Probability favours worse odds?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter iDimension
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the perceived discrepancy between expected and actual winning probabilities in a UK lottery simulator. Participants explore why actual wins consistently appear lower than the probabilities suggest, particularly in the early stages of the simulation, and whether this is a coincidence or indicative of a deeper issue.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why their lottery simulator consistently shows fewer wins than expected, suggesting it might be a coincidence.
  • Another participant proposes that allowing the applet to run longer may lead to lower observed probabilities, referencing the theory of random walks.
  • Some participants note that restarting the program can yield higher odds early on, but that after a certain number of plays, the odds seem to favor lower outcomes.
  • Concerns are raised about potential bugs in the program or incorrect odds, with suggestions that the sample size may be too small to draw definitive conclusions.
  • One participant mentions that the odds of winning remain constant, but if they are lower than theoretical, they may stay lower for an extended period.
  • Another participant discusses the concept of standard deviation and how it relates to the observed outcomes, questioning why actual probabilities do not sometimes exceed expectations.
  • Some participants provide statistical insights, noting that for certain distributions, the probability of getting fewer wins than expected can be greater than getting more wins.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether the observed outcomes are coincidental, indicative of a flaw in the simulation, or a result of statistical properties. Some agree on the need for larger sample sizes, while others emphasize the consistency of lower outcomes.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their sample sizes and the potential for bugs in the simulation software. The discussion also highlights the complexity of probability distributions and the nuances of interpreting results from simulations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals exploring probability theory, those developing or analyzing lottery simulations, and participants curious about statistical anomalies in random processes.

iDimension
Messages
108
Reaction score
4
This is a bit of a strange question but why does it seem like probability of something happening always seems to be less than the actual probability?

For example I am running a UK lottery simulator and you'll notice that the times I win is ALWAYS lower than what the probability says it should be, why is it never higher? Why does it never go higher but instead always lower?

ZGZDmgw.png


In all 3 you see that the times I win is lower than the expected times to win, never does it go higher.

1 in 57 is higher than 1 in 59
1 in 1,033 is higher than 1 in 1,062
1 in 55,492 is higher than 59,984

Is it just a coincidence that the actual outcomes are always lower than what is expected? I've run the program 3 times now for a length of 15 minutes and the actual wins are always lower, never higher, why is this?

As the game plays on to infinity it will end up equalling out but in the early stages it just seems that the actual probability is always lower than the expected probability.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
It should be a coincidence
 
Oh by the way, if you just let your applet run then chances are very large that the probabilities will remain lower. This follows from the theory of random walks. If you actually want to see higher odds, then the best way is to restart the program a few times.
 
micromass said:
Oh by the way, if you just let your applet run then chances are very large that the probabilities will remain lower. This follows from the theory of random walks. If you actually want to see higher odds, then the best way is to restart the program a few times.

Yes I noticed when I restarted the program in the very very early stages it seems quite common to win more than the expected probability but once the game reaches 10,000 plays the probability changes to lower odds instead of higher odds. It seems strange but it would seem that the more you play the less likely you are to win the smaller prizes.

So you're best chance of winning a small prize is actually in the first 10,000 games, after that the odds of winning seem to be lower as the game goes on.
 
Last edited:
iDimension said:
Yes I noticed when I restarted the program in the very very early stages it seems quite common to win more than the expected probability but once the game reaches 10,000 plays the probability changes to lower odds instead of higher odds. It seems strange but it would seem that the more you play the less likely you are to win.

So you're best chance of winning a small prize is actually in the first 10,000 games, after than the odds of winning seem to be lower as the game goes on.

Those are the wrong conclusions as the odds of winning the game always remain the same. It's just that if the odds are lower than theoretical then they will remain lower for a long time. But conversely, if the odds are higher they will remain higher for a long time.

See http://www.math.uah.edu/stat/applets/RandomWalkExperiment.html (use n=100 and "Last zero"), you'll see that the total winnings (red line) doesn't change very often from winning to losing or from losing to winning. In fact, if you're balance is negative, then it will likely remain negative and the same with winning. This despite the fact that the chance of winning is always 1/2.

You would expect that the balance is positive half the time and negative half the time. This is in fact not so. Very counterintuitive.
 
But what I don't understand is why the odds are always lower? If it's true probability then you would expect to see slightly high and slightly lower odds but whenever I run it, the odds never seem to go lower than what is expected, just higher.

TJ8dPDV.png


as you can see I let the program carry on running and after 330,000 games the odds are STILL lower, when if ever will they balance out or go lower? Why are they always higher? This is what I don't understand.

You might notice I did match a raffle and a 5 ball draw but for this particular match it's still the early game so like I said it's quite common to win early on with respect to the probability of that particular set.

I'd actually be surprised if I didn't win the jackpot before the 13,983,816th game. Just like I matched 3 numbers much more often than I 1 in 57 during the early game but as the game tends to infinity it seems the probability always favours slightly higher than the actual true probability.

I doubt that 1 in 58 will ever become 1 in 57, even after a trillion games.
 
Restart the program 10 times or so and let it run for one or two minutes. Tell me if you still observe the same.
 
It could be a bug in the program or wrong odds given, but the given sample size is too small to check. Can you run it for much longer?

There could be a more subtle bug: the odds could be inclusive ("chance to get at least this"), while the win frequency seems to be exclusive.

The last picture shows an higher than expected rate of 5 correct numbers, by the way.
 
mfb said:
It could be a bug in the program or wrong odds given, but the given sample size is too small to check. Can you run it for much longer?

There could be a more subtle bug: the odds could be inclusive ("chance to get at least this"), while the win frequency seems to be exclusive.

The last picture shows an higher than expected rate of 5 correct numbers, by the way.

Unfortunately the program is quite slow so I couldn't run it for a very long time. I stopped after 1million games which took about 45 minutes. The odds are correct as I checked them on the official UK lotto website.
 
  • #10
It would be interesting to take this up with the lottery corporation and see what they have to say. It could put them on-the-spot.
 
  • #11
Well, for the 50,000 GBP prize, your odds are higher.

For the 25 GBP prize, odds of 1:57 corresponds to a win frequency of 1/58.
 
  • #12
iDimension said:
I stopped after 1million games which took about 45 minutes.
What was the result? ;)
 
  • #13
If you take into account the one standard deviation range, you will find that the results are not so strange.
 
  • #14
mathman said:
If you take into account the one standard deviation range, you will find that the results are not so strange.
I don't see how it explains the consistency in bring low so often.
 
  • #15
mfb said:
What was the result? ;)

I forget what it was exactly but apart from the 6 ball match the others were still lower than the actual probability. The 3 ball match stayed at 1:58 and the 4 ball match ended up something like 1:1094 or something I can't remember exactly.

mathman said:
If you take into account the one standard deviation range, you will find that the results are not so strange.

Yes standard deviation of one but why must that always be higher, for example why can't the standard deviation make it 1:56 instead of 1:58 or with the 4 ball match why is it 1:1094 instead of 1:1000? Just a bit strange that the actual probability is always lower, with the exception of the 6 ball draw of course.

The point I'm making is while you will sometimes get better odds and worse odds it seems to favour worse odds. Of course I only ran the program 3 times so I don't have a large sample to work with, it could just be that computer probability isn't 100% true probability perhaps?
 
  • #16
iDimension said:
Of course I only ran the program 3 times so I don't have a large sample to work with
That is not enough to draw conclusions. If we just consider "odds smaller or larger than predicted", we have 6 relevant data points (5 matches are too rare for conclusions), both with about 50% chance to be below and 50% chance to be above the expectation value. That gives a probability of about 1.5% to see all 6 data points below the expectation value.
 
  • #17
In general (for binomial distribution with small mean) the probability of getting less than the average is greater than the probability of getting more.

Example: Prob. of win =.01. 150 tries. Prob(0 wins) =.2215, Prob(1 win) = .3355, sum = .5570, even though expected no. wins is 1.5.
 
  • #18
I might not have been clear enough. The screenshots has both odds and probability, and the two are not the same. If the odds are 1:1, the probability is 1/2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K