>>>>>>>>>>>>>"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).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What, like the odds of winning twice with the same numbers? Maybe, I guess.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, of winning twice, period.
>>>>>
>>>>>Does it make sense that the odds of winning twice would be exactly the same as the odds of winning once? (Note that this is NOT the same thing as winning a second time given that you have won once).
>>>>
>>>>It makes absolute sense. The statistical odds don't change on a draw just because you've won it before.
>>>
>>>
>>>Help, help, I'm getting blue in the face!
>>>
>>>Those. Are. Two. Different. Issues.
>>
>>The problem is that you are taking separate events and trying to make them 'not separate'. They are separate. Doesn't matter how much you'd like them not to be, they are. The odds do not change.
>
>
>Alan, you really are not listening. I agree completely with the point you are making. It just isn't the point under discussion, which is the odds of two independent events BOTH happening. Clearer?

But that isn't what this was all about. When this started, both Terry and I were arguing against Tamar's inference that once somebody wins a lottery, then the odds of them winning again become infinitesimal and can be discounted. When you started arguing with Terry and me, I thought you were taking up Tamars point. In fact, didn't you tell me that Tamar is not incorrect? I still insist she was wrong.