Employees could really game the system. On average there's 1 "big" prize (outside the GLEP prizes) every 4 packs. Any time you see a pack go from start to ~5 remaining without a big prize, buy every remaining ticket.
There's also guaranteed restrictions on the maximum number of losers in a row. So if you see ~6+ (depends on ticket) losers in a row, then buy the next few until you win. I've run simulations on those distributions and it's profitable. But it's a situation that only an employee could take advantage of. And it probably comes up rarely.
I'm a bit confused. How does the employee know that the previous 6 tickets were losers? It's not like all customers are scratching them off then and there in front of them?
> It's not like all customers are scratching them off then and there in front of them?
A good number of tickets (most tickets?) are purchased by habitual players who'll buy many tickets per sale, and many of those people will even scratch them off in the store:
> “Some customers come in up to three times a day to play, spending up to one hour to scratch-off tickets right in the store after spending $300 or more.”
If you don't see this happening often, you're not likely living in poor or low-income neighborhoods, not patronizing the local convenience stores, or at least not paying attention to the 1 or 2 individuals that you'll often see lingering near the counter.
I've heard of this off and on for years, but seeing as I don't know anyone who has actually done it I think practically it's not too profitable. If he has everything in a sqlite db though, hmm..
Nope. Like throwing a coin, with scratch-off ticket packs actions don't have any effect on the following packs. They're mixed to prevent precisely attacks such as the one you describe.
There's also guaranteed restrictions on the maximum number of losers in a row. So if you see ~6+ (depends on ticket) losers in a row, then buy the next few until you win. I've run simulations on those distributions and it's profitable. But it's a situation that only an employee could take advantage of. And it probably comes up rarely.