Quick Picks can't match the power of Self PicksPrevious TopicNext Topic

Ok, I got enough stimulus response from it to show the fatal flaws it has.

We can establish that it's a propionate of the Quick Pick. It has posted topics to support this, including the link it has posted in this topic. Obviously it likes the idea that someone winning using Quick Picks is a good thing and that purchasing Quick Picks makes it happy and proud. We can see this by the posting of jackpot wins, but moreover anyone winning in any form of a Quick Pick is a plus, too. It would have to be true that even a lesser winning prize would also satisfy it, after all, it's a Quick Pick.

However, this leads to a contradiction, especially in this post. See, up till this point I haven't purchased any Self Picks I've been posting in the Lottery Post's predictions board. They were merely posted for show; to illustrate how Self Picking and Wheeling numbers is more efficient than Quick Picking. The Paradox ensues when I made a Quick Pick purchase to prove my point. I've only made a Quick Pick purchase and you'd think that it would be happy I made the Quick Pick purchase; in an effort to help prove its case. But, just the opposite happened; it was offended. You'd think that if someone is all for Quick Picks they'd be thanking me for helping support its case.

Not only was it offended, it tried to belittle the Quick Pick win of $11.00 and more significant the clear differential between the Quick Pick win and my potential Self Pick win of $22.00. I know that I would prefer the $22.00 return over the $11.00 return. It appears to be offended by the fact that the Self Picks performed better than the Quick Picks. And thanks for that non-encouragement for making my $11.00 Quick Pick win. Where's the 'high-5', 'at-a-boy', nada.

It is correct in pointing out the 'spending vs. winnings' though, because with every touted Quick Pick jackpot win there were a vast number of Quick Pick casualties that came with it. It's disgusting to see someone prop themselves on the losses of others and taking credit for others to make their point look good. I did point out earlier in this post and is an established fact that 70-80% of the purchases are Quick Picks; seems to me 'relative to the buy' was and is relevant all along.

Its wrong in assuming that people just want to win the jackpot. Actually, most of the people I talk with hope to get back at least some thing back. I don't think that anyone would ever turn down a winning ticket, even if that prize is less than the jackpot. On that point of a win, yes, $22.00 would be a win regardless how much was spent.

'If one is playing quick picks, is there really such a thing as "your own quick pikcs"?  Think about that one.' You're kidding, right? This has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen in a while. If the Quick Picks you purchase are not yours, then who-the-hell's are they? Surely if you win the jackpot on the $1.00 play you've been working, then by the reckoning, part of that win is mine too; I'll take 50%.

I've purchased my Quick Picks, let's see yours.

we did this earlier this year on a couple of threads, self picks did better.

http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/160905/3

This was actually checking to see if the Self pickd' seeded the Qpiqud'. Not quite the same but I did post a similar Self vs. Qp. and self pick came out ahead. I may try again against BM5 MD. instead of DC6 which is computer drawn. Qps suque as far as I am concerned, always have.

Alright, here we go again, Quick Picks to follow.

Scanned ticket pictures.

JADE Lottery

" On that point of a win, yes, $22.00 would be a win regardless how much was spent."

I'll consier that somewhere between "lotto logic" and insanity. There's no such thing as a win "regardless how much was spent".  Sounds like something a system seller would say.

Foo koo aye kwat.

Vietnamese, literal translation "ambush two tangerines".

Bye.  

Bye? And that's it's? Wow, you really put up a fight though; lasted longer than most, I like that.

Well, ok, picks topic all aside, I really do enjoy the fight more than the actual topic itself. Regardless if I'm right or wrong, it was a pleasure doing battle with you. Winning in a lottery fashion is nothing compared to this, this is priceless.

Good luck to ya guy, I hope those Quick Picks work out for ya.

K, here last nights results. Quick Picks are...

And my Self Picks...

Awe, gee... I guess I lose...  gosh darn it.

I should feel bad, but if it weren't for this other experiment I've been running.

Actually, I expected these results.

You might want to review your ceiloprstuy.

I have.

JADE Lottery

How is rthis:

" On that point of a win, yes, $22.00 would be a win regardless how much was spent."

any different than someone saying they play all the PB  or MM numbers (bottom matrix) to "guarantee a winner".

"Well, I play all 46 Mega numbers so I know I'm going to win $2"

Let's see, play $46, win $2,  = - $44, no?

Buono fortuna 

I dunno, according to last night's drawing there were $2,750.00 - 2nd place wins, $2,736.00 - 3rd place wins and $10,128.00 - 4th place wins, from the Wisconsin Lottery website. From what you're telling me, none of those should be winners. Also, when I scan my tickets some of them are saying $1.00 winner. Must be something wrong from what you are telling me; none of us should be winning. The 4th place total was greater than the starting jackpot level. You'd better contact the Wisconsin Lottery and tell them they are misrepresenting themselves by telling people they are winners.

Jade,

 I don't think anybody here can bring forth a detailed argument to rebuff anything you've shown with an equivalent amount of empirical data or data analysis. I agree with your premise,  because I have come to the same conclusion, back a while. 

The other thread referencing QP winners,  is not a true test,  it shows nothing that we already don't know. 

Your thread here is a true test or comparison that cannot be easily disproven.  People need to understand that you are comparing 'tit for tat' or ticket for ticket.   The winners of jackpots w/QP'S had nothing to do with your analysis.   The arguments directed at your premise are about another subject, beating a proverbial dead horse.

People need to remember we are talking 50 SelfPicks VS. 50 Quickpicks and nothing else. The outcome results for winners last night had nothing to do with these data sets.  The results of the drawing need only apply to these Self Picks and Quick Picks posted here by Jade, that's it, nothing else, they are not being evaluated against anything else but the outcome.

I hope this helps, please let me know if I am wrong.

Nah, you're pretty much correct.

I have Bigger Fish to fry.

This topic is just the appetizer before the meal.

You'll see, just look for a new topic by me some time later this week or next.

I'm working Experiment 1 for posting.

Some one else here at the LP has some insight into what I'm doing.

JADE Lottery

OK, since you said:

 "Well, ok, picks topic all aside, I really do enjoy the fight more than the actual topic itself. Regardless if I'm right or wrong, it was a pleasure doing battle with you. Winning in a lottery fashion is nothing compared to this, this is priceless."

I'll play some more ( gee, I didn't know I'd meet a 5-point Calvinist on a lottery board!)

OK, here we go, earlier, you said

"Its wrong in assuming that people just want to win the jackpot. Actually, most of the people I talk with hope to get back at least some thing back."

That may be true for the people you talk to, but the average sale is $1.  The average player is hoping for a jackpot, and not really any anticipated "ROI" (return on "investment") other than that- and as I've stated before, the lotteries know all too well that all the "chump change" prizes just go to purchase more tickets.

Looking at a Pick 6 game, the average result is 0, 1, or 2 numbers- which doesn't pay at all. Lotteries are designed this way.  

You also said

"Also, when I scan my tickets some of them are saying $1.00 winner."

Of course they do. Who owns the scanner? Think marketing, what do you expect it to say, "You played $50 and are getting paid $1 for this one, schmuck, please come again!"?

A couple of years ago I was more neutral about this, but after I subscribed to the e-mail for my state's daily pick 5 game, I've seen over 3 years worth of jackpopt winners being quite a propenderance of quick picks. 

Like anything esle, it's hard to argue with results, they always speak for themselves.

'Looking at a Pick 6 game, the average result is 0, 1, or 2 numbers- which doesn't pay at all.'

Typical 'apples to oranges' comparison, Pick 5 and Pick 6 are different combinatorially. If you're going to talk about Pick 5, let's keep it on the same page. Don't interject with a Pick 6 game as a diversionary tactic. The majority of your posts have been Pick 5 related, keep it that way.

There is this part you forgot to mention, 'You'd better contact the Wisconsin Lottery and tell them they are misrepresenting themselves by telling people they are winners.' Your telling us that the lower tier prizes are not winners, but the state says they are. I'm only reiterating what the state is telling me. A win is a win regardless of the prize size and on that fact, the Self Picks win and the Quick Picks lose. Seems you have a problem with the Wisconsin Lottery and their marketing department. And again I'd say, 'You'd better contact the Wisconsin Lottery and tell them they are misrepresenting themselves by telling people they are winners.'

',I've seen over 3 years worth of jackpopt winners being quite a propenderance of quick picks.'

You need to take your 'Jackpot Goggles' off and look at the whole picture. Jackpots are not the end all and be all of the Lottery Playing Universe. When you get down to it, the lower tier prizes can sometimes total more than the Jackpot itself.

CT,

You're equivocating two different sets of circumstances,  tests, theories, game parameters.

The jackpot winners of the games is another discussion, a different data set.

Referencing winners of games is irrelevant to this test, it is a different data set.

Capeesh?

Yeah, ok, silly me, I was going by the subject title and assumed the idea was to get the ball into the end zone, didn't know we were playing for 2 and 3 point scores.

Have fun.