top | item 25333148

An Elderly Mathematician Hacked the Lottery for $26M

233 points| pseudolus | 5 years ago |entrepreneurshandbook.co

89 comments

order
[+] lqet|5 years ago|reply
> The math explanation could fill an article itself.

If you are interested in how exactly he did it, here is a more detailed description:

https://math.berkeley.edu/~kpmann/ellenberg.pdf

[+] dmurray|5 years ago|reply
The main strategy is the tremendously complicated scheme of "buy as many tickets as you can physically key in, any time the prize pool goes above $x." Everyone who played the Michigan or Massachussets lottery that week was "hacking" the lottery the exact same way!

That's not quite the optimum solution - what if you accidentally played the same numbers a million times, instead of a million different sets of numbers? So you should make sure you spread out your plays. However, I believe spreading them randomly is "good enough": the interesting maths only improves your edge a tiny amount.

[+] phreeza|5 years ago|reply
Why on earth is there a stock photo of a "High Class Mature Man", captioned as "Author" opening the article?
[+] actusual|5 years ago|reply
I think that's what we in the business call a "joke"
[+] muststopmyths|5 years ago|reply
TFA is, to put it politely, incomplete. They played both the Michigan and a later Mass state lottery. It looks like the Michigan lottery may not have detected them.

https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/lotto-winner...

[+] kevinwang|5 years ago|reply
this is the best article on the topic. Probably my favorite article ever, actually. I also like how it frames Selbee as an average joe-turned-convenience store owner with a side interest in math, instead of how TFA frames him as a mathematician.

Previous discussion on the good article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16494280

Honestly, the currently linked article seems to me like low-effort blogspam.

[+] Udo_Schmitz|5 years ago|reply
I remember that one. The medium article looks like a summary.
[+] mywittyname|5 years ago|reply
> All they’ve done is renovate their house and pay for their 14 grandchildren's college funds.

State lotteries love to go on how their proceeds are used for education. But I bet 14 full rides to college on $8MM is a greater impact on education than what the state achieves with the same amount.

[+] at-fates-hands|5 years ago|reply
>> But I bet 14 full rides to college on $8MM is a greater impact on education than what the state achieves with the same amount

When I was in college, I did some pharmaceutical testing with a local company. We had three colleges in the area so it was perfect for recruiting healthy males between the ages of 18-35.

They came out with some advertising showing they paid college kids more money in six months than the state did in tuition support at all three colleges combined. It was enough to get the state's attention and got them involved in how they both could be doing more for the state's college system. I know at one point the company was donating a LOT of money to all three colleges Pharma school and hiring a lot of their students. It provided them a nice pipeline of talent.

EDIT: The company was out of North Dakota. All the stuff we tested was already FDA approved. Most of the studies were companies looking to get less expensive generic forms of those drugs into the market. Here's some of the tests I was in:

- Naproxen

- Sudafed (it was a nasal variety for decongestion)

- Diclofenac

- Zinc Acetate

- Doxycycline

[+] an_opabinia|5 years ago|reply
They created 14 college funds because each individual 529 allows a lump sum $150k married gift tax free. With that only totalling $2.1m of tax free income, I’m confident they did a lot more stuff with the remaining $5.9m.

Anyway it’s kind of ironic you are comparing the state’s education spending to a tax avoidance scheme.

[+] gnicholas|5 years ago|reply
He won $26M but spent $18M to do so. Still very impressive, but not quite the impression given by the headline.

> But at this point, Jerry had won more than $26 million dollars from the state lottery. After deducting for expenses, they took in more than $8 million in profit.

[+] ogre_codes|5 years ago|reply
A lot of gamblers ignore the "expense" column when talking about their winnings. I had a friend would would go to Reno 2-3 weekends a month and brag about winning $500 or 1000. He never really talked about the fact that on most weeks he came home with empty pockets.
[+] driverdan|5 years ago|reply
This article was written by someone who doesn't understand math or the history of people beating lotteries.

There are many lotteries that have times with an expected positive payout. The key is that the payout can't be shared. Most of the big lotteries have times like this but the chances of having to share it ensure the payout is never positive.

[+] EvanAnderson|5 years ago|reply
I love that this guy pulled this off. It's a great story.

I was reminded of the story of Mohan Srivastava[1], an MIT/Stanford-trained statistician, who found a flaw in the Ontario Lottery's "Tic-Tac-Toe" instant game. There's a great quote from Mr. Srivastava re: his morality and exploiting the flaw he found:

"People often assume that I must be some extremely moral person because I didn't take advantage of the lottery," he says. "I can assure you that that's not the case. I'd simply done the math and concluded that beating the game wasn't worth my time."

[1] https://www.wired.com/2011/01/ff-lottery/

[+] Upvoter33|5 years ago|reply
I have a different reaction: it is not an ethical thing to do. There are lots of things people can do to get money - but this doesn't mean people should do them. Isn't the ethical thing to do to report the problem so that the system can't be gamed by others?
[+] Scoundreller|5 years ago|reply
> The State Lottery made a mistake in all this. They listed the odds of winning that was associated with each combination of numbers.

I don’t see why this is a mistake. Every lotto should do it, but I can see why they don’t.

[+] adolph|5 years ago|reply
Jerry studied those winning odds, and the timing of those Roll Downs. He realized that, statistically, a single one dollar lottery ticket was worth more than one dollar in those final weeks.

The state's error was being too slow with "Roll Downs."

10 years, $26M revenue, $8M profit. $800K/year; I guess taxes were counted in the $18M expenses. Nice "side-gig" to running a convenience store!

[edit: 10 years, not !0 years.]

[+] driverdan|5 years ago|reply
It's not a mistake, it's a legal requirement in some places. It's poor writing.
[+] mikewarot|5 years ago|reply
It's not a mistake at all, it's an advertising campaign for numeracy.
[+] toyg|5 years ago|reply
In a proper lottery (i.e. balls randomly extracted out of a machine), the odds are the same for each combination of numbers, surely...? How did they produce these odds, artificially?
[+] dangus|5 years ago|reply
Right, that wasn’t the mistake. The mistake was designing a game that is gave the player the house advantage.
[+] ajarmst|5 years ago|reply
Old person here. Why is "elderly" sufficiently germane to appear in the title?
[+] JackFr|5 years ago|reply
I don’t understand why the state would care. They take their cut off the top. If there is excess unclaimed jackpot money that accumulates week to week until expected values go positive why does that hurt them?
[+] Maxburn|5 years ago|reply
The house hates it when people hit them for big wins.
[+] choeger|5 years ago|reply
Question: How can he be right about the estimated value of a ticket when the number of buyers is unknown? Should the game not swing back once the "hack" is made public?
[+] busterarm|5 years ago|reply
You can estimate the number of buyers.

You can also clock how long it takes to sell tickets at gas stations and calculate a theoretical maximum because you can get all of the selling locations.

[+] toast0|5 years ago|reply
My (general) understanding is in these lotteries, whenever there's a rolldown, all tickets are positive EV, regardless of the number of tickets bought. Although, it certainly would get slim if the number was very high. I think there were three known large scale buying groups for the MA rolldown lottery?

The exciting technique was determining when your buying could trigger a rolldown, possibly without it being previously announced.

[+] kyleblarson|5 years ago|reply
Assuming they sold lotto tickets at their convenience store and that the couple actually worked at the counter, they could probably get a pretty solid gut feel for the relative demand of each drawing based on the number of tickets they sold.
[+] czottmann|5 years ago|reply
They didn't "hack" anything. They used math and knowledge of statistical probability.

I don't think the headline "Old man used math to win $26M" would've fared worse.

[+] iainctduncan|5 years ago|reply
So this is basically like old black jack card counting but on a lottery. Wait till the deck is hot and then play, play, play. What a great story!
[+] mxie-ca|5 years ago|reply
This indeed reminds me the blackjack movie 21
[+] jacquesm|5 years ago|reply
Here in NL it was the state that hacked the lottery. They did not advertise the fact that all the unsold numbers competed for the prize as well and inflated the number of tickets to ensure that this was very often the case.
[+] mhb|5 years ago|reply
That's all of a piece with the other state "hack" of advertising one "prize" and actually paying an annuity based on that amount (or the value of the annuity).
[+] DoctorOetker|5 years ago|reply
how is this not random feel good advertisement? people always assume that when an entity momentarily loses that it was gamed, while that entity may profit in the long run from allowing to be occasionally gamed, which then after the fact spreads like wildfire and while most readers eventually give up trying to find a flaw, it did succeed in obsessing them for a prolonged amount of time that they just roll with it and go out to buy some tickets even though they didn't succeed in finding a flaw...
[+] m0llusk|5 years ago|reply
How is gaming a lottery a subject for a founders handbook? That seems like over emphasis on the role of chance in starting companies and arguably the opposite of achieving market fit.