-6 Jacks or Better machine with a 53 card deck.  The 53rd
> card is a "double" card, and it doubles the payout of a high pair,
> two pair, three of a kind, and 4 of a kind hands.  It had no other
> value (i.e., it isn't a Joker), so its presence means that there
> are only four real cards to play with.
>
> So, how does the extra "double" payout balance needing to form a hand
> with only 4 cards?

This looks like a rather amusing machine.  If the rest of the payoffs
are "normal", it would seem like it should give the player a big advantage,
because a big chunk of player return comes from large pairs.  Unfortunately,
it appears that it would take major modifications to my video poker program
for this, so I doubt that I'll be able to really answer this question anytime
soon.
--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never try to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys the pig."
From: venkataraman@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (Remesh Venkataraman)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Fun Books that are worth it ?(the effort that is)
Date: 28 Jul 92 02:38:00 GMT
Distribution: usa,local
Organization: University of Arizona MIS Department
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I am going to be in Vegas for a week beginning the 3rd of August. Are there
certain funbooks that are worth the effort of going in showing id, etc.  I did
miss out on Manny's aces up offer. I will be having a car and will be staying
at the Hacienda. 

Also are the best games for the basic strategist/beginning counter/low roller
still at the Frontier/Circus^2

Thanks in advance for any and all information.

-ramesh
========================================================================
Standard Disclaimers Apply
University of Arizona			
Management Information Systems

E-mail:
venkataraman@misvax.mis.ariona.edu       
Sprint:
(602)-621-2748
========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: cheese@wam.umd.edu (Fletch F. Fletch)
Subject: Penetration...
Originator: cheese@rac2.wam.umd.edu
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:14:07 GMT

In his book, "Million Dollar Blackjack," Ken Uston charts various acceptable
and unacceptable penetrations for single deck blackjack, based on number of
players at the table and number of rounds.  For example, he claims that while
playing head-on, single deck, 7 rounds is very good, 6 is acceptable, while
5 is unacceptable.  Under current playing conditions, what kind of single
deck penetration can be expected in LV.  I'll be going to LV next week for the
first time (obviously playing single deck for the first time) and was wondering
what kind of penetration would be acceptable and what would be unacceptable
as far as head-on play, all the way through a full 7-spot table (in which case,
two rounds is obviously the only acceptable game).  Can I expect to find these
acceptable penetrations throughout LV?  Are there any differences between 
downtown and the strip?  Any information on this topic would be greatly
appreciated.

Jason
cheese@wam.umd.edu

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: guido@island.COM (Guido Marx)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: Island Graphics Corp.  San Rafael, Ca.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 16:01:15 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.153759.1545@speedy.aero.org> Kenneth Gordon <gordon@aerospace.aero.org> writes:
>I don't know how the laws are in Canada, so this may not apply to your
>comments.  In the U.S., lottery and gambling income must be declared as
>income anyway, regardless of whether or not you try to deduct
>expenditures on lottery tickets which go toward "charity."

Actually, lotteries in the States are run by each individual State (not
every State has a lottery, and they vary a lot from State to State).
In California, all lottery winnings are exempt from State income tax,
but you still have to declare winnings for your Federal income tax.
Of course, if your State doesn't HAVE an income tax, this point is
moot.

>Most state lotteries earmark profits toward a "charitable" government 
>organization, such as the state education system.  This is not a
>tax-deductable charity as far as I can tell, so lottery tickets probably
>cannot be deducted anyway.

You might argue that the portion of the ticket which goes to education
(1/3 in Ca.) is a tax.  State taxes which you pay ARE deductible (I'll
let someone else try this out on the IRS, let me know what they say ;^).

>When declaring gambling winnings, though, from casinos, the losses from
>the same year can be used to offset the wins (i.e. income).  Perhaps the
>cost of purchasing lottery tickets can be used to offset winnings on the
>1040.  That is meaningless if you hit the $5 million lotto, but might be
>significant for California scratchers or the Michigan Daily 3, where
>winnings are only in the hundreds, and can easily be nullified by
>purchasing more lottery tickets during the year.

This brings up an interesting question which I have wondered about.  If
you did win $5 million, it would be paid over 20 years.  Would that mean
that you could go to Vegas and write off any losses (up to each yearly
payment) for the next 20 years ?  This would mean that Uncle Sam would
pick up about 1/3 of any losses - not bad, it would certainly affect
your expected win/loss.

Guido


Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall)
Subject: Re: Peanuts! Kelly Criterion Strategy Adjustments! Popcorn!
Organization: NASA/ARC Information Sciences Division
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 20:23:47 GMT

In article <9207311930.AA16914@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> red@HARVARD.EDU writes:
>hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:
>> I should add that my modified program to compute splitting adjustments
>> properly has not completed even one count level in the last two days
>> of CPU time.  I don't see any approximations that can be made - the
>> split hands have to be resolved one after the other in order to
>> determine the expected log of the bankroll after the round, which
>> creates a combinatorial explosion.  Any ideas from Steve Jacobs,
>> Steve Markowitz, or others?
>
>For a bet size of only 2% of bankroll, E - V/2B makes a very good
>estimate for the relative worth of two decisions under the Kelly
>criterion.  Rather than keep track of expected log, just keep track of
>the expected value and variance and use the above formula.

This would only speed up the program by a constant amount (the difference
in time between computing logs and squares, more or less.)  In order
to compute variance exactly, I would still have to resolve each split hand
in sequence.  For example, if you split 2's and get an 20 on one hand
and subsequently a 17 on the other hand, and then the dealer draws to 18,
the result is 0, and the squared result to use for variance is 0^2=0.
The only approximation I have figured out so far is to first compute what
happens with one hand of a split, storing the distribution of player hands
for each dealer up card (e.g., probabilities of 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, bust).
Then recompute the first hand of a split and resolve the dealer hand,
next iterating through cached results to find probabilistic values for
the second hand, and finally finding the squared results to add to the
variance.

What a pain for just an approximation.

In e-mail I received a suggestion to disallow resplitting.  I already
did that.  The combinatorial explosion is apparently bad enough for
resolving the two hands resulting from one split in sequence.

-- 
Michael Hall            \ Happiness is... making a big cover bet off the top of
NASA Ames Research Center\ a freshly shuffled deck and getting a blackjack,
hall@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov \ while the pit boss is watching.

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: moo@king.eng.umd.edu (Deac Moo of the UGC)
Subject: Re: Trip Report: Vegas 16-19 July
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 16:53:57 GMT
Organization: Computer Aided Design Lab, U. of Maryland College Park
Distribution: rec
Reply-To: moo@king.eng.umd.edu

In article <ELLIOTT.92Jul20172000@soldier.aero.org>, elliott@aero.org (Kenneth B. Elliott III) writes:
>
>My other recommendation is the tortilla skillet at Palace Station.
>Palace Station is just off the strip, on the other side of 15 off of
>Sahara Ave.  ...  Service is usually pretty slow, so it's a
>good place to go after you've lost a lot of money (or if you're trying
>to hang on to what you've won). :-)

Yah, I noticed the same thing. Talk about getting stuffed tho'. They definately
bring out the food.


	                *** MOO@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU***
Heaven: Playing craps with HotBabes(tm) screaming "I want you to come for MEEE." 
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey)
Subject: Re: Look, Ma , one hand!
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:05:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.032851.2774@ultra.com> howard@ultra.com writes:
>
>Say, that brings up some interesting conversation topics:
>
>1.  What's your favorite position, err, I mean spot, when playing craps
>    and why?

Next to the stickman.  That way I can actually see the dice on both ends.

>2.  What are some great tactics to irritate the "help" when they're being
>    total jerks?  (admittedly, it won't last long :)

1. As someone else said, knocking over the chip stacks with the dice.
2. When making a proposition bet, throw your chip so it rolls
   all around the table.
3. Make one place bet and make the dealer move it to another number
   after every roll.
4. On your first comeout roll, pick up 5 dice and roll them all.

>3.  BJ'ers have PRESTO!, what should us craps players adopt to identify
>    other rec.gamblers at the table?

On a comeout 11, how about: "Sixty-five Yo!"
The counter-sign will be "Presto!"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name:       Ken Kubey  or  QB   |  Reading, editing or printing of this text
Address:    kubey@sgi.com       |  without the express written consent of
Disclaimer: the usual           |  Major League Baseball is prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky rec.gambling:4089 ont.forsale:749 misc.forsale:22081
Newsgroups: rec.gambling,ont.forsale,misc.forsale
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
From: rabagley@uceng.UC.EDU (Ross A Bagley)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:02:26 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati

There is one thing that can be done to increase performance in lottery 
winnings.  Pick number sets that few other people will pick.  Method:

1)  Pick your own and stay away from low numbers (many people who play the
lottery do so on a lucky number system.  Lucky numbers are pretty much
exclusively <20 as are significant numbers (b-days, etc...))

2)  Let the lottery computer pick your numbers for you.

This is only important if you win!  If you do win, the odds are greater that
you will not have to share the prize with as many people.  This is the only
statistical anomaly of a completely fair lottery (which all state ones will
be) and is the only strategy that can help in any way.

Do not fall for anyone who tries to sell you anything concerning changing
the odds of winning.  They are lying and have manufactured or altered their
data in order to make a quick buck.  (Or they're cheating and then it's 
unethical and illegal)

Flames to /dev/null...  post replies
--                                  ______________________________________
      _______                       |                                    |
     /\______\                      |       rabagley@uceng.uc.edu        |
    / / ___  /_____ ______ ______   |                                    |
   / / /_\/ /______\\_____\\_____\  |  Sex appeal is 50% what you've got |
  / / _  __// ___  //  ___//  ___/  |  and 50% what people think you've  |
 / / / \ \ / /_\/ //___  //___  /   |  got.              -Murphy         |
 \/_/   \_\\_____//_____//_____/    |____________________________________|
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: why@kpc.com (Will Hyde)
Subject: Re: Trip Report: New York City (not really a trip report)
Keywords: It's a Crime...! 
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Inc, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 06:53:04 GMT

In article <pccm=9c.slick@netcom.com> slick@netcom.com (Martin Veneroso) writes:
>galanter@nyu.edu (Philip Galanter) writes:
>
>[interesting anecdotes about shell game/three-card monte operators deleted]
>
>>I suppose there are social Darwinists out there who feel that "if they are  
>>that stupid, then they deserve it"...but these scam artists mostly prey on  
>>the false hopes of people who can least afford to lose and are desperate  
>>for some good news in their lives, and its hard for me to be that cold.
>
>Rather like state lotteries, IMHO.
>
>>This "game" is a crime that should not be encouraged.  
>

  No kidding.  Who hasn't seen all those movies about all those
  gangsters who got rich with prostitution, drugs ... and
  "the numbers racket" ...?

  I remember an old Bowery Boys film in which one of the boys got
  into serious trouble 'cause he was a "numbers runner" ...

  You used to (probably still can, somewhere) be able to bet your 
  dollar, or your dime, on a number. 

  You pick a three-digit number (one in a thousand) and place your
  bet with the local deli clerk or bartender, and the numbers runners 
  would come around and collect the bets.

  Then you read tomorrow's New York Times (or wherever), and if the
  last three digits of the Dow-Jones averages (or somesuch) match
  your number, you win!

  500-to-1 you win.

  What a ripoff!  City Council is outraged!  Put 'em all in jail!

  ...

  And then there's the "Daily Three" in California.  Legal Lotto game.

  You pick a three-digit number, bet your buck.

  Every day there's a three-digit number in the paper.  If it's your
  number you win...!

  500.00

  -will
-- 
________________________________________________________________________
___ why@kpc.com   LADY LUCK IS A FICKLE BITCH, AND HER NAME IS KARMA ___
___ -** --- * ***   -* --- -   *** *- -*--   -* --- - **** ** -* --* ___
___ JUSTINCASE:  Guest acct. This writer does not work/speak for kpc ___
From: zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: UK soccer pools - new book review
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:25:01 GMT
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre
Originator: netnews@uts.mcc.ac.uk

I got the book by Prof George - Football Pools and How to Win
9.95 from Oldcastle Books of Harpenden - only known stockist.

From my 1st quick scan:
Appallingly written.  Some interesting stats with possibly dubious 
conclusions drawn from some of them.  Says best indicators are:
relative position in league table (that's what I consider dubious)
very recent form (last 3 matches at most) (I find this interesting)
scoring record (which I know is interesting to a degree)
Section on arranging selections into multiple perms almost totally 
unreadable.  If I didn't know a lot about perms already I wouldn't have had 
a chance of understanding it.

So not really recommended except for diehard enthusiasts
because: so badly written; uses %s when I prefer standardised deviates;
some soccer stats show changes from season to season so his may be out of 
date; incomprehensible perm section.

If you do some simple stats on very recent form, you'll have generated the 
book's most interesting finding yourself.....



+--Great Quotes of our Time-------------------------------------------+
|        You should never have a hobby that eats                      |
+--------------------------------------Amarillo Slim Preston----------+          
|  Dave Budd, MCC, Oxford Rd, Manchester, England  (44)061-275-6033   |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.gambling