Lucky lottery lady outed as Stanford University statistics PhD

Aug 8, 2011, 2:43 pm (74 comments)

Insider Buzz

She was called the luckiest woman in the world.

But now that luck is being called into question by some who think that winning the lottery four times is more than just a coincidental spell of good fortune.

Joan R. Ginther, 63, from Texas, won multiple million dollar payouts each time.

First, she won $5.4 million, then a decade later, she won $2 million, then two years later $3 million and finally, in the spring of 2008, she hit a $10 million jackpot.

The odds of this has been calculated at one in eighteen septillion and luck like this could only come once every quadrillion years.

Harper's reporter Nathanial Rich recently wrote an article about Ginther, which questioned the validity of this 'luck' with which she attributes her multiple lottery wins to.

First, he points out, Ginther is a former math professor with a PhD from Stanford University specialising in statistics.

A professor at the Institute for the Study of Gambling & Commercial Gaming at the University of Nevada, Reno, told Rich, "When something this unlikely happens in a casino, you arrest 'em first and ask questions later."

Although Ginther now lives in Las Vegas, she won all four of her lotteries in Texas.

Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop.

Rich proceeds to detail the myriad ways in which Ginther could have gamed the system — including the fact that she may have figured out the algorithm that determines where a winner is placed in each run of scratch-off tickets.

He believes that after Ginther figured out the algorithm, it wouldn't be too difficult to then determine where the tickets would be shipped, as the shipping schedule is apparently fixed, and there were a few sources she could have found it out from.

According to Forbes, the residents of Bishop, Texas, seem to believe God was behind it all.

The Texas Lottery Commission told Rich that Ginther must have been 'born under a lucky star', and that they don't suspect foul play.

Thanks to Dave for the tip.

Daily Mail

Comments

Hermanus104's avatarHermanus104

There is nothing that says that this cannot be the one year in a quadrillion where it happens.

jeffrey's avatarjeffrey

sounds like she jacked the system. glad i didn't play. supposed to be random but it isn't. if someone snitched then there is fraud involved.

Stack47

"Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop."

Most store owners feel lucky if they sell a $5000 winner, but THREE million dollar plus winners in two years does raise an eyebrow; especially when the three winners are the same person.

tnhope's avatartnhope

Thud

tnhope's avatartnhope

Quote: Originally posted by jeffrey on Aug 8, 2011

sounds like she jacked the system. glad i didn't play. supposed to be random but it isn't. if someone snitched then there is fraud involved.

mmmhumm ... random? it isn't..

check out the cash 3  midday august 1st to august 7 220??? 220??? 220???  somebody getting the hook up huhGroup Hug doubles right...but in the same order BS

Boney526's avatarBoney526

Quote: Originally posted by tnhope on Aug 8, 2011

Thud

EDIT: No idea why I quoted that.

 

I don't see how the odds could possibly be in the septillions, I'm assuming the calculated those odds by multiplying the odds of winning each of those prizes together, without accounting for the fact that she probably played a lot more than 4 tickets.

And to reverse engineer the algorithm that "randomly" (as random as a computer can get) distributes the prizes would be problematic to say the least.  She'd have had to buy millions of tickets, and then hope for that tiny chance there's a distinct pattern to the distribution, or some way to determine how the algorithm placed them.  They'd also have to be in a row, or placed in order, or something like that.

That's not to say that she couldn't have obtained information about where the scratch offs would be SOMEHOW, but I doubt the fact that she has a degree in Statistics helped her to do this.  I've taken 2 statistics courses and the only thing that could even be conisdered even remotely close to helping with Lottery is Probability, unless you just wanted to find, say, the average win, standard deviation of a Pick 3 3 way box over 20000 trials.  Or with scratch offs, or w.e. but it still wouldn't be useful.

RJOh's avatarRJOh

What ever happened to those reporters who use to write "lotteries are voluntary taxes for the uneducated and stupid"?   Now we're finding out that not every lottery player is uneducated or stupid, but some have actually thought about what they are doing and have a strategy for winning.  Obviously those players calculate their chances of winning differently than that professor at the Institute of Gambling who think anyone who wins more than once should be arrested and questioned.  If they were interested in sharing their strategy, they would go on the Internet and sell it. Besides, the average player wouldn't spend the kind of money those players spend to win even if they do make a profit.

Boney526's avatarBoney526

Quote: Originally posted by tnhope on Aug 8, 2011

mmmhumm ... random? it isn't..

check out the cash 3  midday august 1st to august 7 220??? 220??? 220???  somebody getting the hook up huhGroup Hug doubles right...but in the same order BS

Can't vouch for Tennessee, but this type of stuff will happen from time to time.  Plus I've seen the balls flying around, I know it's random, but I still rarely play Pick 3 anymore (50% payouts made me wanna stop playing, the worse popular Casino Table game - roullette - pays back 94ish percent, so I'll stick w/ JP games, where I'm not thinking about the low payout lol)

 

If Tennessee uses RNGs then I can say without a doubt it's not random.  B/C computers are essentially non-random (there's very few ways to get randomness from a PC, see random.org) but for all intensive purposes, RNGs are basically the same.  They are essentially random, even though they'd have to use an algorithm to pick the next number, which is a set of pre-defined steps, making it not ACTUALLY random, it just appears to be random for all technical purposes.

 

Point is, unless there's a glitch, bad programming, or cheating going on, for all intensive purposes RNGs are fine.  It's just that those 3 instances can occur a lot easier in RNGs than with Ping Pong balls, which is why Lotteries that want to appear to have integrity should use them.

 

I remember one month where NJ saw like 10 repeats straight, and that's with balls, which are 100 percent random.

Jon D's avatarJon D

I definitely think it's possible for this to more than just pure luck.

The whole idea of scratch-offs is to hide the winners in the manufacturing and distribution process. The problem is that they need to somewhat evenly distribute the top prizes otherwise they could lose money, every million tickets or so. It is not purely random and there is definitely some kind of algorithm. So if someone can determine which ranges of ticket books are more likely to contain the top prizes, they "buy heavy" on those ranges, and every once in a while, they will hit. Similar to blackjack, betting more when the deck is hot.

Her first big win allowed her to retire with a lot of time and money on her hands, and then over a decade later came the 3 scratch top prize wins every 2 years. Allegedly using such a scheme to significanly improver her odds.

With her resources, she could have been buying many books/rolls of tickets, and doing statistical analysis on the ticket and book numbers to try and figure out the algorithm of the winners insertions. And if she had the help of the store clerk, think of how much more data she could put into her database by going in the store at night and entering in all those piles of winning tickets, and maybe more if the clerk was able to document people jumping up and down with >$1000 winners as well. But if there was collusion between her, the store and the ticket distribution to route certain ranges of books there, then that definitely crosses the line.

Very interesting...

Boney526's avatarBoney526

Obviously an algorithm is used, but without information of every scratch off printed, and even with it, you could end up with a multitude of algorithms that would achieve the same result.

 

Unless I just don't understand what an algorithm is, but I was under the assumption that an algorithm is a set of steps.

RJOh's avatarRJOh

If the company producing the tickets has an algorithm for distributing the prizes on the tickets then it was known by several people.  However since she brought all her winning tickets at the same store in a little town of less than four thousand people, it wouldn't have helped her knowing it if the winning tickets weren't distributed in that town at that store.

Jon D's avatarJon D

Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on Aug 8, 2011

Obviously an algorithm is used, but without information of every scratch off printed, and even with it, you could end up with a multitude of algorithms that would achieve the same result.

 

Unless I just don't understand what an algorithm is, but I was under the assumption that an algorithm is a set of steps.

You don't need to figure out the algorithm itself, just the result.

Scratch-offs are unlike all other lottery draw games. You are not dealing with a pseudo-random number generator, not dealing with probabilities on an undertermined timeline. You are dealing with a finite set.

The lottery publishes the data. A fixed number of tickets total for the game, and sequential numbering of ticket books, a fixed number of prizes in each prize tier. So you just need a sampling, like in any statistical analysis, to reveal patterns. This can allow you to improve you chances of winning a top prize by not buying ranges of tickets that are not likely to contain top prizes.

eddessaknight's avatareddessaknight

Congrats to the lucky + lady, we will probably learn how iy happend.

NEVER SAY NEVER

EddessaKnight   Sun Smiley

Boney526's avatarBoney526

Quote: Originally posted by Jon D on Aug 8, 2011

You don't need to figure out the algorithm itself, just the result.

Scratch-offs are unlike all other lottery draw games. You are not dealing with a pseudo-random number generator, not dealing with probabilities on an undertermined timeline. You are dealing with a finite set.

The lottery publishes the data. A fixed number of tickets total for the game, and sequential numbering of ticket books, a fixed number of prizes in each prize tier. So you just need a sampling, like in any statistical analysis, to reveal patterns. This can allow you to improve you chances of winning a top prize by not buying ranges of tickets that are not likely to contain top prizes.

I suppose if it's not random enough, then you could find patterns with smallrt samples of data, I was sort of assuming it is random, but that would probably change state by state, if any states are random.

 

I always assumed they have a batch of say, 14 million computerized tickets, and a random number generator picks from them when are ordered by stores, and the digital tickets are printed out and sent off.  If they decide to add more, they can easily do so, without the need to print them out until they are ordered.

 

But even then, the only times an advanatage is present is when top prizes are still remaining, while other tickets are sold, and you can be sure that they haven't added more tickets to the pool - without telling you how many were printed. 

 

I suppose you could look up how many winners there were and compare it to the numbers of starting top tier prizes, with the current number to gain a small advantage.

mike4u2nb

This is funny a person winning four time some
questioning but non questioning one area in California that wins 95% of all lottery
games. That is scratchers, big spin, mega, the area wins almost all prizes
above one hundred thousand dollar yet more than half are unclaimed. The area in
California is a fifty mile radius around Los Angeles. If these women lived in
the LA area would this still be an issue? Now I know a lot of you will say LA
has the most winner because they buy the most tickets, really check the lotteries
web page for the area were ticket sales have increased 13% and it is not the LA
area .As per the lottery web site half of all sale are from Southern California
and half from Northern California.

maringoman's avatarmaringoman

I smell a big fat nasty hood rat. Methinks its an inside job. Follow the money...

joshuacloak's avatarjoshuacloak

you guys want random, play mega millions and powerball

 

Now that is where Luck Rules,  even a person specialising in statistics will have a epic uphill fight vs them 2 games

 

however as others have pointed out,  the card games are fixed, they just hide where the winners are shipped and when they shipped out in each game

i however do like what some states do with play it again, like tennessee

all the losers can be entered into a random raffle draw, and 1 winner at end of the game life form the raffle get the top prize they lost, its a nice random element to sure win in a fixed game,

 

besides that, their nonething random about it, winners and losers was fixed before a single person buyed any.

 

at lest with mega millions and powerball, we don't have to worry about it being fixed, its just luck vs insane odds

rdgrnr's avatarrdgrnr

I'm not saying there was any hanky-panky going on but if there was, I would think that rather than her figuring out the algos and all that, it was something much more simple.

Like a person or persons at the Lottery or at the printing outfit telling his friend that he's sending the winning ticket(s) to his store and the store owner tells the lady to come in and buy that book of tickets and they all clandestinely split the winnings in some manner.

It's been done before.

I'd be interested to know if the store owner just happened to move to another country after closing the store.

And if his name was Patel.

 

Edit: When I say it's been done before I don't mean this whole scenario but only someone tipping off someone else about where the winning ticket(s) are.

dallascowboyfan's avatardallascowboyfan

WOW!!!!! I don't know what to make of thisWhat?

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Aug 8, 2011

I'm not saying there was any hanky-panky going on but if there was, I would think that rather than her figuring out the algos and all that, it was something much more simple.

Like a person or persons at the Lottery or at the printing outfit telling his friend that he's sending the winning ticket(s) to his store and the store owner tells the lady to come in and buy that book of tickets and they all clandestinely split the winnings in some manner.

It's been done before.

I'd be interested to know if the store owner just happened to move to another country after closing the store.

And if his name was Patel.

 

Edit: When I say it's been done before I don't mean this whole scenario but only someone tipping off someone else about where the winning ticket(s) are.

Does seem to good to be true.

diamondpalace's avatardiamondpalace

Winning the jackpot multiple times with ball games then it can be seen as having good luck.
When winning with predetermind lottery games (scratch offs) or RNG type lottery multiple times, in millions, jackpot prizes, then there's a small chance being inside work.

If this is the work of highly sophisicated inside job, then someone has to stand forward to claim the winning tickets. Someone with a math degree, like a PhD so they don't question how it was done, because it's too complex you know at PhD level and all. Perfect mascot for the team.

Then again, there are amazing people in this world with unbelivable abilities and good fortunes that is out of this world. That this winner is among one the lucky few.

jarasan's avatarjarasan

This is making some heads explode.  I don't think these are scratchies.  This story was on Drudge.  You can't explain it away.  Accept it. Someone has a good methodology (system) whatever to win,  just like the guy a few months ago who has repeatedly won.  It is possible. 

One can conclude this:

If you a have a good bank and system,  play it and stick to it.

If you don't have a good bank and system.....................quick pig and hope for the best.

Release the pigs!

atoz

Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on Aug 8, 2011

Can't vouch for Tennessee, but this type of stuff will happen from time to time.  Plus I've seen the balls flying around, I know it's random, but I still rarely play Pick 3 anymore (50% payouts made me wanna stop playing, the worse popular Casino Table game - roullette - pays back 94ish percent, so I'll stick w/ JP games, where I'm not thinking about the low payout lol)

 

If Tennessee uses RNGs then I can say without a doubt it's not random.  B/C computers are essentially non-random (there's very few ways to get randomness from a PC, see random.org) but for all intensive purposes, RNGs are basically the same.  They are essentially random, even though they'd have to use an algorithm to pick the next number, which is a set of pre-defined steps, making it not ACTUALLY random, it just appears to be random for all technical purposes.

 

Point is, unless there's a glitch, bad programming, or cheating going on, for all intensive purposes RNGs are fine.  It's just that those 3 instances can occur a lot easier in RNGs than with Ping Pong balls, which is why Lotteries that want to appear to have integrity should use them.

 

I remember one month where NJ saw like 10 repeats straight, and that's with balls, which are 100 percent random.

Boney the way I read it...3 of these wins were scrtatch offs.............  Personally I find it hard to believe everything is kosher.  I have always wondered about the people who work at the places that make the scratch offs.   I think they could figure out a way to tell where the big payouts would be if they are not an honest person.

Lucki723

"Ginther is a former math professor with a PhD from Stanford University specialising in statistics."

Nuff Said

jarasan's avatarjarasan

Quote: Originally posted by jarasan on Aug 8, 2011

This is making some heads explode.  I don't think these are scratchies.  This story was on Drudge.  You can't explain it away.  Accept it. Someone has a good methodology (system) whatever to win,  just like the guy a few months ago who has repeatedly won.  It is possible. 

One can conclude this:

If you a have a good bank and system,  play it and stick to it.

If you don't have a good bank and system.....................quick pig and hope for the best.

Release the pigs!

I stand corrected.  I didn't read it to the bottom on Drudge.  Three wins were scratchies and one was not.   Big scratchie games are expensive requiring a bank,  but she did hit a non scratchie jackpot and she'll probably hit another before the end of a quadrillion years.

tg636

It wasn't luck. But asking her how she did it is like asking her if she wants to be arrested and sued.

The first win was luck, then she used her good fortune to study and investigate and learned something very interesting.

But we know it is in the states' interest to assure lottery players no one can figure out the games so Texas says "Nope, nothing to see here, move along." But I think this quote from The Sting says it..."What was I supposed to do - call him for cheating better than me, in front of the others?"

imagine's avatarimagine

I did a digital download of this mag, just for this article. Just a brief summary.

The reporter talked to a statistics PhD who said the odds of one person hitting the 3 scratchers is much steeper than 18 septillion.

The reporter spoke to a state official from another lottery who said  "I am certain that the Texas Lottery is doing a serious investigation, and they are not going to let anyone know about it."   An IRS investigation is the what the locals say promted the store closing.

The scratch tickets are the most vunerable ticket for fraud in the lottery.   https://www.lotterypost.com/news/127545

Joan Ginther won 4 jackpots.She was in the Virgin Islands on vacation, according to locals for the pick 6 ticket win.  Her elderly father was the ticket holder and gave it to Joan to cash in.

Joan Ginther has lived in Las Vegas for many years.  She has returned to the town twice a year to buy tickets.  She stays in a local hotel and scratches away.  Sometimes she can be found in the store passing out $1 or $2 tickets to anyone who comes in.  Joan is known in Bishop for her kind and generious nature, even buying a car for a local woman, who she did not even know.

Locals say she did not play scratchers since her pick 6 win in 93.  They do report her coming into town twice a year, to buy tickets for the last 5 or 6 years.  Estimates of 3,000 tickets a year. Locals say the store owner holds tickets for Joan,  anyone asking is told they are sold out of certain tickets.  Joan buys $50 tickets that are 20 to a sealed pack. 

How could Joan know when to buy tickets, through a request from the Texas Lottery for public info on tickets or the web.

Dawn Nettles runs  a TX lotto website.  She is one of best TX lottery watchdogs.  She asks for info on a weekly basis and posts it on her website.  The games Joan Ginther won had 3 top prize tickets.

Dawn has noticed the 1st grand prize is won quickly, then they hold the other 2 jp tickets till the end.  (Which is a good idea, who would race out to pay $50 for a ticket when all the top prizes are gone. )

All 3  tickets Joan bought were  the second to win, near the end of the game.   

It's 7 pages, so I hope I summed it up okay.

imagine's avatarimagine

Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Aug 8, 2011

If the company producing the tickets has an algorithm for distributing the prizes on the tickets then it was known by several people.  However since she brought all her winning tickets at the same store in a little town of less than four thousand people, it wouldn't have helped her knowing it if the winning tickets weren't distributed in that town at that store.

Texas is so free with it's information that Joan could have figured out from the info on the web,  and the destination of such tickets.

A sparcely populated town like Bishop would help, with the lack of ticket sales, or if the store owner held the packs for her.

Trillionaire

Now that I understand the real importance of math and stats, I wish I had paid more attention to these subjects than to girls. Although, to be honest, the girls were a helluva lot more fun.

jimmy4164

This is an old story, bandied about here before.

It is nothing but harebrained, unproven, speculation, designed to get tongues wagging.

So, the odds of her winning these 4 lottery games is 1 in 18 septillion?  I'm afraid not.  Some idiot multipled together the probabilities of winning each of the 4 to come up with that number.  Just as the probability of flipping a coin heads is 50%, no matter how many times it previously came up heads, so is the probability of winning a subsequent lottery prize of any amount WHATEVER THE GAME WAS DESIGNED FOR, no matter how many games the player had won leading up to that day.

This is an absurd story which does no more than propagate fallacious thinking about probability and lotteries.

The illogic in it is farcical!

"Although Ginther now lives in Las Vegas, she won all four of her lotteries in Texas.

Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop.

Rich proceeds to detail the myriad ways in which Ginther could have gamed the system — including the fact that she may have figured out the algorithm that determines where a winner is placed in each run of scratch-off tickets."

It wouldn't matter if she had multiple PhDs in all the sciences; the implications of this last sentence are foolish!

"The Texas Lottery Commission told Rich that Ginther must have been 'born under a lucky star', and that they don't suspect foul play."

RJOh made the most compelling observation that anyone should be able to comprehend at 5:27 PM yesterday!

--Jimmy4164

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174

imagine's avatarimagine

jimmy4164

The odds came from a series of mathmatecians that the AP consulted when the original story came out.

The author consulted a statician who said actually they are much higher.

 

I think you posted the wrong link.  That thread has been closed for a year.

jeffrey's avatarjeffrey

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Aug 9, 2011

This is an old story, bandied about here before.

It is nothing but harebrained, unproven, speculation, designed to get tongues wagging.

So, the odds of her winning these 4 lottery games is 1 in 18 septillion?  I'm afraid not.  Some idiot multipled together the probabilities of winning each of the 4 to come up with that number.  Just as the probability of flipping a coin heads is 50%, no matter how many times it previously came up heads, so is the probability of winning a subsequent lottery prize of any amount WHATEVER THE GAME WAS DESIGNED FOR, no matter how many games the player had won leading up to that day.

This is an absurd story which does no more than propagate fallacious thinking about probability and lotteries.

The illogic in it is farcical!

"Although Ginther now lives in Las Vegas, she won all four of her lotteries in Texas.

Three of her wins, all in two-year intervals, were by scratch-off tickets bought at the same mini mart in the town of Bishop.

Rich proceeds to detail the myriad ways in which Ginther could have gamed the system — including the fact that she may have figured out the algorithm that determines where a winner is placed in each run of scratch-off tickets."

It wouldn't matter if she had multiple PhDs in all the sciences; the implications of this last sentence are foolish!

"The Texas Lottery Commission told Rich that Ginther must have been 'born under a lucky star', and that they don't suspect foul play."

RJOh made the most compelling observation that anyone should be able to comprehend at 5:27 PM yesterday!

--Jimmy4164

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174

where did you study math? sharpen those pencils and try again.Agree with stupid

jimmy4164

Quote: Originally posted by imagine on Aug 9, 2011

jimmy4164

The odds came from a series of mathmatecians that the AP consulted when the original story came out.

The author consulted a statician who said actually they are much higher.

 

I think you posted the wrong link.  That thread has been closed for a year.

No, I'm referring to an earlier treatment of this same Ginther "affair."  When that ridiculous odds number was mentioned before, it was a joke to anyone who knows that the only way to get such an astronomical number is to MULTIPLY the odds of each of the 4 games by each other, which is patently absurd, unless you were predicting IN ADVANCE that you were going to win 4 specific games, IN ADVANCE!!  It's still a joke!  Of course, if you believe that the odds of a coin coming up heads is less that 50% after it's been flipped 10 times heads, then the x septillions number will compute for you!  Has any PhD math professor come forward to own that claim above?

I stand by my statements above. 

The link I posted was purposely to my own year old thread, one that needs to be read by all...

imagine's avatarimagine

No professor is named in the article.

I thought it was the link for this:

"RJOh made the most compelling observation that anyone should be able to comprehend at 5:27 PM yesterday!"

What thread are you refrencing, was gonna have a look see, thanks.

joker17

I think eveyone is thinking too hard. S**t happens. Even with random distribution of scratch offs, there's bound to be clusters of winners. It's a given, rare, but nevertheless it happens. It looks biased, but it's not. Spread-out randomness will, from time to time experience events where it will cross paths within itself creating clusters or anomolies.  Highs and lows where the lines intersect.

I knew someone in the Navy, in Key West where I was stationed years ago, who was struck by lightning 3 times years before. S**t happens.

joker17

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Aug 9, 2011

No, I'm referring to an earlier treatment of this same Ginther "affair."  When that ridiculous odds number was mentioned before, it was a joke to anyone who knows that the only way to get such an astronomical number is to MULTIPLY the odds of each of the 4 games by each other, which is patently absurd, unless you were predicting IN ADVANCE that you were going to win 4 specific games, IN ADVANCE!!  It's still a joke!  Of course, if you believe that the odds of a coin coming up heads is less that 50% after it's been flipped 10 times heads, then the x septillions number will compute for you!  Has any PhD math professor come forward to own that claim above?

I stand by my statements above. 

The link I posted was purposely to my own year old thread, one that needs to be read by all...

The coin being flipped 10 times heads you think, may still have a 50/50 chance on the 11th, but what would you personally bet on the 11th?

No math jargon or any other theories, just answer the question honestly. Thanx...

Delta Draw

+
I think it is pure luck and a coincidence that the winner is a statistician. The only way to beat astronomical odds is
luck.

-
But,… would not the odds for each game stand on their own? If the person plays
a new hand in a new game are not the odds for that game set? The guy is on a lucky
roll. Same thing happens to a gambler who goes from game to game in a casino.

?
Why would lotteries distribute winners to just one general area of a state? Are
those not lucky areas even if a computer
is used to decide them? Computers do not understand luck.

~?!!
I don’t know about you but septillions is way bigger than I can comprehend,
therefore I like luck for an explanation. Scru Texas running up a hill; are
they feeling unlucky???

~++
If all of one's good luck has been given
to another, I say go for it Mr. G. You did your homework and beat the odds when
you figured out which bowl the goldfish were in. Random is a beautiful thing.

!?~?
The man knew about his game and played to win. His computer will be attacked,
his phone will be tapped and he is guilty first, without any fact. They will
look into his debit, credit and cash machine
activity. If he has a sexy new car with GPS they can paint quite a picture. They
will want to reconstruct his steps looking for patters because someone wants to
know HOW to do it. Speculation is all that is needed to raise an
eyebrow; the man is worth a chunk of change.He cannot keep that if he figured out a way to WIN. Could be some Texas ranger be wanting
to make a name for himself? Is chuck
Norris weird?

 

JOKER.
You were in the NAVY?

belle$star3!

I believe that this lady honestly won this money.  Congratulations to Ms. Ginther & enjoy your money!

Delta Draw

Quote: Originally posted by belle$star3! on Aug 9, 2011

I believe that this lady honestly won this money.  Congratulations to Ms. Ginther & enjoy your money!

Oh.
It was a woman? That is a very strong reason for luck coming into play. No way
can a woman be smart enough to outsmart a bunch of texicans. It has to be luck
boys, LADY LUCK!

joker17

Quote: Originally posted by Delta Draw on Aug 9, 2011

+
I think it is pure luck and a coincidence that the winner is a statistician. The only way to beat astronomical odds is
luck.

-
But,… would not the odds for each game stand on their own? If the person plays
a new hand in a new game are not the odds for that game set? The guy is on a lucky
roll. Same thing happens to a gambler who goes from game to game in a casino.

?
Why would lotteries distribute winners to just one general area of a state? Are
those not lucky areas even if a computer
is used to decide them? Computers do not understand luck.

~?!!
I don’t know about you but septillions is way bigger than I can comprehend,
therefore I like luck for an explanation. Scru Texas running up a hill; are
they feeling unlucky???

~++
If all of one's good luck has been given
to another, I say go for it Mr. G. You did your homework and beat the odds when
you figured out which bowl the goldfish were in. Random is a beautiful thing.

!?~?
The man knew about his game and played to win. His computer will be attacked,
his phone will be tapped and he is guilty first, without any fact. They will
look into his debit, credit and cash machine
activity. If he has a sexy new car with GPS they can paint quite a picture. They
will want to reconstruct his steps looking for patters because someone wants to
know HOW to do it. Speculation is all that is needed to raise an
eyebrow; the man is worth a chunk of change.He cannot keep that if he figured out a way to WIN. Could be some Texas ranger be wanting
to make a name for himself? Is chuck
Norris weird?

 

JOKER.
You were in the NAVY?

Yes, I was in the Navy Between December, 1982...... to......December, 1986. It stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.....lol

Delta Draw

Quote: Originally posted by joker17 on Aug 9, 2011

Yes, I was in the Navy Between December, 1982...... to......December, 1986. It stands for Never Again Volunteer Yourself.....lol

Well at least you know what you don’t want to do for the rest of your life. Thank you for
your service.

Let me say that I am most ashamed of that malcontent so-called patriot (tax weasel)who has very bigoted, racist
and  overt islamophobic views. You are much more an American in my eyes.

I think the lady is OKAY and she should keep all her money. All this speculation is a
reason to take her money away.

sully16's avatarsully16

Quote: Originally posted by Delta Draw on Aug 9, 2011

Oh.
It was a woman? That is a very strong reason for luck coming into play. No way
can a woman be smart enough to outsmart a bunch of texicans. It has to be luck
boys, LADY LUCK!

How could a woman understand the sum of x minus xbar divided by n-1 squared ? Finding the standard deviation on the bell curve must be a tough one. Understanding the cpk or ppk couldn't possibly come from sitting in a class room and learning it.

jarasan's avatarjarasan

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Aug 9, 2011

How could a woman understand the sum of x minus xbar divided by n-1 squared ? Finding the standard deviation on the bell curve must be a tough one. Understanding the cpk or ppk couldn't possibly come from sitting in a class room and learning it.

jimmy4164

Quote: Originally posted by imagine on Aug 9, 2011

No professor is named in the article.

I thought it was the link for this:

"RJOh made the most compelling observation that anyone should be able to comprehend at 5:27 PM yesterday!"

What thread are you refrencing, was gonna have a look see, thanks.

Maybe this link will help you understand why I posted what I did earlier this AM...

Click HERE and note the date of this posting.

Subscribe to this news story