- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
It's almost mathematically impossible the NBA draft lottery isn't regularly rigged
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:00 pm
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. All of these events were 65:1 to 50:1 type events.
We would expect to see, on average, one of these super long shot teams come through about every 50 years.
Of course, the universe is random and there's no guarantee things neatly according to the odds, so this sorta of long shot coming through twice or even three times over that span is def unlikely, but theoretically possible within the realm of a reality you may live to see.
However over the past 35 years we have seen a ridiculous longshot 5 times?
The odds of that are the equivalent of someone flipping a coin 200 times in a row and getting exclusively heads or tails, 200 times straight.
If you witnessed such an event, would you conclude that you just saw the most unfathomably unlikely outcome in the word? Or would you conclude the coin is rigged? Which is the more likely of the two?
9
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:01 pm to StansberryRules
Your math is illogical. There are multiple teams with odds less than 2%, so the odds of one winning is closer to 5%. 4 out of 40 is not that much of a statistical anomaly.
That said, this lottery was rigged AF
That said, this lottery was rigged AF
This post was edited on 5/12/25 at 9:03 pm
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:04 pm to TheWalrus
quote:
There are multiple teams with odds less than 2%, so the odds of one winning is closer to 5%
You are correct. If you factor all the long shots together you get to about 100 straight coin flips in a row instead. That I totally believe is legit.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:04 pm to StansberryRules
And your 200 times straight heads being equivalent to a longshot hitting 5 out of 40 times makes absolutely no sense
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:05 pm to StansberryRules
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:05 pm to TheWalrus
It really isn't.
It is highly improbable but also entirely plausible
These things are not the same as being 'almost impossible', or the insinuation that an instance is rigged.
You know what is about equally improbable as the draft lottery results?
The outcome of the first 25 shots of any game occurring in any pattern. Its highly unlikely an NBA game has had the same make-miss-make sequence ever, for more than about 20 shots. That isn't a conspiracy either-- it is just math.
It is highly improbable but also entirely plausible
These things are not the same as being 'almost impossible', or the insinuation that an instance is rigged.
You know what is about equally improbable as the draft lottery results?
The outcome of the first 25 shots of any game occurring in any pattern. Its highly unlikely an NBA game has had the same make-miss-make sequence ever, for more than about 20 shots. That isn't a conspiracy either-- it is just math.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:11 pm to StansberryRules
The chances of this order
Mavs
Spurs
76ers
Was something like .0014%
Mavs
Spurs
76ers
Was something like .0014%
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:12 pm to StansberryRules
Lol
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:14 pm to BoardReader
You'd have to add in the fact that. This happened and the two times the pelicans got #1. First with new ownership, then with the exit of Davis.
Now this.
I'm not saying it's all a fluke. It does make you go hmm.
Now this.
I'm not saying it's all a fluke. It does make you go hmm.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:16 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
All of these events were 65:1 to 50:1 type events
No
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:18 pm to TheWalrus
quote:
Your math is illogical. There are multiple teams with odds less than 2%, so the odds of one winning is closer to 5%. 4 out of 40 is not that much of a statistical anomaly.
That said, this lottery was rigged AF
You're arguing the math like people argue grammar and totally missing the underlying point. You can group the long shots together (say the bottom 5 teams in terms of odds), run the numbers. The answer will still show it's astronomically too high. You basically admit that in your final sentence.
Just as a hypothetical question, how many flips of a coin would you need to see land heads in a row until you began suspecting the coin was fixed? Any logical person is going to start thinking something is probably wrong after say 10+.
No matter how you do your longshot groupings, you're gonna find the math says it stinks to high heaven.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:20 pm to StansberryRules
You are fricking terrible at probabilities 
.
The answer based on the data you provided - at least 5 times in 35 years - (ain't nobody got time to verify it) is 3.6%.
Obviously still low, but not this 100-200 coin flips you keep talking about. wtf
. The answer based on the data you provided - at least 5 times in 35 years - (ain't nobody got time to verify it) is 3.6%.
Obviously still low, but not this 100-200 coin flips you keep talking about. wtf
Posted on 5/12/25 at 9:20 pm to WeareLATech
Even the 2003 lottery. Yeah the Cavs had the best odds, but they also had a 77.5% chance of NOT getting the #1 pick.
But the high school phenom from Akron playing for the local team that hadn't finished better than 11th in the Eastern Conference for the last 5 seasons was too perfect to not pass up.
But the high school phenom from Akron playing for the local team that hadn't finished better than 11th in the Eastern Conference for the last 5 seasons was too perfect to not pass up.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:20 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
You're arguing the math like people argue grammar and totally missing the underlying point. You can group the long shots together (say the bottom 5 teams in terms of odds), run the numbers. The answer will still show it's astronomically too high. You basically admit that in your final sentence. Just as a hypothetical question, how many flips of a coin would you need to see land heads in a row until you began suspecting the coin was fixed? Any logical person is going to start thinking something is probably wrong after say 10+. No matter how you do your longshot groupings, you're gonna find the math says it stinks to high heaven.
Why would someone that’s clearly never studied statistics argue with people about probabilities?
Can you show your work on the 200 coin flip equivalency?
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:30 pm to southdowns84
quote:
Can you show your work on the 200 coin flip equivalency?
It's not the correct answer, was more an example/thought experiment to show how an extremely low probability event that is technically not impossible is way less likely than the event being fixed. My bad for not stating such and I would go back and add a disclaimer stating as such but you nits won't care. You're intentionally avoiding the actual issue being raised.
There are almost infinite ways you can produce an number depending on how you wanna chop things up. Do you group the bottom 3? The bottom 5? Do you factor in other picks besides #1?
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:38 pm to Murph4HOF
quote:And then conveniently get the #1 pick a year after Lebron goes to Miami, then win the lottery again 3 years later to magically lure Lebron back home. Both times with sub-3% odds
Even the 2003 lottery. Yeah the Cavs had the best odds, but they also had a 77.5% chance of NOT getting the #1 pick.
But the high school phenom from Akron playing for the local team that hadn't finished better than 11th in the Eastern Conference for the last 5 seasons was too perfect to not pass up.
NOLA conveniently won the lottery at 13% odds too when the league had just sold the team to Benson.
Now the Mavs. And the Spurs got the 2nd pick with only about 12% chance at a top-2 pick. Just the ammo they need to go after Giannis this offseason to pair him with Wemby. Too many low odds “coincidences” for teams where the league stands to benefit greatly from them winning the lottery
This post was edited on 5/12/25 at 10:55 pm
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:40 pm to StansberryRules
You sound retarded
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:45 pm to StansberryRules
quote:
You're intentionally avoiding the actual issue being raised.
No, I’m intentionally asking you to answer a question I’m almost certain you cant answer independently, but one that you could easily obtain an answer for by simply using Google.
And if you think I’m splitting hairs, then you’re missing the point. The probabilities of your 200 and 100 coin flip examples occurring are in completely different galaxies than what we’ve witnessed in the NBA draft lottery era.
Posted on 5/12/25 at 10:49 pm to castorinho
1 out of 7 going to ~2% odds is sus
Posted on 5/12/25 at 11:07 pm to RemouladeSawce
quote:as has been pointed out already in this thread, it's 5%.
1 out of 7 going to ~2% odds is sus
And, sticking with the “1 out of 7“ you just created...you have 26% of the 5% case coming up at least once. Not that ridiculous now, is it?
But like I said above the math for the actual lottery is much lower than that. But still not 100-200 flips bad like the OP was talking about
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News