€13m Lotto winner from Dalkey

PCros

Fair play to whoever it was. I might aswell do my lotto on the southside from now on. €14m two months ago now this.

Personally I think since they added the 3 extra numbers into the lotto its impossible to win......what 3 winners so far this year with two draws a week?

The way its going it could be 6 winners this year from 104 draws. Shoite.

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/city-news/dalkey-hunts-euro13m-lotto-winner-1753641.html

Aodan83

PCros wrote: »

The way its going it could be 6 winners this year from 104 draws. Shoite.

Pretty sweet for whoever does win it though.

PCros

Aodan83 wrote: »

Pretty sweet for whoever does win it though.

Of course, but I'd prefer it to be spread out more.

Dennis the Stone

Wow. Lucky frigger.

CatFromHue

if i remember from my leaving cert maths

to win the lotto now with 45 balls the chances are
45x44x43x42x41x40 = 5864443200 to 1

with 42 balls are
42x41x40x39x38x37 = 3776965920 to 1

those 3 balls make it 64% harder to win

but i was never any good at maths though

mike65

Dalkey? So they really needed the money then?

SV

Fair play to them.

Happy days

Squiggle

CatFromHue wrote: »

if i remember from my leaving cert maths

to win the lotto now with 45 balls the chances are
45x44x43x42x41x40 = 5864443200 to 1

with 42 balls are
42x41x40x39x38x37 = 3776965920 to 1

those 3 balls make it 64% harder to win

but i was never any good at maths though

You're right you weren't. :pac:

There are 45 numbers, you have to choose 6.

45C6 = 8,145,060 possible 6 number combinations.

When there were 42 numbers the number of 6 number combinations was

42C6 = 5,245,786.

The whole purpose of increasing the number of balls to 45 is that there are more combinations to be covered by all players, less likely that the winning combination will be selected by a player and hence more roll overs which in turn attracts more players for the following draw !

Fratton Fred

It could be me! FFS don't tell the missus, she'll be off to Dundrum like a shot

PCros

Squiggle wrote: »

The whole purpose of increasing the number of balls to 45 is that there are more combinations to be covered by all players, less likely that the winning combination will be selected by a player and hence more roll overs which in turn attracts more players for the following draw !

In other words fleecing us!

Oafley Jones

Squiggle wrote: »

You're right you weren't. :pac:

There are 45 numbers, you have to choose 6.

45C6 = 8,145,060 possible 6 number combinations.

When there were 42 numbers the number of 6 number combinations was

42C6 = 5,245,786.

The whole purpose of increasing the number of balls to 45 is that there are more combinations to be covered by all players, less likely that the winning combination will be selected by a player and hence more roll overs which in turn attracts more players for the following draw !

Remember that there is a minimum play of two lines, so the odds of winning are just over 4 million to 1.

thewools

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Remember that there is a minimum play of two lines, so the odds of winning are just over 4 million to 1.

Eh no....

8,145,060 for one line

8,145,060 - 1 = 8,145,059 for two

Fad

Its to stop people buying all the possible tickets and winning, which has been done (kinda), not really to fleece you, it just does that in the process :pac:.

javaboy

thewools wrote: »

Eh no....

8,145,060 for one line

8,145,060 - 1 = 8,145,059 for two

Eh no. Oafley Jones was right.

Abi

Hold up.. somebody from Dalkey did the lottery? They will never live down the shame.

Some old bat will start petitioning to have the fiendish lottery machine dumped in the Liffey, on the grounds that said lottery machine will cause the house prices to plummet in Dalkey.

thewools

javaboy wrote: »

Eh no. Oafley Jones was right.

Me bad....

Thought about it again. All those probability and permatation days coming back to haunt me again.

Yes I remember now - so if I buy 1000 tickets the odds are 8,145 to one?

Anyone like those odds?

USER X

You'd have to wonder how many of those possible combinations/arrangements are highly unlikely or impossible like 42,42,42,42,42,42 or 1,2,3,4,5,6. I know the ticket would not be accepted but if your considering the stats/probability then these would need to be removed.

javaboy

USER X wrote: »

You'd have to wonder how many of those possible combinations/arrangements are highly unlikely or impossible like 42,42,42,42,42,42 or 1,2,3,4,5,6. I know the ticket would not be accepted but if your considering the stats/probability then these would need to be removed.

42,42,42,42,42,42 isn't included in those figures. The figure of 8,145,060 is correct.

As for 1,2,3,4,5,6 it's just as likely as any other permutation, that is to say it's incredibly unlikely. (8,145,060 to 1 to be exact). Interestingly enough 1,2,3,4,5,6 is supposed to be a very common choice of numbers.

CatFromHue

if there are 45 balls you have 45 choices for the first number. that ball is taken out leaving 44 balls
so for the second number you now have 44 choices. when the second ball is drawn it is taken out leaving 43 balls. so you have 43 choices, and so on.

javaboy

CatFromHue wrote: »

if there are 45 balls you have 45 choices for the first number. that ball is taken out leaving 44 balls
so for the second number you now have 44 choices. when the second ball is drawn it is taken out leaving 43 balls. so you have 43 choices, and so on.

Yes but order isn't important in the Lotto so the real calculation is:

T: total balls (45)
X: number of balls drawn (6)

T!/((T-X)!*X!)

or

(45*44*43*42*41*40)/(6*5*4*3*2)

javaboy

javaboy wrote: »

Yes but order isn't important in the Lotto so the real calculation is:

T: total balls (45)
X: number of balls drawn (6)

T!/((T-X)!*X!)

or

(45*44*43*42*41*40)/(6*5*4*3*2)

really?

i always though it was 1/(45*44*43*42*41*40)

Flaccus

nope, javaboy is right

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics

jape

The lotto is for stupid people.

SV

jape wrote: »

The lotto is for stupid people.

here we go again

why is that?

Flaccus

Flaccus wrote: »

nope, javaboy is right

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottery_mathematics

cool. always thought the odds were way over 150m to 1 or something..

Peteee

javaboy wrote: »

Interestingly enough 1,2,3,4,5,6 is supposed to be a very common choice of numbers.

You'd have to be an idiot to put down those numbers.

In the event of them coming out (Just as likely as any other combination) you'd have to share the jackpot with about 200 other dunces who put down that combination too.

jape

SV wrote: »

here we go again

why is that?

Because, as pointed out earlier the odds of winning are 8,145,060/1

A single line costs €2, therefore if the jackpot is €5 million for example, you are only getting 2.5 million/1 odds on an 8 million/1 chance.

The jackpot would need to be somewhere close to €16,290,120 , all the time, for it to be worthwhile.

You can get much closer odds to the real odds of an event occuring, by investing your money in betting on sport/etc.

SV

jape wrote: »

Because, as pointed out earlier the odds of winning are 8,145,060/1

A single line costs €2, therefore if the jackpot is €5 million for example, you are only getting 2.5 million/1 odds on an 8 million/1 chance.

The jackpot would need to be somewhere close to €16,290,120 , all the time, for it to be worthwhile.

You can get much closer odds to the real odds of an event occuring, by investing your money in betting on sport/etc.

Ok, but that's only the jackpot

there is various other prizes as well.
It's very easy to win money on the lotto.

That_Guy

mike65 wrote: »

Dalkey? So they really needed the money then?

They need to pay the butler, feed the ponies, petrol for the fifty BMW's..... Yep they definitely needed it. Recession hits the southsiders two you know.

javaboy

jape wrote: »

Because, as pointed out earlier the odds of winning are 8,145,060/1

A single line costs €2, therefore if the jackpot is €5 million for example, you are only getting 2.5 million/1 odds on an 8 million/1 chance.

The jackpot would need to be somewhere close to €16,290,120 , all the time, for it to be worthwhile.

You can get much closer odds to the real odds of an event occuring, by investing your money in betting on sport/etc.

While technically you're correct, you're missing the point of the lotto. For most people a couple of quid on the lotto each week isn't going to be missed. It's not a big hole in your wallet.

Statistically you're right. The odds of making any kind of profit on the lotto long term are minuscule. But betting on sports or investing your money is unlikely to make you a millionaire even if you are really good/lucky.

With the lottery there is always that chance, however slim that you might become an instant millionaire. It comes down to the old "If you're not in you can't win". That's what it's all about. Sure the odds are bad but the price is almost negligible. It might mean one less pint a week to be in with a chance of becoming an overnight millionaire. That's what they're selling.

Most people who play the lotto aren't idiots. They just think that feeling of possibly becoming instantly rich is worth the small price.

ctrl-alt-delete

jape wrote: »

Because, as pointed out earlier the odds of winning are 8,145,060/1

A single line costs €2, therefore if the jackpot is €5 million for example, you are only getting 2.5 million/1 odds on an 8 million/1 chance.

The jackpot would need to be somewhere close to €16,290,120 , all the time, for it to be worthwhile.

You can get much closer odds to the real odds of an event occuring, by investing your money in betting on sport/etc.

But for €2 do you not think €5million is not worthwhile?


Just to add, heard on newstalk this morning that the slogan might be changed to

"it could be you too" for the Dalkey thing

Mr. Presentable

Peteee wrote: »

You'd have to be an idiot to put down those numbers.

In the event of them coming out (Just as likely as any other combination) you'd have to share the jackpot with about 200 other dunces who put down that combination too.

Except of course, you'd still get something. Half a percent, yes, but when those numbers come up imagine how the poor sap who picked 2,4,6,8,10,12, will feel

Latchy

Of all the winners , in all the towns and suburbs , in all the world ......it had to be Bogie .....er Dalkey .

Perhaps it was a big syndicate ?

Dennis the Stone

I was going to pick 1,3,5,7,9,11 last week but decided against it as the numbers are a bit too odd.

melekalikimaka

SV wrote: »

here we go again

why is that?

Lotteries have the worse odds against winning than any other type of gambling. Lotteries take money from people who have the least amount of money and people who least understand their odds of winning, and redistribute the lottery proceeds to pay for public services just like an optional tax for those who can be fooled. Simple put, the lottery is a stupid man’s tax.

a quick google explains it all

Latchy

Which is why syndicates are very popular, if only for the obious reasons .

DirkVoodoo

I remember a friend of mine told me that some old lad he worked with had been playing the lotto for the last 30 or so years and couldn't understand how he had not won it yet, twas funny

I think the best way to do it is with a syndicates, as Latchy said.

Latchy

Funny how some people who 'religiously' play the lotto every week ,convince themself's that they will win and they are the ones who do

PCros

Latchy wrote: »

Perhaps it was a big syndicate ?

Nope, it was a €4 quickpick.

Chardee MacDennis

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I remember a friend of mine told me that some old lad he worked with had been playing the lotto for the last 30 or so years and couldn't understand how he had not won it yet, twas funny

I think the best way to do it is with a syndicates, as Latchy said.

he was playing the lotto 9 years before it started? what a waste of money!

Latchy

PCros wrote: »

Nope, it was a €4 quickpick.

The perfect way to win the lotto .

Fratton Fred

melekalikimaka wrote: »

Lotteries have the worse odds against winning than any other type of gambling. Lotteries take money from people who have the least amount of money and people who least understand their odds of winning, and redistribute the lottery proceeds to pay for public services just like an optional tax for those who can be fooled. Simple put, the lottery is a stupid man’s tax.

a quick google explains it all

Whereas, Paddy Power being absolutely minted indicates that gambling is very profitable....for the bookie.

Fighting Irish

jape wrote: »

The lotto is for stupid people.

its either €8 a week on lotto, or €8 a week on some other bull**** like chocolate

Fighting Irish

melekalikimaka wrote: »

Lotteries have the worse odds against winning than any other type of gambling. Lotteries take money from people who have the least amount of money and people who least understand their odds of winning, and redistribute the lottery proceeds to pay for public services just like an optional tax for those who can be fooled. Simple put, the lottery is a stupid man’s tax.

a quick google explains it all

I understand the odds and i'm not poor, i still do the lotto

you could call anything a "stupid tax"

kazza90210

I bought my ticket in Dalkey, but sadly in the wrong shop


Bet bloody bono won it......

kingtut

Oh who gives a sh*t about computations and permutations!!!

It's simple, buy a ticket and you might win. Don't buy a ticket and you won't win.

ffs :rolleyes:

jape

kingtut wrote: »

Oh who gives a sh*t about computations and permutations!!!

It's simple, buy a ticket and you might win. Don't buy a ticket and you won't win.

ffs :rolleyes:

^ This is why the lotto is so popular. Some people just don't understand.

javaboy

jape wrote: »

^ This is why the lotto is so popular. Some people just don't understand.

No it's you who doesn't understand. The lotto gives bad odds. Everyone knows it including the people who play it week in week out.

But the odds are not the point. €4 or whatever it costs to play now is a small price for knowing as you bend down to scrub the jacks in some pub, file your millionth TPS report or try to explain to yet another moronic member of the public that they can't get a refund without a receipt that there is some small chance, however remote, that you will become an instant millionaire and drop all your worries.

If you don't play the lotto, the chances of you becoming instantly rich are non-existent unless a rich old uncle dies and answers all your prayers or a surgeon accidentally removes the wrong squishy bit from inside you and you get compensation.

If you do play the lotto, there's always that chance.

It doesn't matter that the odds are bad. If the payout was 1 billion euro, yes the odds would be good but it would amount to the same thing. €4 a week for a tiny chance at winning a life changing amount.


Btw I've bought about 4 lotto tickets in my life. I don't play it but I can understand why those who do do.

stovelid

melekalikimaka wrote: »

Lotteries have the worse odds against winning than any other type of gambling. Lotteries take money from people who have the least amount of money and people who least understand their odds of winning, and redistribute the lottery proceeds to pay for public services just like an optional tax for those who can be fooled. Simple put, the lottery is a stupid man’s tax.

a quick google explains it all

The Lotto doesn't only sell a chance; it sells hope. A hope that, however slim, you might win enough to leave your life forever. For some people, that can be enough. Leave them with their dream, killjoy.


/shit: Javaboy said it better.

Messed Up Mind

Just heard on TodayFM news there that the person that won it had travelled from the Wesht since losing his job in a desperate attempt to look for a job in the big shmoke. So he's now 13m euro richer now, although he still doesn't have a job. Lucky. I love hearing stories like this

CatFromHue

im from the area so id just like to say
they stole my lotto numbers!