Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
The time is now 12:35 am
You last visited September 3, 2014, 12:31 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Interest In Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems

Topic closed. 99 replies. Last post 3 years ago by lotterybraker.

Page 1 of 7
53
PrintE-mailLink

What are the Merits of Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems?

I think it would provide valuable insights. [ 41 ]  [64.06%]
I think it would be a waste of time. [ 6 ]  [9.38%]
I Don't Know but I would like to learn about it. [ 13 ]  [20.31%]
I don't know and I don't care. [ 4 ]  [6.25%]
Total Valid Votes [ 64 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 1 ]  
jimmy4164's avatar - andy warhol.jpg
State of Mind
United States
Member #93949
July 10, 2010
2142 Posts
Offline
Posted: April 18, 2011, 2:00 am - IP Logged

If you are reading this you are probably aware that there are several people posting in the Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems Thread who seem to have a vested interest in disrupting serious discussion of the subject or possibly just enjoy frustrating someone whose ideas they don't like.  Whatever their motivations, I need to determine if it is worth any further effort on my part to try to introduce Monte Carlo Methods and discussion.  I feel these people are behaving very rudely and foolishly, but if they have the support of the majority, I will gladly drop the subject.

The two charts below illustrate examples of the kinds of studies that can be made with the help of Random Number Generators.  In this case, a comparison of the risks in two different stock trading systems is made.

Thanks for your participation.

--Jimmy4164

========


"Betting systems votaries are spiritually akin to the proponents of perpetual motion
machines, butting their heads against the Second Law of Thermodynamics."
The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic by Richard Arnold Epstein

    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
    mid-Ohio
    United States
    Member #9
    March 24, 2001
    17842 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: April 18, 2011, 4:27 pm - IP Logged

    Could any of this testing have shown during the first month that Tennessee used a computer RNG for their pick3 drawings which was not producing any doubles or triples because of a mistake that the odds of a double or triple hit were zero and the odds of a straight or box hit with three different numbers were 1:720 and 1:120 instead of the usual 1:1000 and 1:220?

    If all it does is show the odds of winning a lottery game with certain parameters are the same as those calculated and posted on the play slips instead of showing that some oddities in the drawings results of a particular game could change the odds of winning then what good is it?

    * you don't need more tickets, just the right ticket * 
    * your best chance to win a lottery jackpot is to buy a ticket * 
        Wink 

      Avatar
      NASHVILLE, TENN
      United States
      Member #33372
      February 20, 2006
      999 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: April 18, 2011, 9:11 pm - IP Logged

      No matter what subject you decide to bring up on this forum, there will be people telling you "It can'be be done!"

      So go for it and try to ignore the nay-sayers.  Like the poor, they will be with us always.


        United States
        Member #71120
        February 19, 2009
        984 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: April 19, 2011, 10:57 am - IP Logged

        An no matter what is said and done on systems this state pays in that certain range payout anyway.When I go to Ky or Ga to play the excitment of it is awesome...Tennessee makes a sick feeling in my gutt..

          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - DiscoBallGlowing

          United States
          Member #59354
          March 13, 2008
          2119 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: April 20, 2011, 3:27 am - IP Logged

          Could any of this testing have shown during the first month that Tennessee used a computer RNG for their pick3 drawings which was not producing any doubles or triples because of a mistake that the odds of a double or triple hit were zero and the odds of a straight or box hit with three different numbers were 1:720 and 1:120 instead of the usual 1:1000 and 1:220?

          If all it does is show the odds of winning a lottery game with certain parameters are the same as those calculated and posted on the play slips instead of showing that some oddities in the drawings results of a particular game could change the odds of winning then what good is it?

          I Agree!

          RL

            jimmy4164's avatar - andy warhol.jpg
            State of Mind
            United States
            Member #93949
            July 10, 2010
            2142 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: April 20, 2011, 12:16 pm - IP Logged

            Could any of this testing have shown during the first month that Tennessee used a computer RNG for their pick3 drawings which was not producing any doubles or triples because of a mistake that the odds of a double or triple hit were zero and the odds of a straight or box hit with three different numbers were 1:720 and 1:120 instead of the usual 1:1000 and 1:220?

            If all it does is show the odds of winning a lottery game with certain parameters are the same as those calculated and posted on the play slips instead of showing that some oddities in the drawings results of a particular game could change the odds of winning then what good is it?

            No need to remind me that this is a picture of a roulette simulation and not a Pick-3 game.  Be patient.

              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
              mid-Ohio
              United States
              Member #9
              March 24, 2001
              17842 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: April 20, 2011, 1:55 pm - IP Logged

              No need to remind me that this is a picture of a roulette simulation and not a Pick-3 game.  Be patient.

              I was thinking your would be showing  and explaining charts generated by your tests and simulations rather pictures of some one else work.

              * you don't need more tickets, just the right ticket * 
              * your best chance to win a lottery jackpot is to buy a ticket * 
                  Wink 

                garyo1954's avatar - garyo
                Dallas, Texas
                United States
                Member #4549
                May 2, 2004
                872 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: April 20, 2011, 2:20 pm - IP Logged

                I was thinking your would be showing  and explaining charts generated by your tests and simulations rather pictures of some one else work.

                I was thinking the same thing RJOH. This looks like a scanned page of "Anti-Lottery Anonymous Weekly." Maybe if we can convince him to flip it over, we can all read "How I BEAT Monty Hall's car door problem!" by Don Catlain.

                Or it could be a sales circular for Krogers. In which case, none of us would have to leave the house to see what their specials are.

                  jimmy4164's avatar - andy warhol.jpg
                  State of Mind
                  United States
                  Member #93949
                  July 10, 2010
                  2142 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: April 20, 2011, 2:25 pm - IP Logged

                  I was thinking your would be showing  and explaining charts generated by your tests and simulations rather pictures of some one else work.

                  I was hoping you might have an observation to make on the charts, rather than merely pointing out that someone else produced them.

                  Be patient.

                    Avatar
                    Kentucky
                    United States
                    Member #32652
                    February 14, 2006
                    5412 Posts
                    Online
                    Posted: April 20, 2011, 3:41 pm - IP Logged

                    I was thinking your would be showing  and explaining charts generated by your tests and simulations rather pictures of some one else work.

                    I was thinking it would be easier to divide 2 by 38 if I wanted to know the house edge in roulette. He could have explained how he got the "2" and and "38", but pretty graphs are attention grabbers!

                      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                      mid-Ohio
                      United States
                      Member #9
                      March 24, 2001
                      17842 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: April 20, 2011, 3:51 pm - IP Logged

                      I was hoping you might have an observation to make on the charts, rather than merely pointing out that someone else produced them.

                      Be patient.

                      The only other observation I could have made was the one you said you didn't need to be reminded of.

                      * you don't need more tickets, just the right ticket * 
                      * your best chance to win a lottery jackpot is to buy a ticket * 
                          Wink 

                        jimmy4164's avatar - andy warhol.jpg
                        State of Mind
                        United States
                        Member #93949
                        July 10, 2010
                        2142 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: April 20, 2011, 4:06 pm - IP Logged

                        Stack47 and RJOh have helped me narrow the problem with their perceptions here down to two possibilities.

                        Either they are color blind, and can only see that RED bar in the middle of the roulette chart...

                        or, the BLUE bars mean absolutely nothing to them.

                          Avatar

                          United States
                          Member #105316
                          January 29, 2011
                          433 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: April 20, 2011, 7:35 pm - IP Logged

                          There are dozens of real lottery systems alive and well on the American continent.  Simulating one instead of using any of the real ones seems redundant and a lot less trustworthy than using one with a cadre of overseers and a security infrastructure.

                          Backtesting is primarily a tool intended to assist in narrowing the avenues of approach to developing a system intended to predict lottery draw results.  But backtesting a simulated system seems an empty exercize.

                          In fact, the ultimate test for any backtest is forward testing.  If backtesting doesn't result in a means of providing accurate forward prediction it does nothing.

                            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                            mid-Ohio
                            United States
                            Member #9
                            March 24, 2001
                            17842 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: April 20, 2011, 7:57 pm - IP Logged

                            Stack47 and RJOh have helped me narrow the problem with their perceptions here down to two possibilities.

                            Either they are color blind, and can only see that RED bar in the middle of the roulette chart...

                            or, the BLUE bars mean absolutely nothing to them.

                            I can see both the RED and BLUE bars, so you're half right.

                            * you don't need more tickets, just the right ticket * 
                            * your best chance to win a lottery jackpot is to buy a ticket * 
                                Wink 

                              jimmy4164's avatar - andy warhol.jpg
                              State of Mind
                              United States
                              Member #93949
                              July 10, 2010
                              2142 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: April 20, 2011, 11:37 pm - IP Logged

                              There are dozens of real lottery systems alive and well on the American continent.  Simulating one instead of using any of the real ones seems redundant and a lot less trustworthy than using one with a cadre of overseers and a security infrastructure.

                              Backtesting is primarily a tool intended to assist in narrowing the avenues of approach to developing a system intended to predict lottery draw results.  But backtesting a simulated system seems an empty exercize.

                              In fact, the ultimate test for any backtest is forward testing.  If backtesting doesn't result in a means of providing accurate forward prediction it does nothing.

                              To me, a backtest of a lottery system would be to use your system rules to pick your numbers, sequence through actual past draws, and keep a tally of your equity.  A forward test is not usually undertaken until a system looks viable on the [back]test data.  I have yet to see a lottery system meeting this criteria for any reasonable length of time - have you?

                              The roulette chart here was based on 50,000 random gamblers each betting on 1,000 spins, using a RNG to produce all the data.  I call this a simulation with NO SYSTEM involved.  So, I guess I really don't know what your point is here in this context.