Noone "Should Win" Take this as an example: I 1 ticketed 450k. eben24 had 400 tickets in Soo noone "should win" Everyone has a chance, and even though someone had less tickets than u your shouldn't have won any lotto.
B, whether split up or not, you still have a combined 1000 tickets, so the chance of winning remains the same. (Not sure why this question is even there, as it's simple math .-.)
As Kuke said: "B" If you and Maco are teaming, then the combined 1000 tickets would have the same chance of winning as a 1000 tic for one person. Seriously: 500+500=1000+0 Now, if you were competing: then it would be as follows: 500 ticks vs. 500 ticks. is equal chance. 1000 ticks vs. 0 ticks. is obviously a win-lose.
Your chances of winning in the lotto are based on how many tickets you bought vs how many tickets everyone else has bought. Say there are 1000 tickets purchased in the lotto. You have purchased 250 of them, player B has purchased 100, player C has purchased 150, and player D has purchased 500. You would have a 25% chance of winning, player B would have a 10% chance, player C would have a 15% chance, and player D would have a 50% chance of winning. Another way to explain this is to think of the lotto this way. Every time you purchase a ticket, you are assigned a number. The more tickets you purchase, the more numbers are assigned to you. The lotto will only pick one number to be the winner. This means that if you have more numbers, then the chances of you winning are higher, but nothing is guaranteed.
Meh, by "more" tickets I meant that one person would have more than the 900. Remember, I had been on ECC for 18 hours
That's kind of the point I'm trying to prove, but this is how I see it. Say there are 2000 tickets total. 1 person has 900 (45%), another had 800 (40%) and another has 200 (10%). IF lottery is based primarily on percentages (not bound by them or else 1 tickets would never have a chance) then the 45% would more than likely win, BECAUSE the "teamed" 800 and 200 would be seen as individual percentages (40% and 10%), however, if it was one person, it would be seen as 1 chunk of 50%. Not sure if this makes sense, but this is how I see it.
Let's take this to an extreme: If you have 99 people paying on ticket and 1 person buying 2 tickets. Then you can't say the 2 ticket person "would more than likely win" just because they have the highest percentage out of everyone. It is that 2 ticket person vs ALL the 1 ticketers. Or even better yet. Take your example. What is the % the each one will LOSE. You will see that the 900 ticket person that the same chance to LOSE in each scenario. If they have the same chance to lose, then they have the same chance to win in each scenario. While one person will win more often if he bought the 1000 tickets than if he bought only 800 of them. It is the total 800 + 200 you need to keep in mind, since the 200 person will win sometimes.
40% + 10% = 50% Really, it's literally that. There's 10% chance one person wins, there's 40% chance another person wins. And there's 50% chance of losing. How you see it makes no sense whatsoever, because if people team up, their tickets just add up, seeing as you're splitting the money in the end regardless who wins of the two. So if the 10% person wins, you win too, and if you win, the 10% person wins as well. so you have 50% chance of losing, and 50% chance of winning
I understand what you were saying, individually the one with the most tickets would have the best chance of winning. But individual tickets don't matter if you team, the combined tickets is what matters.
I was figuring based off individual percentages. Maybe we're all wrong and this is just a complete myth all together?
Well, I 500v500 teamed with Original_Jackson.... and we won David_Torento's 1M so..... Yeah.... A bit lotto win. (See that pun).... But in reality, its neither.
Show us some math to back up your claims. Statistics isn't about feelings or what things seem to be.it is about observable fact. You won't be able to come up with anything valid because you are 100 percent wrong.
