Bayes Theorem, Conditional Probabilities, Lottery

[i***@gmail.com]

Unconditionally Axiomatic Colleagues of Mine:

I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!

Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.

The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.

There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.

Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!

Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

[duncan smith]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.

No. And if you really understood probability theory you'd know why.

[snip]

Duncan

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.

A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.

Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.

Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?

P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

That's Bayes alright for you, old chap! For more on lottery probabilities (e.g. a number in a lotto combination being ODD and LOW) read this:

http://saliu.com/oddslotto.html

Ion Saliu,

Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/theory-of-probability.html

[duncan smith]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.
A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.
Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.
Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?
P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snip]

Try replying to my post instead of your own. So by your reckoning the
probability of getting a head (and not a tail) on a fair coin toss must
be 1/4, because the probability of a head is 1/2, the probability of not
a tail is 1/2 and the two events aren't mutually exclusive. Up to your
usual standards. Mutual exclusivity is not the basis of the
multiplication rule.

Duncan

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.
A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.
Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.
Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?
P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snip]
Try replying to my post instead of your own. So by your reckoning the
probability of getting a head (and not a tail) on a fair coin toss must
be 1/4, because the probability of a head is 1/2, the probability of not
a tail is 1/2 and the two events aren't mutually exclusive. Up to your
usual standards. Mutual exclusivity is not the basis of the
multiplication rule.
Duncan

Druncan:

You plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey again! That non-mutually exclusive event aggravates your old grudge by an order of magnitude... not to mention the idiocy factor!

Bayes' Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events -- such as coin tossing. You cannot have -- repeat, cannot have -- 'tails' AND 'heads' in one toss. You can have, however, 'tails' AND 'heads' in multiple tosses -- but that's a totally different beast.

The topic on the page I referred to is the Bayes Theorem and determining probabilities from statistical data. But because you had plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey first, you WAS totally in the dark when reading the Web page!

Bayes' Theorem applies to NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events, such as determining probabilities from surveys or polls. Such events consist of TWO phases. They give examples such as drawing a card (a drunken Jack) from a deck. Then the experiment conductor tells the subject that the result was a face card; what is the probability that the PICTURE card was a Jack? That experiment does NOT have two phases -- and it should NOT be given as an example of applications of the Bayes Theorem. Lottery is in the same category.

The best application of the Bayes Theorem is POLLING. It is widely applied in the political campaigns in the United States. Polling is the most typical case of a probabilistic event in two phases. Polls show quite accurate data how various segments of population vote. But nobody can predict the voter turnout.

If the turnout is high in USA, the Democrat Party is heavily favored to win. There was an amazing fact in the 2012 presidential elections. The TV pundits determined that Obama (a Democrat) won -- after only less than 10% of the vote count. The exit polls showed a large number of minorities and women voting. Those two groups vote overwhelmingly Democrat. The Bayes' Theorem indicated, beyond statistical doubt, that Obama would be the winner -- and he was by a substantial margin.

Pull your head from that barrel of whiskey, Druncan!

Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

[duncan smith]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.
A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.
Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.
Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?
P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snip]
Try replying to my post instead of your own. So by your reckoning the
probability of getting a head (and not a tail) on a fair coin toss must
be 1/4, because the probability of a head is 1/2, the probability of not
a tail is 1/2 and the two events aren't mutually exclusive. Up to your
usual standards. Mutual exclusivity is not the basis of the
multiplication rule.
Duncan

You plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey again! That non-mutually exclusive event aggravates your old grudge by an order of magnitude... not to mention the idiocy factor!
Bayes' Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events -- such as coin tossing. You cannot have -- repeat, cannot have -- 'tails' AND 'heads' in one toss. You can have, however, 'tails' AND 'heads' in multiple tosses -- but that's a totally different beast.

Heads and NOT tails are not mutually exclusive. They are different
descriptions of the same event, just like your 3 odd numbers and 3 even
numbers. So you don't multiply the marginal probabilities together. You
could multiply one marginal probability by a conditional probability -
but the conditional probability would be 1.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The topic on the page I referred to is the Bayes Theorem and determining probabilities from statistical data. But because you had plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey first, you WAS totally in the dark when reading the Web page!
Bayes' Theorem applies to NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events, such as determining probabilities from surveys or polls. Such events consist of TWO phases. They give examples such as drawing a card (a drunken Jack) from a deck. Then the experiment conductor tells the subject that the result was a face card; what is the probability that the PICTURE card was a Jack? That experiment does NOT have two phases -- and it should NOT be given as an example of applications of the Bayes Theorem. Lottery is in the same category.

It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in
the case of mutually exclusive events.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The best application of the Bayes Theorem is POLLING. It is widely applied in the political campaigns in the United States. Polling is the most typical case of a probabilistic event in two phases. Polls show quite accurate data how various segments of population vote. But nobody can predict the voter turnout.
If the turnout is high in USA, the Democrat Party is heavily favored to win. There was an amazing fact in the 2012 presidential elections. The TV pundits determined that Obama (a Democrat) won -- after only less than 10% of the vote count. The exit polls showed a large number of minorities and women voting. Those two groups vote overwhelmingly Democrat. The Bayes' Theorem indicated, beyond statistical doubt, that Obama would be the winner -- and he was by a substantial margin.
Pull your head from that barrel of whiskey, Druncan!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing.

Duncan

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.
A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.
Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.
Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?
P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snip]
Try replying to my post instead of your own. So by your reckoning the
probability of getting a head (and not a tail) on a fair coin toss must
be 1/4, because the probability of a head is 1/2, the probability of not
a tail is 1/2 and the two events aren't mutually exclusive. Up to your
usual standards. Mutual exclusivity is not the basis of the
multiplication rule.
Duncan

You plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey again! That non-mutually exclusive event aggravates your old grudge by an order of magnitude... not to mention the idiocy factor!
Bayes' Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events -- such as coin tossing. You cannot have -- repeat, cannot have -- 'tails' AND 'heads' in one toss. You can have, however, 'tails' AND 'heads' in multiple tosses -- but that's a totally different beast.

Heads and NOT tails are not mutually exclusive. They are different
descriptions of the same event, just like your 3 odd numbers and 3 even
numbers. So you don't multiply the marginal probabilities together. You
could multiply one marginal probability by a conditional probability -
but the conditional probability would be 1.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The topic on the page I referred to is the Bayes Theorem and determining probabilities from statistical data. But because you had plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey first, you WAS totally in the dark when reading the Web page!
Bayes' Theorem applies to NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events, such as determining probabilities from surveys or polls. Such events consist of TWO phases. They give examples such as drawing a card (a drunken Jack) from a deck. Then the experiment conductor tells the subject that the result was a face card; what is the probability that the PICTURE card was a Jack? That experiment does NOT have two phases -- and it should NOT be given as an example of applications of the Bayes Theorem. Lottery is in the same category.

It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in
the case of mutually exclusive events.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The best application of the Bayes Theorem is POLLING. It is widely applied in the political campaigns in the United States. Polling is the most typical case of a probabilistic event in two phases. Polls show quite accurate data how various segments of population vote. But nobody can predict the voter turnout.
If the turnout is high in USA, the Democrat Party is heavily favored to win. There was an amazing fact in the 2012 presidential elections. The TV pundits determined that Obama (a Democrat) won -- after only less than 10% of the vote count. The exit polls showed a large number of minorities and women voting. Those two groups vote overwhelmingly Democrat. The Bayes' Theorem indicated, beyond statistical doubt, that Obama would be the winner -- and he was by a substantial margin.
Pull your head from that barrel of whiskey, Druncan!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing.
Duncan

"It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in the case of mutually exclusive events. "

Really? Bayes' is about CONDITIONAL probabilities. 'Probability of A AND B IF B is true.' Your resentment blinds your mind! How can you have 'tails' AND 'heads' in ONE coin toss? Look at what stupidiotic statement your "understanding" of the Bayes Theorem leads to:

"The probability of 'heads' AND 'tails' IF 'heads' is true equals 0."

That's an absurdity, Druncan! It is WORSE even than the examples I ridiculed in my previous post. "What is the probability to draw a Jack if the card drawn was a Face card?" You are saying: "What is the probability to flip a 'heads' IF the toss was a 'tails'?!"

"Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing."

10% is a "very large sample"??? They missed the Florida prediction in 2000 (Gore v. Bush) when the sample was 99%!!! The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court turned himself into... Bayes!

Your mind was loose alright even a few years ago, when we had our skirmishes. But your brains are now totally out of nuts and bolts... unfortunately for you!

Ion Saliu,
Brain Smith At-Large
http://saliu.com/forum/gamblingodds.html

[duncan smith]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

"No" -- what, Druncan? Read the page? Here is an example tailored-made for you.
A survey recorded that the probability of a man named 'Duncan' being 'intelligent' is 55%. The probability of a man named 'Smith' being 'intelligent' is 64%.
Therefore, the probability of a man named 'Duncan AND Smith' being 'intelligent' is 55% * 64% = 35.2%.
Exiting the survey, a man states he is named 'Smith' alright AND Druncan. What is the probability he is intelligent?
P(A|B) = P(A) * P(B) / P(A) = 64% * 0% / 64% = BRRRRRRRRAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[snip]
Try replying to my post instead of your own. So by your reckoning the
probability of getting a head (and not a tail) on a fair coin toss must
be 1/4, because the probability of a head is 1/2, the probability of not
a tail is 1/2 and the two events aren't mutually exclusive. Up to your
usual standards. Mutual exclusivity is not the basis of the
multiplication rule.
Duncan

You plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey again! That non-mutually exclusive event aggravates your old grudge by an order of magnitude... not to mention the idiocy factor!
Bayes' Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events -- such as coin tossing. You cannot have -- repeat, cannot have -- 'tails' AND 'heads' in one toss. You can have, however, 'tails' AND 'heads' in multiple tosses -- but that's a totally different beast.

Heads and NOT tails are not mutually exclusive. They are different
descriptions of the same event, just like your 3 odd numbers and 3 even
numbers. So you don't multiply the marginal probabilities together. You
could multiply one marginal probability by a conditional probability -
but the conditional probability would be 1.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The topic on the page I referred to is the Bayes Theorem and determining probabilities from statistical data. But because you had plunged your head in that barrel of whiskey first, you WAS totally in the dark when reading the Web page!
Bayes' Theorem applies to NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events, such as determining probabilities from surveys or polls. Such events consist of TWO phases. They give examples such as drawing a card (a drunken Jack) from a deck. Then the experiment conductor tells the subject that the result was a face card; what is the probability that the PICTURE card was a Jack? That experiment does NOT have two phases -- and it should NOT be given as an example of applications of the Bayes Theorem. Lottery is in the same category.

It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in
the case of mutually exclusive events.

Post by i***@gmail.com
The best application of the Bayes Theorem is POLLING. It is widely applied in the political campaigns in the United States. Polling is the most typical case of a probabilistic event in two phases. Polls show quite accurate data how various segments of population vote. But nobody can predict the voter turnout.
If the turnout is high in USA, the Democrat Party is heavily favored to win. There was an amazing fact in the 2012 presidential elections. The TV pundits determined that Obama (a Democrat) won -- after only less than 10% of the vote count. The exit polls showed a large number of minorities and women voting. Those two groups vote overwhelmingly Democrat. The Bayes' Theorem indicated, beyond statistical doubt, that Obama would be the winner -- and he was by a substantial margin.
Pull your head from that barrel of whiskey, Druncan!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing.
Duncan

"It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in the case of mutually exclusive events. "
"The probability of 'heads' AND 'tails' IF 'heads' is true equals 0."
That's an absurdity, Druncan!

An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd? The
point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you plug
the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct answer.

It is WORSE even than the examples I ridiculed in my previous post.
"What is the probability to draw a Jack if the card drawn was a Face
card?" You are saying: "What is the probability to flip a 'heads' IF the
toss was a 'tails'?!"
No, I said not a tail, so the conditional probability is 1. According to
your original post (3 odd numbers and 3 even numbers) you would multiply
the marginal probabilities to get the joint - and get 1/4 for a head
(and not a tail).

Post by i***@gmail.com
"Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing."
10% is a "very large sample"???

[snip]

10% of the cast votes in the US election is a very large sample.

Duncan

[i***@gmail.com]

On Monday, March 14, 2016 at 8:01:16 PM UTC-4, duncan smith wrote:

"An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd? The point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you plug the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct answer."

Cardinal confusion: Event of probability 0 (impossibility) equated to ABSURDITY.

Look at the absurdity of applying (attempt) Bayes' Theory to a mutually exclusive event (e.g. coin toss) -

P('Heads' | 'Tails') = P('Heads') * P('Tails') / P('Heads') = (1/2 * 1/2) / 1/2 = 1/2 = 0

The absurdity: 1/2 = 0 (a number greater than 0 is equal to 0). You can't simply say: "Make it 0 by definition". That's insane!

That's why the Bayes Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to mutually exclusive events. "If 'Woman' is true, then the probability of 'Man' is 1/2 = 50%"!!! Bayes' Theorem correctly applies as in, for example: "If 'Man' is true, then the probability of 'Republican' is 55%... or something like that.

"10% of the cast votes in the US election is a very large sample."

Only in your crazy mind! The Pennsylvania case in 2012 was extreme. Philadelphia was the key, with a large number of Black voters who decided to vote in very large numbers. They voted Democrat 95%. In most cases, the predictions ('projections', as they say on TV) will not be made even if 60% of the votes were counted. In another extreme case, Florida 2000, wrong 'projections' were made after 90% of the votes were counted!


Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

[duncan smith]

Post by i***@gmail.com
"An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd? The point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you plug the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct answer."
Cardinal confusion: Event of probability 0 (impossibility) equated to ABSURDITY.
Look at the absurdity of applying (attempt) Bayes' Theory to a mutually exclusive event (e.g. coin toss) -
P('Heads' | 'Tails') = P('Heads') * P('Tails') / P('Heads') = (1/2 * 1/2) / 1/2 = 1/2 = 0

[snip]

That's not Bayes theorem you fool.

P(H|T) = P(T|H) * P(H) / P(T) = 0 * 0.5 / 0.5 = 0

Duncan

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com
"An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd? The point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you plug the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct answer."
Cardinal confusion: Event of probability 0 (impossibility) equated to ABSURDITY.
Look at the absurdity of applying (attempt) Bayes' Theory to a mutually exclusive event (e.g. coin toss) -
P('Heads' | 'Tails') = P('Heads') * P('Tails') / P('Heads') = (1/2 * 1/2) / 1/2 = 1/2 = 0

[snip]
That's not Bayes theorem you fool.
P(H|T) = P(T|H) * P(H) / P(T) = 0 * 0.5 / 0.5 = 0
Duncan

Simultaneous opposites as in mutually exclusive events represent absurdities.

You cannot be 'Man' AND 'Woman', hermaphrodite! But you can be 'Man' AND 'Labour'. CONDITIONAL probabilities require NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events: One element in a group can belong to another group. 'Man' in a gender group can belong to one political group, or one disease group.

But you, a 'Man', cannot belong in the 'healthy' group AND the 'insane' group. Your resentment drops you unconditionally in the latter...

[Marmaduke Jinks]

Post by duncan smith

Post by i***@gmail.com
"An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd?
The point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you
plug the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct
answer."
Cardinal confusion: Event of probability 0 (impossibility) equated to ABSURDITY.
Look at the absurdity of applying (attempt) Bayes' Theory to a mutually
exclusive event (e.g. coin toss) -
P('Heads' | 'Tails') = P('Heads') * P('Tails') / P('Heads') = (1/2 *
1/2) / 1/2 = 1/2 = 0

[snip]
That's not Bayes theorem you fool.
P(H|T) = P(T|H) * P(H) / P(T) = 0 * 0.5 / 0.5 = 0
Duncan

Simultaneous opposites as in mutually exclusive events represent
absurdities.

You cannot be 'Man' AND 'Woman', hermaphrodite! But you can be 'Man' AND
'Labour'. CONDITIONAL probabilities require NON-MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE events:
One element in a group can belong to another group. 'Man' in a gender group
can belong to one political group, or one disease group.

But you, a 'Man', cannot belong in the 'healthy' group AND the 'insane'
group. Your resentment drops you unconditionally in the latter...

~~~~

But not only that - nobody knew Mr Duncan Smith was thinking of writing
that email until he did

;-)

MJ

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by i***@gmail.com
Only in your crazy mind! The Pennsylvania case in 2012 was extreme. Philadelphia was the key, with a large number of Black voters who decided to vote in very large numbers. They voted Democrat 95%. In most cases, the predictions ('projections', as they say on TV) will not be made even if 60% of the votes were counted. In another extreme case, Florida 2000, wrong 'projections' were made after 90% of the votes were counted!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

In the 2012 election, women represented 53% of voters, men 47%. The Democrat candidate received 60% of women's vote. This 2016 election, the Democrat will take a clearly higher percentage of the women’s vote because the Republican is repulsive to women.

And thus, the supporters of the Republican, Donald “Duck” Trump, the so-called “deplorables”, want now to repeal the 19th Amendment of the United States Constitution. The 19th Amendment gave American women the right to vote.

The elections are, for some, a mad lottery where every side hates virulently the favorable odds of the opposing sides. Much like them Kotskarrs of this cyber world…

http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html#conditional

Ion Saliu (royalty-democratic name: Parpaluck) –
Founder of Political Mathematics

http://saliu.com/bbs/messages/547.html
FORMULA Software, Probability, Statistics, Standard Deviation, Politics, Successes

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
Only in your crazy mind! The Pennsylvania case in 2012 was extreme. Philadelphia was the key, with a large number of Black voters who decided to vote in very large numbers. They voted Democrat 95%. In most cases, the predictions ('projections', as they say on TV) will not be made even if 60% of the votes were counted. In another extreme case, Florida 2000, wrong 'projections' were made after 90% of the votes were counted!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

In the 2012 election, women represented 53% of voters, men 47%. The Democrat candidate received 60% of women's vote. This 2016 election, the Democrat will take a clearly higher percentage of the women’s vote because the Republican is repulsive to women.
And thus, the supporters of the Republican, Donald “Duck” Trump, the so-called “deplorables”, want now to repeal the 19th Amendment of the United States Constitution. The 19th Amendment gave American women the right to vote.
The elections are, for some, a mad lottery where every side hates virulently the favorable odds of the opposing sides. Much like them Kotskarrs of this cyber world…
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html#conditional
Ion Saliu (royalty-democratic name: Parpaluck) –
Founder of Political Mathematics
http://saliu.com/bbs/messages/547.html
FORMULA Software, Probability, Statistics, Standard Deviation, Politics, Successes

MAD LOTTERY — a U.S. Presidential election is.

Donald “Duck” Trump has had dozens of issues — bankruptcy, cheating of contractors, sexual assault, hidden taxes and not paying taxes, insulting women, immigrants, Muslims, and everybody on the opposing side, etc., etc., etc.

Trump’s issues are so BAD that a normal person should have dropped out of campaigning very early in the primaries. Yet, polls indicate a close Presidential race in this year of grace 2016! I don’t believe America lost her mind since 1992. I am sure of one explanation: HATRED.

There is a group of people in the White community driven by intense hatred because of their caricatural view of America. Goes like this: the Blacks don’t work and commit crimes; the Mexicans work a lot for nothing and drive our wages down; Mexicans also bring in deadly drugs that many Americans take and die…

Decent human beings like Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, George Bush I, John McCain, Mitt Romney lost pretty badly their Presidential bids. Yet, a severely brain-damaged AFFLUENZA boy insults, scandalizes and shocks a big nation — and is much closer in the polls than the decent Presidential candidates aforementioned.

A disturbing truth. Donald “Duck” Trump touted that he would shoot someone in the middle of the street — and a bunch of Americans would still vote for him “Quack-And-Whack Duck”!!!

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by i***@gmail.com
Only in your crazy mind! The Pennsylvania case in 2012 was extreme. Philadelphia was the key, with a large number of Black voters who decided to vote in very large numbers. They voted Democrat 95%. In most cases, the predictions ('projections', as they say on TV) will not be made even if 60% of the votes were counted. In another extreme case, Florida 2000, wrong 'projections' were made after 90% of the votes were counted!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

In the 2012 election, women represented 53% of voters, men 47%. The Democrat candidate received 60% of women's vote. This 2016 election, the Democrat will take a clearly higher percentage of the women’s vote because the Republican is repulsive to women.
And thus, the supporters of the Republican, Donald “Duck” Trump, the so-called “deplorables”, want now to repeal the 19th Amendment of the United States Constitution. The 19th Amendment gave American women the right to vote.
The elections are, for some, a mad lottery where every side hates virulently the favorable odds of the opposing sides. Much like them Kotskarrs of this cyber world…
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html#conditional
Ion Saliu (royalty-democratic name: Parpaluck) –
Founder of Political Mathematics
http://saliu.com/bbs/messages/547.html
FORMULA Software, Probability, Statistics, Standard Deviation, Politics, Successes

MAD LOTTERY — a U.S. Presidential election is.
Donald “Duck” Trump has had dozens of issues — bankruptcy, cheating of contractors, sexual assault, hidden taxes and not paying taxes, insulting women, immigrants, Muslims, and everybody on the opposing side, etc., etc., etc.
Trump’s issues are so BAD that a normal person should have dropped out of campaigning very early in the primaries. Yet, polls indicate a close Presidential race in this year of grace 2016! I don’t believe America lost her mind since 1992. I am sure of one explanation: HATRED.
There is a group of people in the White community driven by intense hatred because of their caricatural view of America. Goes like this: the Blacks don’t work and commit crimes; the Mexicans work a lot for nothing and drive our wages down; Mexicans also bring in deadly drugs that many Americans take and die…
Decent human beings like Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, George Bush I, John McCain, Mitt Romney lost pretty badly their Presidential bids. Yet, a severely brain-damaged AFFLUENZA boy insults, scandalizes and shocks a big nation — and is much closer in the polls than the decent Presidential candidates aforementioned.
A disturbing truth. Donald “Duck” Trump touted that he would shoot someone in the middle of the street — and a bunch of Americans would still vote for him “Quack-And-Whack Duck”!!!

Axiomatics:

Since this place is named rec.GAMBLING, this reading may be interesting and exciting:

“How Donald Trump Bankrupted His Atlantic City Casinos, but Still Earned Millions”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/12/nyregion/donald-trump-atlantic-city.html

I received phone calls from Trump… Ivanka Trump. I was aroused… but I didn’t grope the phone…

"I received a phone call
From one who claimed was tall.
Then, s/he cursed me even worse
For my gambling on the horse."

http://saliu.com/winning.html

Ion Saliu
Founder of Mathematical Politics and Gambling

[i***@gmail.com]

On Friday, November 4, 2016 at 1:17:19 PM UTC-4, gmail.com wrote:
So much for Bayes’ Theorem, polls, surveys! Donald Trump shocked the world in 2016 and won The White House. He became the 45th President of the United States.

According to TremedousFakeNews, The Lord chose Donald Trump for The White House to fulfill the Armageddon Prophesy. The Second Coming of The Christ is possible only after The Armageddon.

http://forums.saliu.com/armageddon-jesus-trump.html
“Armageddon, Donald Trump, Jesus Christ, The Second Coming, Tremendous Fake News”

[nigel]

Post by i***@gmail.com
So much for Bayes’ Theorem, polls, surveys! Donald Trump shocked the
world in 2016 and won The White House. He became the 45th President
of the United States.
According to TremedousFakeNews, The Lord chose Donald Trump for The
White House to fulfill the Armageddon Prophesy. The Second Coming of
The Christ is possible only after The Armageddon.
http://forums.saliu.com/armageddon-jesus-trump.html “Armageddon,
Donald Trump, Jesus Christ, The Second Coming, Tremendous Fake News”

I wonder if that's an inherited flaw. Most men can come again after
about twenty minutes.

Evil Nigel


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by nigel

Post by i***@gmail.com
So much for Bayes’ Theorem, polls, surveys! Donald Trump shocked the
world in 2016 and won The White House. He became the 45th President
of the United States.
According to TremedousFakeNews, The Lord chose Donald Trump for The
White House to fulfill the Armageddon Prophesy. The Second Coming of
The Christ is possible only after The Armageddon.
http://forums.saliu.com/armageddon-jesus-trump.html “Armageddon,
Donald Trump, Jesus Christ, The Second Coming, Tremendous Fake News”

I wonder if that's an inherited flaw. Most men can come again after
about twenty minutes.
Evil Nigel

Mathematics proves undeniably (FFG) that an exact repetition of the current iteration of the Universe with intelligent life, has a good chance: 37%. Unfortunately also, there will be an exact repetition of a President Trump — His Second Coming... not in bed, mind you...

http://saliu.com/birthday.html#Genetic
“Birthday Paradox: Coincidences, Duplication, Repetition, including Intelligent Life, Same Universe”

“Ayo, ayo! Cinco de Mayo!
Ayo, ayo! La fiesta del gallo!”

* Gallo (pronounced as in Mexican(!) Spanish) = Rooster; Donald Trump fantasizes He is a Rooster amongst dozens of Miss Universe pageants... from all over the world, not only Americans! “Grab them by the pussy!”… and give them U.S. citizenship, if necessary…

[i***@gmail.com]

Obviously, the Bayes Theorem was fruitless in the 2016 U.S. general election. The “culprit” was not mathematics, however. It was the voter turnout.

Now, many Americans talk a lot about ‘impeachment’. According to (biased) polls, a majority of Americans want President Trump be impeached. Bayes’ Theorem cannot be applied, however.

Impeachment is the prerogative of the Congress. The Congress may not be polled. Nobody knows how Congress would vote in case of an impeachment. Usually, the political party of the President opposes impeaching procedures if they have a majority. It is the case now.

Also, methinks impeachment depends a lot on the ‘covfefe’ factor:

http://saliu.com/freeware/covfefePerms.html
(covfefe Tweet by President Trump: Meaning, Speculations, Anagrams, Permutations).

[Ion Saliu]

Post by i***@gmail.com
Obviously, the Bayes Theorem was fruitless in the 2016 U.S. general election. The “culprit” was not mathematics, however. It was the voter turnout.
Now, many Americans talk a lot about ‘impeachment’. According to (biased) polls, a majority of Americans want President Trump be impeached. Bayes’ Theorem cannot be applied, however.
Impeachment is the prerogative of the Congress. The Congress may not be polled. Nobody knows how Congress would vote in case of an impeachment. Usually, the political party of the President opposes impeaching procedures if they have a majority. It is the case now.
http://saliu.com/freeware/covfefePerms.html
(covfefe Tweet by President Trump: Meaning, Speculations, Anagrams, Permutations).

[Ion Saliu]

Post by i***@gmail.com
"An impossible event with probability zero - you think that's absurd? The point is that even if you have mutually exclusive events, if you plug the correct probabilities into Bayes theorem you get the correct answer."
Cardinal confusion: Event of probability 0 (impossibility) equated to ABSURDITY.
Look at the absurdity of applying (attempt) Bayes' Theory to a mutually exclusive event (e.g. coin toss) -
P('Heads' | 'Tails') = P('Heads') * P('Tails') / P('Heads') = (1/2 * 1/2) / 1/2 = 1/2 = 0
The absurdity: 1/2 = 0 (a number greater than 0 is equal to 0). You can't simply say: "Make it 0 by definition". That's insane!
That's why the Bayes Theorem does NOT -- repeat, does NOT -- apply to mutually exclusive events. "If 'Woman' is true, then the probability of 'Man' is 1/2 = 50%"!!! Bayes' Theorem correctly applies as in, for example: "If 'Man' is true, then the probability of 'Republican' is 55%... or something like that.
"10% of the cast votes in the US election is a very large sample."
Only in your crazy mind! The Pennsylvania case in 2012 was extreme. Philadelphia was the key, with a large number of Black voters who decided to vote in very large numbers. They voted Democrat 95%. In most cases, the predictions ('projections', as they say on TV) will not be made even if 60% of the votes were counted. In another extreme case, Florida 2000, wrong 'projections' were made after 90% of the votes were counted!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Politics
http://saliu.com/dirty-election.html

• There is a new useful feature for reading the Usenet posts in Google Groups. The vast majority of newsgroup members use GROUPS.GOOGLE.COM to post and read on the Internet pioneering service, Usenet.

One drawback of the Google service, very useful otherwise, is the default font. It is a proportional font (of variable-width, that is). However, initially Usenet was written and shown in a monospace font.

Many of the statistical reports I posted did not show up in an acceptable format. The original format was in the typewriter format 9the Courier font). I shall inventory the most important posts in this newsgroup and refer the readers to this important thread. Viewing will be better off overall.

It is quite easy and simple to add this useful feature to two of your browsers: Chrome and Firefox. Just read this axiomatic thread:

• https://groups.google.com/g/rec.gambling.lottery/c/xj1oUsXz5oo?hl=en
• Usenet Redivivus! Best Post Viewing in Google Groups

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by duncan smith
It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in
the case of mutually exclusive events.
Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing.
Duncan

"It applies to any events. You just end up with a probability of zero in the case of mutually exclusive events. "

Really? Bayes' is about CONDITIONAL probabilities. 'Probability of A AND B IF B is true.' Your resentment blinds your mind! How can you have 'tails' AND 'heads' in ONE coin toss? Look at what stupidiotic statement your "understanding" of the Bayes Theorem leads to:

"The probability of 'heads' AND 'tails' IF 'heads' is true equals 0."

That's an absurdity, Druncan! It is WORSE even than the examples I ridiculed in my previous post. "What is the probability to draw a Jack if the card drawn was a Face card?" You are saying: "What is the probability to flip a 'heads' IF the toss was a 'tails'?!"

"Very large sample, firm conclusion. That's not amazing."

10% is a "very large sample"??? They missed the Florida prediction in 2000 (Gore v. Bush) when the sample was 99%!!! He Chief Justice of the Supreme Court turned himself into... Bayes!

Your mind was loose alright even a few years ago, when we had our skirmishes. But your brains are now totally out of nuts and bolts... unfortunately for you!

Ion Saliu,
Brain Smith At-Large
http://saliu.com/forum/gamblingodds.html

[Marmaduke Jinks]

<***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:bd67cdd6-6257-47aa-9486-***@googlegroups.com...

Unconditionally Axiomatic Colleagues of Mine:

I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative
relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one
(in)famous Psychosama!

Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists
associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are
two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by
the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the
probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.

The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see
6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the
other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in
coin tossing.

There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as
clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors.
I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events.
Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation:
the Ion Saliu Paradox.

Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events
that your lives are comprised of!

Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

Fascinating.

Would have been interesting to see this applied and working in the recent
Lotto challenge.

MJ

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative
relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one
(in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists
associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are
two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by
the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the
probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see
6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the
other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in
coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as
clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors.
I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events.
the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events
that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html
Fascinating.
Would have been interesting to see this applied and working in the recent
Lotto challenge.
MJ

Axiomate:

The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery. A lottery drawing is not a two-phase event. They don't conduct a drawing first and then announce the players that the draw consists of 3 odd numbers and 3 even. The players would face far more favorable odds. See my reply above to your old chap, Druncan Smith.

"The recent Lotto challenge" you referring to should have better methods. For starters, the 'skip methodology'; it has even dedicated software. The lotto system usually comprises of significantly fewer numbers to play while recording more winning numbers. You might want to take a look at this lottery strategy:

http://saliu.com/skip-strategy.html

"The recent Lotto challenge" you referring to is weird, though. A 3-number win can score higher than a 6-number (jackpot) hit! That's not lottery -- order does not matter in a lotto combonation! That's more like horse racing, Marmaduke Jinks.

Best of luck, axio, including at the racetrack!

Ion Saliu,
Founder of Probability Theory of Life
Founder of Lottery Mathematics
Founder of Equestrian Mathematics
http://saliu.com/horses.html

[Marmaduke Jinks]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative
relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one
(in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists
associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are
two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by
the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the
probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see
6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the
other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in
coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as
clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors.
I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events.
the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events
that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html
Fascinating.
Would have been interesting to see this applied and working in the recent
Lotto challenge.
MJ

Axiomate:

The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery. A lottery drawing is not
a two-phase event. They don't conduct a drawing first and then announce the
players that the draw consists of 3 odd numbers and 3 even. The players
would face far more favorable odds. See my reply above to your old chap,
Druncan Smith.

"The recent Lotto challenge" you referring to should have better methods.
For starters, the 'skip methodology'; it has even dedicated software. The
lotto system usually comprises of significantly fewer numbers to play while
recording more winning numbers. You might want to take a look at this
lottery strategy:

http://saliu.com/skip-strategy.html

"The recent Lotto challenge" you referring to is weird, though. A 3-number
win can score higher than a 6-number (jackpot) hit! That's not lottery --
order does not matter in a lotto combonation! That's more like horse racing,
Marmaduke Jinks.

Best of luck, axio, including at the racetrack!

Ion Saliu,
Founder of Probability Theory of Life
Founder of Lottery Mathematics
Founder of Equestrian Mathematics
http://saliu.com/horses.html

~~~

Indeed. I'll stick to the horses.

In a few days time the 17th March will be the 79th anniversary of Marmaduke
Jinks winning the Lincoln handicap.

MJ

[Nick UK]

***@gmail.com wrote:

<Snip the lot!>

Saliu says in reply to MJ..

Post by i***@gmail.com
The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery.

That being the case, then best you send your never-ending boring fkn
'Bayes Theorem' posts to a newsgroup where it *does* apply!

In other words.. STFU!

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by Nick UK
<Snip the lot!>
Saliu says in reply to MJ..

Post by i***@gmail.com
The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery.

That being the case, then best you send your never-ending boring fkn
'Bayes Theorem' posts to a newsgroup where it *does* apply!
In other words.. STFU!

Koochew:

If 'doesn't apply' then let people know 'doesn't apply' where people thing 'does apply'.

Pull your head out of that barrel of whiskey, ALCOHOLIC TROLL! Or don't read my posts, wormy brain!

Ion Saliu,
iPsychiatrist At-Large
http://saliu.com/brain.html

[Nick UK]

Post by i***@gmail.com
If 'doesn't apply' then let people know 'doesn't apply' where people thing 'does apply'.

WTF?? 'Doesn't apply'? Your ability to put a few simple words into
plain, ordinary, understandable English - doesn't apply; you stupid,
arrogant, ignorant prick!

Post by i***@gmail.com
Pull your head out of that barrel of whiskey, ALCOHOLIC TROLL! Or don't read my posts, wormy brain!

Reminder: it was *you* who said..

Post by i***@gmail.com
The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery.

Now listen up shit-for-brains: you stop posting your rambling, boring,
off-topic junk here and subscribers to RGL won't have to suffer them..
that's the answer - asshole!

Post by i***@gmail.com
Ion Saliu,
iPsychiatrist At-Large

'Psychiatrist At-Large'.. huh?

You are obviously psychotic and need to see a psychiatrist - ASAP!

[i***@gmail.com]

Post by Nick UK

Post by i***@gmail.com
If 'doesn't apply' then let people know 'doesn't apply' where people thing 'does apply'.

WTF?? 'Doesn't apply'? Your ability to put a few simple words into
plain, ordinary, understandable English - doesn't apply; you stupid,
arrogant, ignorant prick!

Post by i***@gmail.com
Pull your head out of that barrel of whiskey, ALCOHOLIC TROLL! Or don't read my posts, wormy brain!

Reminder: it was *you* who said..

Post by i***@gmail.com
The Bayes Theorem does not really apply to lottery.

Now listen up shit-for-brains: you stop posting your rambling, boring,
off-topic junk here and subscribers to RGL won't have to suffer them..
that's the answer - asshole!

Post by i***@gmail.com
Ion Saliu,
iPsychiatrist At-Large

'Psychiatrist At-Large'.. huh?
You are obviously psychotic and need to see a psychiatrist - ASAP!

SANE people do NOT read what can potentially afflict them. Reject my messages in your newsreader, or don't read my messages in Google groups. Otherwise, you are also a case of COMPULSIVE OBSESSIVE behavior.

I don't read your messages in Google groups (I've never used a newsreader, only idiots do that nowadays). I know how stupidiotic and sick you are. I only saw your alcoholic-driven messages in my thread -- and I responded. All normal persons have a right to respond when attacked. You started the fire, ALCOHOLIC TROLL of dementia dimensions!

I'll toss you back to that rehab marsh, ALCOHOLIC TROLL! I've done that a few times to sickos like you. Where are them Psychosamas, Zamzalasheeps, et al.? In the graveyard of iPsychosis...

[Ion Saliu]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

The theory of lottery strategies has come to full fruition. Both ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ strategies are fully analyzed, including the ‘reversed lottery strategy’. The comprehensive analysis pairs each type of strategy with its specific lottery software application.

The Bayes Theorem in lottery is considered by many an ‘exotic predictive strategy’. In truth, this theorem is not a strategy, but an operational method to calculate the simultaneous probability. We can calculate the probability of the direct strategies AND reversed lottery strategies to occur simultaneously.

Read the latest in theory of predictive strategies:

http://software.saliu.com/lottery-strategy-lotto-strategies.html
The Best Lottery Strategies: Foundation, Application of the Lotto Strategy Concept

[Ion Saliu]

On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 12:49:22 PM UTC-5, Ion Saliu wrote:
… updating links to HTTPS…

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!

Post by i***@gmail.com
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.

Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
https://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

Post by i***@gmail.com
The theory of lottery strategies has come to full fruition. Both ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ strategies are fully analyzed, including the ‘reversed lottery strategy’. The comprehensive analysis pairs each type of strategy with its specific lottery software application.
The Bayes Theorem in lottery is considered by many an ‘exotic predictive strategy’. In truth, this theorem is not a strategy, but an operational method to calculate the simultaneous probability. We can calculate the probability of the direct strategies AND reversed lottery strategies to occur simultaneously.

https://software.saliu.com/lottery-strategy-lotto-strategies.html
"The Best Lottery Strategies: Foundation, Application of the Lotto Strategy Concept".

[Ion Saliu]

Post by Ion Saliu

Post by i***@gmail.com
I was surprised recently to learn that Bayes' Theorem has a negative relation to this lottery group. Most discussions had connections to one (in)famous Psychosama!
Although the aim of the theorem is more encompassing, many lotterists associate the rule with the probability of simultaneous events. If there are two non-mutually exclusive events, the simultaneous probability is given by the multiplication of the individual probabilities. For example, the probability of 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers.
The events are not mutually exclusive, as in coin tossing. We can see 6-number lotto combinations with 3 odd numbers AND 3 even numbers. On the other hand, it is impossible to get 'heads' AND 'tails' simultaneously in coin tossing.
There is a more on this topic. I addressed the Bayes Theorem and made it as clear as it can get. I responded to requests and suggestions from visitors. I stress also the value and the limitations of simulation in random events. Finally, I connect the Bayes Theorem to the most precise rule in simulation: the Ion Saliu Paradox.
Axiomatics, I wish the very best in all (relatively) simultaneous events that your lives are comprised of!
Ion Saliu,
Founder of: Probability Theory of Life, Randomness Philosophy
http://saliu.com/bayes-theorem.html

The theory of lottery strategies has come to full fruition. Both ‘static’ and ‘dynamic’ strategies are fully analyzed, including the ‘reversed lottery strategy’. The comprehensive analysis pairs each type of strategy with its specific lottery software application.
The Bayes Theorem in lottery is considered by many an ‘exotic predictive strategy’. In truth, this theorem is not a strategy, but an operational method to calculate the simultaneous probability. We can calculate the probability of the direct strategies AND reversed lottery strategies to occur simultaneously.
http://software.saliu.com/lottery-strategy-lotto-strategies.html
The Best Lottery Strategies: Foundation, Application of the Lotto Strategy Concept

You can get lost easily in public forums like this Usenet group. THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY POSTS!!! The overwhelming proportion of such “scribbles” are nothing more or above garbage, nonsense, one-liner bullshitting, fights, controversies… or a few cryptic numbers meant to “beat” the lottery!

To solve the problem, I created a thread referring to the most relevant articles, materials, debates, systems, fights, etc. I keep it updated and make sure it shows at the top of this Google group:

• https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/rec.gambling.lottery/TztssQOdv9M
• The Best RGL Posts, Contents: Lottery, Strategies, Systems, Software.

Ion Saliu (royalty-name: Parpaluck),
Founder of Lottery Mathematics
Founder of Lotto Programming Science

• https://saliu.com/lotto_lottery_gambling.htm
• Forums: Lottery, Lotto, Gambling, Software, Systems.

[Ion Saliu]

The 'Bayes Theorem, Conditional Probabilities, Lottery' topic is too important to get lost. It is an interesting entry in the r.g.l. table of worthy contents:

• All-Matters Lottery, Lotto: Strategies, Systems, Software
• https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/rec.gambling.lottery/OR5o1HDcy-U