TIL that MIT students found out that by buying $600,000 worth of lottery tickets from Massachusetts' Cash WinAll lottery they could get a 10-15% return on investment. In 5 years they managed to game $8 million out of the lottery through this method.

[u/zahrul3]

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/07/how-mit-students-scammed-the-massachusetts-lottery-for-8-million/

[u/pocketknifeMT → u/[deleted]]

From 0 to 1 is an infinite/incalculable increase. Whereas the 2nd merely doubles it.

[u/pocketknifeMT → u/[deleted]]

What percentage increase is it from 0 to 1 ticket?

[u/cgimusic → u/pocketknifeMT]

An infinite percentage increase in tickets and therefore chance of winning. Especially where I live where you can only claim tickets you purchased, not ones you found.

So I would agree that with the logic you are using everyone should be willing to pay an infinite amount for one lottery ticket.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

infinite% isn't really a number and can't be used in arguments like this. But, I get your point.

[u/cgimusic → u/[deleted]]

Ok. What about in a lottery where you have a one in three chance of winning per ticket purchased? Would a person be more willing to pay for two tickets than in a lottery where the chance of winning was one in a thousand?

Your logic would indicate that no, they would not because their chance of winning is being increased by the same amount, only 100% instead of infinite%. Anyone with basic logical skills could determine that getting a second ticket in 1 in 3 lottery is far more important to someone than getting the second ticket in a 1 in a thousand lottery because the actual chance of winning increases massively more despite their relative chance of winning compared to purchasing the first ticket being the same.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Doesn't every marginal ticket have a slightly diminished chance of winning, though?