5

According to a story published on syracuse.com, a man from Syracuse named Randal Stier won the NY Lottery at least 1,400 times pocketing $600 or more in prizes per win (totaling over $1.6 million in wins, not including wins from prizes less than $600).

Stier wouldn't talk about his winnings when a Syracuse.com reporter tried to interview him outside his home last week.

"I don't play the game anymore," he said. "I can't even believe they've got that information on who won. I think that's totally unfair."

It is not clear whether Stier had a proven system of picking winning numbers and profited from the totality of his bets or he just played the lottery so frequently that he won so many times purely based on chance (but lost money from the totality of his bets).

Stier probably overall lost a lot of money, based on the odds, according to lottery experts. But he wouldn't talk about his losses.

"That's nobody's business," he said.

What I wish to know is this: Is the story for sure true? The report states that the data was "obtained from the state lottery by journalism students at Columbia University" and provides no other veryfing details. How can one verify that in fact a man by the name of Randal Stier won the NY Lottery Quick Draw 1,400 times?

The report cites a number of other similar tales, on which I present the same question.

Arkin
  • 167
  • 2
  • 6
    Per that article, he played keno for three hours every night for 10 years and won, on average, about once a month. Passes the plausibility test. – bishop Oct 13 '20 at 01:31
  • 5
    This summary is undermined by the rest of the article: (i) The $1.6m is his revenue, not profit.He is thought to have lost more than he won. (ii) "It is not clear whether Stier had a system of picking winning numbers" This sentence offers a false dilemma. – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 02:44
  • 2
    "How can one verify that in fact a man by the name of Randal Stier won the NY Lottery Quick Draw 1,400 times?" Note the article explains that they used a public records request. – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 02:46
  • @Oddthinking "He is thought to have lost more than he won" is the opinion of the reporter. It is not based on specific facts he obtained. A reporter is entitled to report the facts, but the opinion remains just that - an opinion. Moreover, if you look at the wording the reporter used, it seems he is in fact uncertain whether Mr. Stier lost more than he won as he intentionally chose the ambiguous phrase "he is thought". To me, this suggests that the reporter believes this is the case simply because those are the expected odds but is leaving room for the possibility that it is not so.. – Arkin Oct 13 '20 at 03:02
  • 7
    @Arkin: I agree. We only have his income, and not his outgoings, so **we don't know if he made a profit**, and I think the summary should reflect that. My first assumption was that he was another [Zeljko Ranogajec](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/4293/is-there-a-statistical-advantage-in-playing-keno-for-a-long-period-of-time) and only bet when the jackpot was high (which is one reason why you offered a false dilemma), but the rest of the circumstances in the story suggests he was merely an addict who lost millions and who deserves privacy. – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 03:08
  • @Oddthinking Keep in mind the fact that Mr. Stier would not discuss his losses could mean that he was embarrassed by them (i.e, losing money and hence a gambling addiction); It could also mean he didn't want others to be aware that he had a "winning system". Once again, the article is intentionally ambiguous in Mr. Stier's case (In contrast to some of the other stories cited, in which the gambler admitted losing money) – Arkin Oct 13 '20 at 03:50
  • @Arkin Mr Stier did not want to discuss his winnings either: *"Stier wouldn't talk about his winnings when a Syracuse.com reporter interviewed him outside his home last week"* so you can't infer anything from *"But he wouldn't talk about his losses."* Mr Steir ***is*** reported to have said *"I don't play the game anymore ... I can't even believe they've got that information on who won. I think that's totally unfair ... That's nobody's business."* and the rest is newspaper spin to make a story. – Weather Vane Oct 13 '20 at 09:15
  • "It is not clear whether Stier had a proven system of picking winning numbers and profited from the totality of his bets or he just played the lottery so frequently that he won so many times purely based on chance." Okay, one more time... FALSE DILEMMA. You only offer two choices, both of which seem unlikely. – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 12:25
  • 4
    Either (a) he has this system that magically picks optimal numbers despite it being theoretically impossible (and no-one is making this claim), or (b) he bet and lost a lot of money (which people *are* claiming), or (c) he bet a lot and happened to be lucky (which is very unlikely), or (d) he bet when the jackpot was high (which is not a system for picking *numbers*) or (e) he cheated, or (f) the reporting is wrong, or (g) some other option I can't think of. – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 12:26
  • 2
    Basically, you are turning a mundane claim (a lot of people lose a lot of money at Keno. This man is embarrassed to talk about how he lost the most.) into a breathless "Nobody knows if he used magic to achieve this.") – Oddthinking Oct 13 '20 at 12:32
  • 1
    @Oddthinking My second suggestion "he just played the lottery so frequently that he won so many times purely based on chance" was intended to be **(b) he bet and lost a lot of money (which people are claiming)**. Editing it for the sake of clarity.. – Arkin Oct 13 '20 at 16:32
  • 2
    Lets not forget that the researchers were looking for statistical outliers. Out of millions of players, some will come out ahead. Suppose this guy was an overall winner and used the extra money for activities he enjoyed, like playing more keno. – tdelaney Oct 13 '20 at 18:33

0 Answers0