>>>>>>"Acting Lottery Director Gardner Gurney said this was only the third time in Lotto’s history that a winner has hit the jackpot twice. The odds of winning just once were 22.5 million to one."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... and a second time, therefore is still 22.5 million : 1, surely. The fact that it's happened twice before is further indicative evidence of this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Correct. However, the odds of winning twice are actually much, much smaller. Should be 22.5M * 22.5M to 1. Of course, that's for a single ticket.
>>>>
>>>>You sure about that? From my memory of stats back in college you have just the same odds EACH TIME, no matter how many times you've already won.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, the odds are the same each time, but to calculate the odds of a particular person winning twice, you multiply the odds of winning the first time by the odds of winning the second time.
>>>
>>>Let's take a simpler example:
>>>
>>>You roll one die, looking for a 5. The odds are 1 in 6. Do it again, the odds are again 1 in 6.
>>>
>>>But what are the odds that rolling the die twice, you'll get two 5's. One in thirty-six, because there's only one combination of the thirty-six combinations that is 5,5.
>>
>>Sorry, don't understand that explanation at all. I'd've though the chance of getting 2 X 5, in 2 throws, would be 2 in 12, ie 1 in 6 - just the same.
>>
>>>
>>>Now, the lottery thing isn't actually that simple. 22.5M x 22.5M would actually be the chance of winning both of two particular drawings rather than the lifetime chance of winning twice. That's somewhat higher, since each time you play, you have the same chance, but with the odds so small, the repeat plays don't count for much.
>>>
>>>>And the odds of winning twice with just one ticket are ZERO I'd have thought.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>Well, yeah, I meant one ticket each drawing.
>>>
>>>Tamar
>
>I agree with you Terry. The odds don't change just because you've won it before. The odds remain the same through each lottery or throw of the die. The logic that Tamar is trying to apply, though it sounds reasonable is incorrect.


Her logic wasn't incorrect but you may be talking about two different things. She was describing the odds of the same thing happening twice. (Not the odds in independent events such as the first and second lotteries).