mscroggs.co.uk
mscroggs.co.uk

subscribe

# Blog

## Archive

Show me a random blog post
▼ show ▼
2018-03-23

## A 20,000-to-1 baby?

This morning, I heard about Arnie Ellis on the Today programme. Arnie is the first baby boy to be born in his family in five generations, following ten girls. According to John Humphrys, there is a 20,000-to-1 chance of this happening. Pretty quickly, I started wondering where this number came from.
After a quick Google, I found that this news story had appeared in many of today's papers, including the Sun and the Daily Mail. They all featured this 20,000-to-1 figure, which according to The Sun originally came from Ladbrokes.

### What is the chance of this happening?

If someone is having a child, the probability of it being a girl is 0.5. The probability of it being a boy is also 0.5. So the probaility of having ten girls followed by a boy is
$$\left(\tfrac12\right)^{10}\times\tfrac12=\frac1{2048}.$$
If all 11 children were siblings, then this would be the chance of this happening—and it's a long way off the 20,000-to-1. But in Arnie's case, the situation is different. Luckily the Daily Mail article, there is an outline of Arnie's family tree.
Here, you can see that the ten girls are spread over five generations. So the question becomes: given a baby, what is the probability that the child is male and his most recently born ten relatives on their mother's side are all female?
Four of the ten relatives are certainly female—Arnie's mother, grandmother, great grandmother and great great grandmother are all definitely female. This only leaves six more relatives, so the probability of a baby being in Arnie's position is
$$\left(\tfrac12\right)^{6}\times\tfrac12=\frac1{128}.$$
This is now an awful lot lower than the 20,000-to-1 we were told. In fact, with around 700,000 births in the UK each year, we'd expect over 5,000 babies to be born in this situation every year. Maybe Arnie's not so rare after all.
This number is based on the assumption that the baby's last ten relatives are spread across five generations. But the probability will be different if the relatives are spread over a different number of generations. Calculating the probability for a baby with any arrangement of ancestors would require knowing the likelihood of each arrangement of relatives, which would require a lot of data that probably doesn't exist. But the actual anwer is probably not too far from 127-to-1.

### Where did 20,000-to-1 come from?

This morning, I emailed Ladbrokes to see if they could shed any light on the 20,000-to-1 figure. They haven't got back to me yet. (Although they did accidentally CC me when sending the query on to someone who might know the answer, so I'm hopeful.) I'll update this post with an explanaation if I do hear back.
Until then, there is one possible explanation for the figure: we have looked at the probability that a baby will be in this situation, but we could instead have started at the top of the family tree and looked at the probability that Beryl's next ten decendents were girls followed by a boy. The probability of this happening will be lower, as there is a reasonable chance that Beryl could have no female children, or no children at all. Looking at the problem this way, there are more ways for the situation to not happen, so the probability of it happening is lower.
But working the actually probability out in this way would again require data about how many children are likely in each generation, and would be a complicated calculation. It seems unlikely that this is what Ladbrokes did. Let's hope they shed some light on it...

### Similar posts

 How much will I win on the new National Lottery? "Uncanny" royal coincidence World Cup stickers 2018 The end of coins of constant width

Comments in green were written by me. Comments in blue were not written by me.

Allowed HTML tags: <br> <a> <small> <b> <i> <s> <sup> <sub> <u> <spoiler> <ul> <ol> <li>
To prove you are not a spam bot, please type "j" then "u" then "m" then "p" in the box below (case sensitive):
2015-10-08

## How much will I win on the new National Lottery?

This post also appeared on the Chalkdust Magazine blog. You can read the excellent second issue of Chalkdust here, including the £100 prize crossnumber which I set.
From today, the National Lottery's Lotto draw has 59 balls instead of 49. You may be thinking that this means there is now much less chance of winning. You would be right, except the prizes are also changing.
Camelot, who run the lottery, are saying that you are now "more likely to win a prize" and "more likely to become a millionaire". But what do these changes actually mean?

### The changes

Until yesterday, Lotto had 49 balls. From today, there are 59 balls. Each ticket still has six numbers on it and six numbers, plus a bonus ball, are still chosen by the lottery machine. The old prizes were as follows:
 Requirement Estimated Prize Match all 6 normal balls £2,000,000 Match 5 normal balls and the bonus ball £50,000 Match 5 normal balls £1,000 Match 4 normal balls £100 Match 3 normal balls £25 50 randomly picked tickets £20,000
The prizes have changed to:
 Requirement Estimated Prize Match all 6 normal balls £2,000,000 Match 5 normal balls and the bonus ball £50,000 Match 5 normal balls £1,000 Match 4 normal balls £100 Match 3 normal balls £25 Match 2 normal balls Free lucky dip entry in next Lotto draw One randomly picked ticket £1,000,000 20 other randomly picked tickets £20,000

### Probability of Winning a Prize

The probability of winning each of these prizes can be calculated. For example, the probability of matching all 6 balls in the new lotto is $$\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{matching\ ball\ 1})\times \mathbb{P}(\mathrm{matching\ ball\ 2})\times...\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{matching\ ball\ 6})$$ $$=\frac{6}{59}\times\frac{5}{58}\times\frac{4}{57}\times\frac{3}{56}\times\frac{2}{55}\times\frac{1}{54}$$ $$=\frac{1}{45057474},$$ and the probability of matching 4 balls in the new lotto is $$(\mathrm{number\ of\ different\ ways\ of\ picking\ four\ balls\ out\ of\ six})\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{matching\ ball\ 1})\times\\...\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{matching\ ball\ 4})\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{not\ matching\ ball\ 5})\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{not\ matching\ ball\ 6})$$ $$=15\times\frac{6}{59}\times\frac{5}{58}\times\frac{4}{57}\times\frac{3}{56}\times\frac{53}{55}\times\frac{52}{54}$$ $$=\frac{3445}{7509579}.$$ In the second calculation, it is important to include the probabilities of not matching the other balls to prevent double counting the cases when more than 4 balls are matched.
Calculating a probability for every prize and then adding them up gives the probability of winning a prize. In the old draw, the probability of winning a prize was $$0.0186$$. In the new draw, it is $$0.1083$$. So Camelot are correct in claiming that you are now more likely to win a prize.
But not all prizes are equal: these probabilities do not take into account the values of the prizes. To analyse the actual winnings, we're going to have to look at the expected amount of money you will win. But first, let's look at Camelot's other claim: that under the new rules you are more likely to become a millionaire.

### Probability of winning £1,000,000

In the old draw, the only way to win a million pounds was to match all six balls. The probability of this happening was $$0.00000007151$$ or $$7.151\times 10^{-8}$$.
In the new lottery, a million pounds can be won either by matching all six balls or by winning the millionaire raffle. This will lead to different probabilities of winning on Wednesdays and Saturdays due to different numbers of people buying tickets. Based on expected sales of 16.5 million tickets on Saturdays and 8.5 million tickets on Wednesdays, the chances of becoming a millionaire on a Wednesday or Saturday are $$0.0000001398$$ ($$1.398\times 10^{-7}$$) and $$0.00000008280$$ ($$8.280\times 10^{-8}$$) respectively.
These are both higher than the probability of winning a million in the old draw, so again Camelot are correct: you are now more likely to become a millionaire...
But the new chances of becoming a millionaire are actually even higher. The probabilities given above are the chances of winning a million in a given draw. But if two balls are matched, you win a lucky dip: you could win a million in the next draw without buying another ticket. We should include this in the probability calculated above, as you are still becoming a millionaire due to the original ticket you bought.
In order to count this, let $$A_W$$ and $$A_S$$ be the probabilities of winning a million in a given draw (as given above) on a Wednesday or a Saturday, let $$B_W$$ and $$B_S$$ be the probabilities of winning a million in this draw or due to future lucky dip tickets on a Wednesday or a Saturday (the values we want to find) and let $$p$$ be the probability of matching two balls. We can write $$B_W=A_W+pB_S$$ and $$B_S=A_S+pB_W$$ since the probability of winning a million is the probability of winning in this draw ($$A$$) plus the probability of winning a lucky dip ticket and winning in the next draw ($$pB$$). Substituting and rearranging, we get $$B_W=\frac{A_W+pA_S}{1-p^2}$$ and $$B_W=\frac{A_S+pA_W}{1-p^2}.$$
Using this (and the values of $$A_S$$ and $$A_W$$ calculated earlier) gives us probabilities of $$0.0000001493$$ ($$1.493\times 10^{-7}$$) and $$0.00000009736$$ ($$9.736\times 10^{-8}$$) of becoming a millionaire on a Wednesday and a Saturday respectively. These are both significantly higher than the probability of becoming a millionaire in the old draw ($$7.151\times 10^{-8}$$).
Camelot's two claims—that you are more likely to win a prize and you are more likely to become a millionaire—are both correct. It sounds like the new lottery is a great deal, but so far we have not taken into account the size of the prizes you will win and have only shown that a very rare event will become slightly less rare. Probably the best way to measure how good a lottery is is by working out the amount of money you should expect to win, so let's now look at that.

### Expected prize money

To find the expected prize money, we must multiply the value of each prize by the probability of winning that prize and then add them up, or, in other words,
$$\sum_\mathrm{prizes}\mathrm{value\ of\ prize}\times\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{winning\ prize}).$$
Once this has been calculated, the chance of winning due to a free lucky dip entry must be taken into account as above.
In the old draw, after buying a ticket for £2, you could expect to win 78p or 83p on a Wednesday or Saturday respectively. In the new draw, the expected winnings have changed to 58p and 50p (Wednesday and Saturday respectively). Expressed in this way, it can be seen that although the headline changes look good, the overall value for money of the lottery has significantly decreased.
Looking on the bright side, this does mean that the lottery will make even more money that it can put towards charitable causes: the lottery remains an excellent way to donate your money to worthy charities!

### Similar posts

 A 20,000-to-1 baby? How to kick a conversion "Uncanny" royal coincidence World Cup stickers 2018

Comments in green were written by me. Comments in blue were not written by me.

Allowed HTML tags: <br> <a> <small> <b> <i> <s> <sup> <sub> <u> <spoiler> <ul> <ol> <li>
To prove you are not a spam bot, please type "quiet" in the box below (case sensitive):
2014-04-11

## Countdown probability, pt. 2

As well as letters games, the contestants on Countdown also take part in numbers games. Six numbers are chosen from the large numbers (25,50,75,100) and small numbers (1-10, two cards for each number) and a total between 101 and 999 (inclusive) is chosen by CECIL. The contestants then use the six numbers, with multiplication, addition, subtraction and division, to get as close to the target number as possible.
The best way to win the numbers game is to get the target exactly. This got me wondering: is there a combination of numbers which allows you to get every total between 101 and 999? And which combination of large and small numbers should be picked to give the highest chance of being able to get the target?
To work this out, I got my computer to go through every possible combination of numbers, trying every combination of operations. (I had to leave this running overnight as there are a lot of combinations!)

### Getting every total

There are 61 combinations of numbers which allow every total to be obtained. These include the following (click to see how each total can be made):
By contrast, the following combination allows no totals between 101 and 999 to be reached:
• 1 1 2 2 3 3
The number of attainable targets for each set of numbers can be found here.

### Probability of being able to reach the target

Some combinations of numbers are more likely than others. For example, 1 2 25 50 75 100 is four times as likely as 1 1 25 50 75 100, as (ignoring re-orderings) in the first combination, there are two choices for the 1 tile and 2 tile, but in the second combination there is only one choice for each 1 tile. Different ordering of tiles can be ignored as each combination with the same number of large tiles will have the same number of orderings.
By taking into account the relative probability of each combination, the following probabilities can be found:
 Number of large numbers Probability of being able to reach target 0 0.964463439 1 0.983830962 2 0.993277819 3 0.985770510 4 0.859709475
So, in order to maximise the probability of being able to reach the target, two large numbers should be chosen.
However, as this will mean that your opponent will also be able to reach the target, a better strategy might be to pick no large numbers or four large numbers and get closer to the target than your opponent, especially if you have practised pulling off answers like this.
Edit: Numbers corrected.
Edit: The code used to calculate the numbers in this post can now be found here.

### Similar posts

 Countdown probability Pointless probability A 20,000-to-1 baby? How much will I win on the new National Lottery?

Comments in green were written by me. Comments in blue were not written by me.
2016-07-20
I've pushed a version of the code to https://github.com/mscroggs/countdown-numbers-game
Matthew
2016-07-20
Sadly, I lost the code I used when I had laptop problems. However, I can remember what it did, so I shall recreate it and put it on GitHub.
Matthew
2016-07-20
If you could, I'd love to have the code you used to do this exhaustive search?

I'm a fan of the game myself (but then I'm French, so to me it's the original, "Des chiffres et des lettres"), but for the numbers game, this is pretty much irrelevant to the language and country :)
Francis Galiegue

Allowed HTML tags: <br> <a> <small> <b> <i> <s> <sup> <sub> <u> <spoiler> <ul> <ol> <li>
To prove you are not a spam bot, please type "b" then "e" then "a" then "r" in the box below (case sensitive):
2014-04-06

## Countdown probability

On Countdown, contestants have to make words from nine letters. The contestants take turns to choose how many vowels and consonants they would like. This got me wondering which was the best combination to pick in order to get a nine letter word.
Assuming the letters in countdown are still distributed like this, the probability of getting combinations of letters can be calculated. As the probability throughout the game is dependent on which letters have been picked, I have worked out the probability of getting a nine letter word on the first letters game.

### The probability of YODELLING

YODELLING has three vowels and six consonants. There are 6 (3!) ways in which the vowels could be ordered and 720 (6!) ways in which the consonants can be ordered, although each is repeated at there are two Ls, so there are 360 distinct ways to order the consonants. The probability of each of these is:
$$\frac{21\times 13\times 13\times 6\times 3\times 5\times 4\times 8\times 1}{67\times 66\times 65\times 74\times 73\times 72\times 71\times 70\times 69}$$
So the probability of getting YODELLING is:
$$\frac{6\times 360\times 21\times 13\times 13\times 6\times 3\times 5\times 4\times 8\times 1}{67\times 66\times 65\times 74\times 73\times 72\times 71\times 70\times 69} = 0.000000575874154$$

### The probability of any nine letter word

I got my computer to find the probability of every nine letter word and found the following probabilities:
 Consonants Vowels Probability of nine letter word 0 9 0 1 8 0 2 7 0 3 6 0.000546 4 5 0.019724 5 4 0.076895 6 3 0.051417 7 2 0.005662 8 1 0.000033 9 0 0
So the best way to get a nine letter word in the first letters game is to pick five consonants and four vowels.

### Similar posts

 Countdown probability, pt. 2 Pointless probability A 20,000-to-1 baby? How much will I win on the new National Lottery?

Comments in green were written by me. Comments in blue were not written by me.

Allowed HTML tags: <br> <a> <small> <b> <i> <s> <sup> <sub> <u> <spoiler> <ul> <ol> <li>
To prove you are not a spam bot, please type "snup" backwards in the box below (case sensitive):
2013-12-15

## Pointless probability

Last week, I was watching Pointless and began wondering how likely it is that a show features four new teams.
On the show, teams are given two chances to get to the final—if they are knocked out before the final round on their first appearance, then they return the following episode. In all the following, I assumed that there was an equal chance of all teams winning.
If there are four new teams on a episode, then one of these will win and not return and the other three will return. Therefore the next episode will have one new team (with probability 1). If there are three new teams on an episode: one of the new teams could win, meaning two teams return and two new teams on the next episode (with probability 3/4); or the returning team could win, meaning that there would only one new team on the next episode. These probabilities, and those for other numbers of teams are shown in the table below:
 No of new teams today Noof new teams tomorrow 1 2 3 4 1 0 0 $$\frac{1}{4}$$ 1 2 0 $$\frac{1}{2}$$ $$\frac{3}{4}$$ 0 3 $$\frac{3}{4}$$ $$\frac{1}{2}$$ 0 0 4 $$\frac{1}{4}$$ 0 0 0
Call the probability of an episode having one, two, three or four new teams $$P_1$$, $$P_2$$, $$P_3$$ and $$P_4$$ respectively. After a few episodes, the following must be satisfied:
$$P_1=\frac{1}{4}P_3+P_4$$ $$P_2=\frac{1}{2}P_2+\frac{3}{4}P_3$$ $$P_3=\frac{3}{4}P_3+\frac{1}{2}P_4$$ $$P_4=\frac{1}{4}P_1$$
And the total probability must be one:
$$P_1+P_2+P_3+P_4=1$$
These simultaneous equations can be solved to find that:
$$P_1=\frac{4}{35}$$ $$P_2=\frac{18}{35}$$ $$P_3=\frac{12}{35}$$ $$P_4=\frac{1}{35}$$
So the probability that all the teams on an episode of Pointless are new is one in 35, meaning that once in every 35 episodes we should expect to see all new teams.
Edit: This blog answered the same question in a slightly different way before I got here.

### Similar posts

 Countdown probability, pt. 2 Countdown probability A 20,000-to-1 baby? How much will I win on the new National Lottery?