- Home
- Premium Memberships
- Lottery Results
- Forums
- Predictions
- Lottery Post Videos
- News
- Search Drawings
- Search Lottery Post
- Lottery Systems
- Lottery Charts
- Lottery Wheels
- Worldwide Jackpots
- Quick Picks
- On This Day in History
- Blogs
- Online Games
- Premium Features
- Contact Us
- Whitelist Lottery Post
- Rules
- Lottery Book Store
- Lottery Post Gift Shop
The time is now 8:34 pm
You last visited
April 18, 2024, 7:20 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)
So what would the "Holy Grail" of Pick 3 playing be?Prev TopicNext Topic
-
What would the "Holy Grail" of playing the Pick 3 game look like?...
Unless the game is completely corrupt (which it's not), it's not "knowing the winning number in advance," because that's literally impossible. But unless you believe the games (i.e., that aren't run off falling balls) are just randomly picking any number from 000-999 using no factors whatsoever… there has to be a reduced pool of numbers at work in any given play. And we here on lp all use filters to sift whatever pools we've improvised for our winning selections.
So we have two tools at our disposal: pools, and filters.
A filter isn't a pool, though often it looks like one. A "due sum," for example, isn't a pool, because there's no guarantee a due sum is coming in X number of plays.
A pool is: A reduced set of numbers that are guaranteed within X number of plays to pay off.
The only immediately guaranteed pool of numbers I know, is the pool of one thousand numbers. Too big. So we reduce it.
You can, say, reduce it by half. That's still 500 numbers. One can measure the pay-off rate, and then create a formula for that pool. But that pool is much too large for feasibility.
But here's one guaranteed, dramatically reduced pool: playing boxes. The pool of 120 singles boxes reduces the overall pool, and guarantees pay-off within (most of the time) one or two plays max. Again, though, it's too large for our normal use, not to mention profitability. So we filter those 120 boxes down.
The Holy Grail, then, still wouldn't be ever finer filters applied to this 120 box pool - because filters can never take the place of a guaranteed pool.
The Holy Grail of number sets - our working pools - would have to then have two elements: (1) Be reduced to a manageable amount, and (2) guaranteed to pay off within manageable amounts of plays.
But what is "manageable"? Debatable. But I'd venture to say... speaking in terms of singles boxes only now...
If one could discover (a) a pool of numbers somewhere between 10-20; that (b) was guaranteed to pay off within 10 plays (with, ideally, the bulk of such payoffs being less than about 1/2 that amount, i.e., < five to six plays consistently); and, as difficult as those two alone are, the necessary piéce de résistance: (c) If this pool could be calculated before any filter was ever applied to it.
... then that would indeed be the Holy Grail of the Pick 3 game. Right?
-
What would the "Holy Grail" of playing the Pick 3 game look like?...
Unless the game is completely corrupt (which it's not), it's not "knowing the winning number in advance," because that's literally impossible. But unless you believe the games (i.e., that aren't run off falling balls) are just randomly picking any number from 000-999 using no factors whatsoever… there has to be a reduced pool of numbers at work in any given play. And we here on lp all use filters to sift whatever pools we've improvised for our winning selections.
So we have two tools at our disposal: pools, and filters.
A filter isn't a pool, though often it looks like one. A "due sum," for example, isn't a pool, because there's no guarantee a due sum is coming in X number of plays.
A pool is: A reduced set of numbers that are guaranteed within X number of plays to pay off.
The only immediately guaranteed pool of numbers I know, is the pool of one thousand numbers. Too big. So we reduce it.
You can, say, reduce it by half. That's still 500 numbers. One can measure the pay-off rate, and then create a formula for that pool. But that pool is much too large for feasibility.
But here's one guaranteed, dramatically reduced pool: playing boxes. The pool of 120 singles boxes reduces the overall pool, and guarantees pay-off within (most of the time) one or two plays max. Again, though, it's too large for our normal use, not to mention profitability. So we filter those 120 boxes down.
The Holy Grail, then, still wouldn't be ever finer filters applied to this 120 box pool - because filters can never take the place of a guaranteed pool.
The Holy Grail of number sets - our working pools - would have to then have two elements: (1) Be reduced to a manageable amount, and (2) guaranteed to pay off within manageable amounts of plays.
But what is "manageable"? Debatable. But I'd venture to say... speaking in terms of singles boxes only now...
If one could discover (a) a pool of numbers somewhere between 10-20; that (b) was guaranteed to pay off within 10 plays (with, ideally, the bulk of such payoffs being less than about 1/2 that amount, i.e., < five to six plays consistently); and, as difficult as those two alone are, the necessary piéce de résistance: (c) If this pool could be calculated before any filter was ever applied to it.
... then that would indeed be the Holy Grail of the Pick 3 game. Right?
Wow!
Some people say the game is strictly random. However, there are systems that work. That's what the forum is all about.
There is no guarantee in gambling. Pools,percentages (chasing numbers) can be costly. Claims of high percentages that a double ,single number will hit are ridiculous and can drain your pocketbook. Use the basics +111 rundowns or a system that works in your state after backtesting.
If you wish group the last 10 and look for trends etc. Then spend wisely. Get some wins and build a betting "bank" and budget from there.
I'm sitting here listening to Merle Haggard sipping some coffee!
-
Wow!
Some people say the game is strictly random. However, there are systems that work. That's what the forum is all about.
There is no guarantee in gambling. Pools,percentages (chasing numbers) can be costly. Claims of high percentages that a double ,single number will hit are ridiculous and can drain your pocketbook. Use the basics +111 rundowns or a system that works in your state after backtesting.
If you wish group the last 10 and look for trends etc. Then spend wisely. Get some wins and build a betting "bank" and budget from there.
-
I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain. -
The goal is to approach the Pick 3 & Pick 4 game sensibly and systematically!!
I'm not like the guy who predicted the end of the world and nothing happened.
-
-
I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain. -
You know IT!!!
The goal is to approach the Pick 3 & Pick 4 game sensibly and systematically!!
I'm not like the guy who predicted the end of the world and nothing happened.
-
Many people use 111 to get pairs for the next draw. I don't use every one of the rundown.
Maybe one or two sets max.
I'm sitting here listening to Merle Haggard sipping some coffee!
-
"There is no such thing as luck; only adequate or inadequate preparation to cope with a statistical universe."
~Robert A. Heinlein
-
These are all great ideas, of course. But I guess no one here's too interested in methods that isolate actual pools of numbers that pay off consistently and (relatively) quickly? Pools that you isolate before you ever even apply your favorite filter #1 to them?
I mean, I can make up my own pools; dividing the table into random sets of my choosing, depending on the amount. Twenty singles boxes is 1/6th of the pool, so hitting consistently within about nine plays isn't necessarily something amazing... it falls into the normal amount given the laws of probability.
Except, it doesn't. If you divide the boxes into say groups of tens, in the traditional way (starting ABC [012] and running through to the end), you notice some sets pay off rapid-fire, while some go far beyond regular probability parameters; often, a minority of sets pay off consistently or rapidly, with the majority going far beyond manageability. The effect of the algorithm as the secret hand at play.
So any manageable pool-sets that effectively exterminated all anomalous events and "long outs" would be... something great, if you could find it. Think about it: small sets tested to pay off consistently/soon; now apply filters each play depending upon the state of play - paring them down to (in theory) five to seven powerful plays per pool; you could go ten times on such a set with ease... in theory.
So is it starry-eyed to search out such magical pools?
-
These are all great ideas, of course. But I guess no one here's too interested in methods that isolate actual pools of numbers that pay off consistently and (relatively) quickly? Pools that you isolate before you ever even apply your favorite filter #1 to them?
I mean, I can make up my own pools; dividing the table into random sets of my choosing, depending on the amount. Twenty singles boxes is 1/6th of the pool, so hitting consistently within about nine plays isn't necessarily something amazing... it falls into the normal amount given the laws of probability.
Except, it doesn't. If you divide the boxes into say groups of tens, in the traditional way (starting ABC [012] and running through to the end), you notice some sets pay off rapid-fire, while some go far beyond regular probability parameters; often, a minority of sets pay off consistently or rapidly, with the majority going far beyond manageability. The effect of the algorithm as the secret hand at play.
So any manageable pool-sets that effectively exterminated all anomalous events and "long outs" would be... something great, if you could find it. Think about it: small sets tested to pay off consistently/soon; now apply filters each play depending upon the state of play - paring them down to (in theory) five to seven powerful plays per pool; you could go ten times on such a set with ease... in theory.
So is it starry-eyed to search out such magical pools?
Procrastination Stops Progress ⇒Σ
-
How? I'm looking for them myself!
-
These are all great ideas, of course. But I guess no one here's too interested in methods that isolate actual pools of numbers that pay off consistently and (relatively) quickly? Pools that you isolate before you ever even apply your favorite filter #1 to them?
I mean, I can make up my own pools; dividing the table into random sets of my choosing, depending on the amount. Twenty singles boxes is 1/6th of the pool, so hitting consistently within about nine plays isn't necessarily something amazing... it falls into the normal amount given the laws of probability.
Except, it doesn't. If you divide the boxes into say groups of tens, in the traditional way (starting ABC [012] and running through to the end), you notice some sets pay off rapid-fire, while some go far beyond regular probability parameters; often, a minority of sets pay off consistently or rapidly, with the majority going far beyond manageability. The effect of the algorithm as the secret hand at play.
So any manageable pool-sets that effectively exterminated all anomalous events and "long outs" would be... something great, if you could find it. Think about it: small sets tested to pay off consistently/soon; now apply filters each play depending upon the state of play - paring them down to (in theory) five to seven powerful plays per pool; you could go ten times on such a set with ease... in theory.
So is it starry-eyed to search out such magical pools?
So is it starry-eyed to search out such magical pools?
Nope. Just create it. I gave my example up top. I'd take the magic dust out of it though.
I dislike sneezing. lol
small sets tested to pay off consistently/soon
It all goes back to finding out which digit plays the most in your state game.
If it plays the most then there's no need to create a "magic pool" with the less popular numbers.
But I guess no one here's too interested in methods that isolate actual pools of numbers that pay off consistently
So if it isn't that special magical pool you seek or have... does that mean it wouldn't pay off consistently???!!!
What are you more concerned about? The MONEY or the Pool??
If you're concerned about consistency and quickness then a Magic Pool wouldn't make any huge difference. *shrugs*
...and lets say(hypothetically speaking) you absolutely need a pool to win quickly. Doesn't the pool have to be created
anyways??
One could find the next day's pair and add 0-9 (first magic pool)
or if it's a high pair add 0-4 (1st 5 powerful set) and if it's a low pair add 5-9 (2nd 5 powerful set) $3.50c each
If one can do this almost every single day, then poof Magic
But I think the real magic is based on how you Wager. I like to get in and get out quickly.
The goal is to approach the Pick 3 & Pick 4 game sensibly and systematically!!
I'm not like the guy who predicted the end of the world and nothing happened.
-
How? I'm looking for them myself!
Procrastination Stops Progress ⇒Σ
