Quick Picks can't match the power of Self Picks

Reply #97

JADELottery — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 05:47:39 GMT

This post has morphed ---> https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/167260

Reply #96

JADELottery — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:46:57 GMT

Also, here are the actual payouts for the Wheel Distribution of Matched Numbers. Just multiply the amount by the number matched in the corresponding column of the Wheel Distribution of Matched Numbers.

012345

$0.00$0.00$1.00$2.00$50.00$10,000.00

Reply #95

JADELottery — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:40:28 GMT

Below is the final tally for Experiment 1 and following is the early results for Experiment 2. Experiment 2 is approaching the number selection a little differently. I ask that many of you interested in this post and those of you mildly interested please pay close attention to the WI Badger 5. This post is going to morph into something amazing.

Experiment 1

Data Stream ChronoBadger 5 SelectedWheel Numbers Derived from Previous Day SelectionWheel Distribution of Matched Numbers

IndexYear... [ More ]

Reply #94

KY Floyd — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:50:08 GMT

It's not at all meaningless, and though you seem to have missed it, by bringing up election polls you're acknowledging with my point. Election polls typically look at thousands of voters. A poll of a few hundred has a margin of error that's bigger than the split in typical elections, and therefore offers no useful information. If you want statistics that are valid you'll need to look at a few thousand QP's and self picks side by side.

Reply #93

KY Floyd — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:48:32 GMT

I understand it just fine. He never said it isn't theoretically possible, but you haven't claimed to turn a profit, which would be the analogy to winning with nothing but field goals. If what you win is less than what you bet, you lose. You're free to think that you're doing well or that you're getting closer, but you're deluding yourself if you think you're winningwhen you aren't even breaking even.

Reply #92

Coin Toss — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:26:44 GMT

but they did hit.

Well, they woulda hit- you bet your mind uyou lose your mind.

This winning while actually showing a loss brings a character in Catch-22 to mind, I think it was Milo Minderebinder.

Milo decided to go into business for himself on the black market, and was getting everything he could get his hands on and selling it at a loss. Yossrian asked him how he could sell every item at a loss and make a profit and Milo said, I make it up in volume.

Good luck everyone.

Reply #91

truecritic — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 07:14:37 GMT

I struggled with a choice of a word other than normal - I mean to simply imply people that I see on the street/stores that play quick picks.

Although they did not bet money, yes, people on here have had winning numbers for Jackpot games. Off the top of my head, couldn't tell you who (LottoMike?) (Jack or maybe Win D?). Sure they might have been part of that group you mention, that chose 100s of numbers, but they did hit.

Reply #90

Coin Toss — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 07:12:59 GMT

truecritic

Well I guess I'm a different breed of cat than a lot of people here then because looking at any lottery jackpot game as anything other than a $1 lark that might run a toothpick into a lumber yard is economic suicide.

This is a huge board with a lot of lurkers and considering that the title of this thread is deceptive. People checking out this board aren't looking for ingenius ways of hitting 3, 4, and 5 out of 6 or 3 or 4 out of 5 + 1 games.

Justxploring

You may have... [ More ]

Reply #89

justxploring — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 06:49:51 GMT

people on this forum tend to do much better than normal lottery players that choose quick-picks.

True Critic - are you talking about all games, including the jackpot games or only the pick-3 and pick-4 games? Has anyone ever picked all of the PB or MM numbers or even 5/5 or all 6 numbers in a state lottery? Just curious.

BTW, there's no such thing as a 'normal' lottery player.

Reply #88

truecritic — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:26:58 GMT

I don't mean to get between 2 posters that I like but I do have an opinion. It didn't take me long after becoming a member to realize that people on this forum tend to do much better than normal lottery players that choose quick-picks.

Coin Toss, if I understand this thread at all, I believe it is not about showing a profit per se. It is simply a question of which gives you more winning tickets - and self-picks wins as far as I am concerned. You seem to be saying that self-picks do not s... [ More ]

Reply #87

jarasan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:17:47 GMT

Nobody disputes QP's win more because they are played more, that is correct, because there are more QP's played than SP's by far.

But if you are going to actually play, you'll do better with self picks, I always have.

I actually play.

Reply #86

Coin Toss — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 03:55:45 GMT

Jarasan

Since I'm saying quick picks produce more winners than picked numbers, and since I'm saying most people playhiping to win a jackpot, why would I make predictions?

A good 80% of predictions made here aren't played, anyway, and some people make so many predictions they couldn't afford to play them.

It isn't all luck, once in a while.

Hoping for that once in a while is itself hoping for luck.

May you have 5 1/2 point favorites in sudden death OT when the FG kicker come... [ More ]

Reply #85

jarasan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:57:33 GMT

I guess there is a presumption that everything is a debate on this forum.

JX says:

But anyone can post 100 combinations and get lucky once in a while.

Wow. You are right.

But if you look and examine more closely though, for eg. at Jackpots/MADDOGS challenges' statistics maintained by FJA, one will find that the challenges track and contain prediction results data for more than a year. You will find that some predictors don't just get lucky once in while, they get lucky regularl... [ More ]

Reply #84

JADELottery — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:38:12 GMT

When you stop going off on a tangent, we'll battle. This is about the Pick 5 topics you've been admittedly promoting by posting only jackpots and not considering the lower tier wins. You keep moving the attention away from the original Pick 5 QP vs SP. From what I can read, you seem more like the snotty kid, who when he's knows he's losing the battle, he throws in off topic issues, saying with a childish condescending tone, Yeah, but what about this? Nah, nah... nah. Yeah, what about that? Eve... [ More ]

Reply #83

justxploring — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:10:05 GMT

There is also a predictions section, I don't see CToss or KYFloyd with nary a prediction on either, hmmmmm.....

I don't post them either. One reason is that I have no proof my system (if any) is really a winner, since I haven't hit a jackpot or even 5 numbers to show my fellow members. When I see predictions and a member says Wow, I won! but has no ticket to scan and post, I shrug my shoulders. If it was real money I'd be very happy for him/her. I truly apologize if I am offending an... [ More ]

Reply #82

Coin Toss — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:20:05 GMT

JADE Lottery said they enjoyed debates so I said I'd play along.

There is also a predictions section, I don't see CToss or KYFloyd with nary a prediction on either, hmmmmm.....

I prefer a different site for such things:

I once posted the link here but it got squelched as such things seem to be verboten, too bad since they have a survivor contest, pays $10,000 for 21 straight winners. My best streak so far was 9 in a row for a hat. What the heck, it's free:

Coin Toss:

NFL

Reco... [ More ]

Reply #81

jarasan — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:00:17 GMT

In gambling cirlces such players are called grinders and are seen as no threat to the house whatsoever. If they win, they blow it back, if they lose they come back with more of their own $, but they come back.

There is a gambling circle of sorts on this forum under jackpots, the MADDOG challenges. I believe they are a good indicator of predictors, a level playing field. There is also a predictions section, I don't see CToss or KYFloyd with nary a prediction on either, hmmmmm.....

Instea... [ More ]

Reply #80

JADELottery — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:19:01 GMT

'Quick Picks Can't Match the Power of Self Picks if You Want to Grind Out Lower Tier Prizes and Call Yourslef A Winner - Even if the end of the day is a - and not a +.'

Perhaps, but it wasn't and it's not only correct, it's proved.

'Re: Field goal kickers, yeah, they're worth their weigth in gold and decide a lot of games. Often the team winning by a field goal doesn't cover the spread, by the way. Show me a championship team that only scored field goals throughout the season though, and t... [ More ]

Reply #79

Coin Toss — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:41:05 GMT

Perhaps a more accurate title for this thread would have been

Quick Picks Can't Match the Power of Self Picks if You Want to Grind Out Lower Tier Prizes and Call Yourslef A Winner - Even if the end of the day is a - and not a +.

In gambling cirlces such players are called grinders and are seen as no threat to the house whatsoever. If they win, they blow it back, if they lose they come back with more of their own $, but they come back.

Since stats seem to be so popular in this thread, l... [ More ]

Reply #78

jarasan — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 16:15:07 GMT

No, actually you are another who isn't understanding the point being made. You need to read and COMPREHEND the subject matter. The statement:

but what you're also missing is that even $50 per drawing gives you statistics that are meaningless in a game with half a million or more combinations.

is a meaningless irrelevant statement to the subject at hand.

Have you heard of an election poll ? How are polls done? Do they call everybody? No they don't, they take a sample. They der... [ More ]

Reply #77

JADELottery — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:20:31 GMT

Yes, and there are games that were won where the total score was comprised of only field goals. From what I can read, it is you who are not understanding it.

Reply #76

KY Floyd — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 08:12:24 GMT

The point he's making, and that you aren't understanding is that it's the total score that counts, not who made more field goals or who gained more yards. You can gaintwice as many yards and make twice as many field goals and still lose.

Some of your individual tickets may be winners, but spending $50 to win $20 makes you a loser. Whether you lost more or less than somebody else is a different matter, but what you're also missing is that even $50 per drawing gives you statistics that are... [ More ]

Reply #75

JADELottery — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 06:17:04 GMT

Yeah, and just think, games have been won with just 3 point field goals, because that's all it takes. How about that? Our point exactly! Great job in demonstrating that you don't need to win the Jackpot to be considered a winner. We all are, even the ones less than the Jackpot.

Reply #74

Coin Toss — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:20:24 GMT

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.

Reply #73

jarasan — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 00:58:16 GMT

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

Reply #72

JADELottery — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:54:11 GMT

'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 ar... [ More ]

Reply #71

Coin Toss — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:45:04 GMT

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. Actua... [ More ]

Reply #70

JADELottery — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 07:49:19 GMT

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.

Reply #69

jarasan — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 01:14:47 GMT

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... [ More ]

Reply #68

JADELottery — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 21:29:48 GMT

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 a... [ More ]

Reply #67

Coin Toss — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 15:41:36 GMT

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

Reply #66

JADELottery — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 11:38:12 GMT

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

012345

22208000

And my Self Picks...

012345

30200000

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.

Reply #65

JADELottery — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 11:19:20 GMT

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.

Reply #64

Coin Toss — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 07:05:51 GMT

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.

Reply #63

JADELottery — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 02:54:32 GMT

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

Badger 5 Quick Picks for 2007-12-02

IndexTicket #ABCDE

00010190770204142831

00020190771213253031

00030190770411212527

00040190770102041018

00050190770922253031

00060119320413182729

00070119320422232627

00080119320311132125

00090119320314232629

00100119320410132528

00110162080709101319

00120162081518222829

00130162080809212528

00140162081520222831

00150162080103101621

00160197930814232830

Reply #62

jarasan — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 02:33:42 GMT

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.

Reply #61

jarasan — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 02:07:41 GMT

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

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

Reply #60

JADELottery — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 01:43:45 GMT

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... [ More ]

Reply #59

Coin Toss — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:10:32 GMT

For one thing, my average play is $1 a draw, maybe $2 or more if the jackpot is up (Little Lotto had been over $1,000,000, not bad for a Pick 5 game), so I'm not about to go dollar-for-dollar with anyone who wheels numbers.

In your post with the scanned tickets, if I'm reading it right, you're showing $50 worth of play for one day. You talk of winning $22. I don't see any winnng in that whatsoever. I do see a bookie's wet dream.

I'll also venture that if you're playing $50 a pop all $22... [ More ]

Reply #58

JADELottery — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:00:52 GMT

You forgot this part -

Also, I have yet to see anyone truly put forth any effort on a dollar for dollar basis, one-on-one, YOUR OWN QUICK PICKS to MY SELF PICKS challenge. Well, since we don't have anyone with any bawls, I guess I have to do this my self.

Reply #57

Coin Toss — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 18:31:32 GMT

JADE Lottery

I see that in another posted topic someone is taking credit for someone else's effort and trying to pass it off as their Quick Pick challenge. That's a really sad attempt to try and convince others that somehow another person's time, money and effort is a means of proving their point.

If it's my thread you're talking about you assume much. I'm not taking credit for anything. If you read the OP to my thread the specific numbers aren't what it's about, it's QP jackpots vs cho... [ More ]

Reply #56

JADELottery — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 06:18:32 GMT

That was fun. I think I'll try it again for this Sunday. I will post the Crappy Picks.. uh, I mean Quick Picks later in the day.

Reply #55

JADELottery — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:51:32 GMT

Ok, here's the results from this sample. The Quick Picks covered all 31 numbers and got the following matches. The Total amount won by Quick Pick 7 - $1.00, 2 - $2.00 for a grand total of $11.00.

012345

16257200

My self picks only matched 3 of the 5 numbers and was potentially played in a 12 number wheel. Here are the matches for my Self Picks. The Total possible won by Self Pick 20 - $1.00, 1 - $2.00 for a grand total of $22.00.

012345

101920100

Just think the Quick Pi... [ More ]

Reply #54

JADELottery — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:32:14 GMT

Extra update note - The A, B, C, D and E across the top in the Table does not correspond to the A, B, C, D and E in the Scanned pictures.

Reply #53

JADELottery — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:39:54 GMT

Update

Here are the matches for 2007-11-18 to 2007-11-30

IndexYearMonthDay12345123456789101112012345

45200711187111625318910111213141516171819201812

46200711194919202813141516171819202122232415287

472007112010222325291112131415161718192021222921

482007112157814271617181920212223242526272921

492007112211016293078910111213141516171816268

50200711233511273012131415161718192021222350

512007112416131516101112131415161718192021724181

522007112... [ More ]

Reply #52

JADELottery — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:10:33 GMT

I'm posting this information because some of the matching numbers are falling below the Lottery Post's Prediction Statistic Radar.

The wheel I'm using to post my Self Picks is as follows.

Index

A

B

C

D

E

1

1

2

3

5

7

2

1

2

3

5

12

3

1

2

4

7

8

4

1

2

5

6

12

5

1

2

5

7

10

6

1

2

6

7

11

7

1

2

6

9

10

8

1

3

4

6... [ More ]

Reply #51

tplayer — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:58:05 GMT

hey Ky Floyd

Well said.

I have alwys known that any given set of numbers are just as likely to occur as any other.

Reply #50

JADELottery — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:14:03 GMT

Sorry Rehoboth,

I got a little side tracked on some other projects. I'm going to respond to each of your statements as they were typed. Some of them will have details, some won't.

Self picks vs Quick picks.

Opening statement.

The numbers are random.

Open ended statement.

Any patterns that you believe you are seeing are a mirage.

This statement I'd have to disagree with. Every lottery is based in some form finite combinatorial or permutational selec... [ More ]

Reply #49

Rehoboth — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:47:08 GMT

Self picks vs Quick picks. The numbers are random. Any patterns that you believe you are seeing are a mirage. Quick picks that group in the number range are no worse or better than any other number combination. There is only one place that self picks have an advantage to quick picks, and that is to take advantage of other players' selection anomolies. Specifically, when the pot is large it will draw a lot of players. In these cases the probability of multiple winners begins to increase.... [ More ]

Reply #48

JADELottery — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:23:30 GMT

I think you're confusing that with Random Seep.

Reply #47

jarasan — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:12:15 GMT

Random creep. I hear it is one of the warning signs for needing Depends.

Reply #46

JADELottery — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:00:49 GMT

Random Creep?

Hey, That's me!

Pretty much random and I am a Creep.

Reply #45

Todd — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:18:23 GMT

I thought random creep was someone on Jerry Springer.

Reply #44

KY Floyd — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 05:19:35 GMT

I think it would be accurate to say that majority of LOSING tickets are quick picks.

Since QP's account for 70 to 80% of all tickets sold, anyone with half a clue would expect that they should account for the majority of losers unless they're substantially better than self picks.

As far as random creep goes, that's simply a buzzword that may have been successful at selling a few lottery books to people who don't realize that having numbers repeated on multiple lines of a QP is no differ... [ More ]

Reply #43

Greg — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:51:43 GMT

Random Creep is what one author (William Atwood, I believe) refers to the numbers that repeat on subsequent lines of machine generated quick picks. Random Creep defeats players from winning because numbers are repeated on purpose to limit or prevent the player from playing OTHER numbers.

I think it would be accurate to say that majority of LOSING tickets are quick picks.

Lastly, I call quick picks QUICKRIPS! because that is how they function most of the time.

ALWAYS TELL THE TRU... [ More ]

Reply #42

JADELottery — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 20:51:57 GMT

The main objective here is to document my selections before the actual draw.

If there are those in the Quick Pick Community who would like to challenge this topic, then document your selections here at the Lottery Post.

Post your Quick Pick Selections on the Prediction Board and Prove It.

Reply #41

Todd — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 20:45:55 GMT

There may be a way in the future, but I'm not saying yet either.

Reply #40

JADELottery — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 20:40:11 GMT

Todd,

Not a slam on the Lottery Post's Prediction Board.

I understand the intricate problems of programming.

The information I've stated has another propose.

I can not say what it is, because it's an experiment in progress.

I have no problem with the way you have the prize levels and payouts set to, however, if you can make it more inline with the actual Game, Great.

Reply #39

Todd — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:18:26 GMT

This should be explained on the prediction board page.

I agree, lots of other things too. I do what I can, given then number of things on my plate. At least I'm describing it here.

Reply #38

time*treat — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 17:09:08 GMT

By the way, for those who are not familiar with the predictions board payouts, the payouts across every state for a particular game type are purposely made the same, so that state-to-state comparisons are possible.

For example, on the prediction board, Pick 5 games always pay out $10 for a 3 of 5 match, no matter what state the hit is in. The same goes for Pick 3, Pick 4, and Pick 6 games.

The only games that get a unique payout are unique games -- such as Powerball and Mega Millions, a... [ More ]

Reply #37

Todd — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:23:57 GMT

I would not be so unhappy about the lack of a 2-number match, if I were you.

If I applied the REAL Badger 5 payouts you'd be doing a lot worse.

In Badger 5, 4 of 5 pays $50, and 3 of 5 pays $2.

You posted above your Lottery Post stats:

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 54 of 522-23-25-27-2823-24-25-27-28$150

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 53 of 517-21-24-25-2723-24-25-27-28$10

Are you sure you want to quibble about not getting $1 for a 2 of 5 match

Reply #36

Guru101 — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 03:22:31 GMT

Sometimes, determining what something is, is by determining what it isn't.

Trust me, anyone who can look at past results and take into consideration that sentence has a very good chance of hitting a jackpot. I know.

Reply #35

JADELottery — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:36:13 GMT

Yep, Lottery Post statically wrong... almost, nearly 2 of 5 Badger 5 wrong.

It's good to be wrong, yeah... I tell ya...

Sometimes, determining what something is, is by determining what it isn't.

And what it isn't is what I'm looking for; it's what they're not looking at that is out of view.

It good to be wrong... well, nearly wrong.

It's looking very very good... keep up the bad work... I'll keep documenting.

2007-10-11 draw 03 04 07 13 24

00001 - 07 08 09 11 13 - 02

00002... [ More ]

Reply #34

jarasan — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 00:39:48 GMT

Billy Joel thinks you maybe right:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxNOCl7S7lU

Reply #33

JADELottery — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 00:01:21 GMT

I love being wrong.

Being wrong is what Dougies do best.

Let's see If I'm wrong again tonight.

I hope I am.

Reply #32

POWERBALLPOOL — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:34:39 GMT

each week i will lose 41.00 because even though one ticket matched the powerball.we will have 41 losers.

Reply #31

jarasan — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:34:03 GMT

Actually it is closer to 70% if you are talking of Quick Picks, letting the computer pick your numbers. The percentages reflect the way tickets are purchased, more tickets are sold as Quick Picks.

Reply #30

POWERBALLPOOL — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:32:09 GMT

each week i will win 3.oo because i will match the powerball.one winner

Reply #29

POWERBALLPOOL — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:30:23 GMT

there are 299,398,484 people in the u.s.

the odds of winning the powerball are 1 in 146,107,962

if you notice,the odds are about half the population.

that means if every person in the u.s.bought one powerball ticket.

only 2 people would win.and they would split the 15 million prize.

my pool will covor all 42 powerball numbers each drawing.

twice a week 52 weeks a year.to buy more tickets would be a waste.

not to covor each powerball number would be a waste.

play smart,get... [ More ]

Reply #28

POWERBALLPOOL — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:21:04 GMT

80% of winning tickets are computer generated

Reply #27

POWERBALLPOOL — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:42:19 GMT

ummm i disagree

Reply #26

psykomo — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 18:53:33 GMT

THANKS...........to ALL for this QP..........discussion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This PSYKO has done well in the past with QP's (note: I said PAST)

In the present TIME..........this PSYKO <<<<<<<<<HAS NOT???????

therefore,.. what DO YOU think I've done in this SITUATION ???????

ANSWER: ( confession) translation,.....ALL pain....no GAIN <$$$$$

I've.............almost QUIT playing the LOTTERY ..............it aunt much

FUN any more if you DON't WIN>>>>>>>>>> ................ [ More ]

Reply #25

JADELottery — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:32:53 GMT

The 2007-10-10 drawing also had 16 additional 2 of 5 wins.

Winning numbers 03 05 12 20 21 for 2007-10-10.

00001 - 11 12 13 15 17 - 01

00002 - 11 12 13 15 22 - 01

00003 - 11 12 14 17 18 - 01

00004 - 11 12 15 16 22 - 01

00005 - 11 12 15 17 20 - 02

00006 - 11 12 16 17 21 - 02

00007 - 11 12 16 19 20 - 02

00008 - 11 13 14 16 21 - 01

00009 - 11 13 14 18 19 - 00

00010 - 11 13 15 16 22 - 00

00011 - 11 13 16 17 18 - 00

00012 - 11 14 15 17 21 - 01

00013 - 11 14 15 18 19 - 00

00014 - 11... [ More ]

Reply #24

JADELottery — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:07:18 GMT

Also, not showing up in the Lottery Post's data.

The Wisconsin Badger 5 has a match 2 of 5.

If those were included, there would be an additional 25 wins to tack on for the 2007-10-06 date.

Below is the complete list of combos and wins on the right for the 2007-10-06 draw.

Notice every line has at least 1 winning number in it, also.

Winning numbers for 2007-10-06 were 23 24 25 27 28.

00001 - 17 18 19 21 23 - 01

00002 - 17 18 19 21 28 - 01

00003 - 17 18 20 23 24 - 02

00004 - 1... [ More ]

Reply #23

JADELottery — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:56:05 GMT

My Self Picks are Optimized to Produce the Most Number of Wins with the Least Amount of Effort.

2007-10-06

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 54 of 518-23-24-27-2823-24-25-27-28$150

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 54 of 520-23-25-27-2823-24-25-27-28$150

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 54 of 522-23-25-27-2823-24-25-27-28$150

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 53 of 517-21-24-25-2723-24-25-27-28$10

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 53 of 518-19-23-25-2723-24-25-27-28$10

JADELotteryWisconsinBadger 53 of 51... [ More ]

Reply #22

LANTERN — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:07:58 GMT

Most people who pick their own numbers don't know how to predict right, so their numbers are no better than quick picks.

How many times do I have to say this?

Perhaps a billion times!, As some people just NEVER get it.

Birthdays, anniversaries, dream numbers, playing the same numbers all of the time, etc, those are not numbers picked according to a system that use past draws stats, so they are no better than quick picks, therefore the stats are are you said.

Picks that are better pre... [ More ]

Reply #21

four4me — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:58:36 GMT

Yep thats the word that best describes it.

Quick pick clustering.

And you know what really bugs me is I'll bet it happens in other states too.

The Rng terminals chip sets are all more than likely from the same manufacture. Therefore they spit out the same or similar combinations. If those chip set are programed to omit numbers then they have gained and upper edge on the game. And while i have no way to prove it. Other than comparing large groups of Quick picks from past attempts at winn... [ More ]

Reply #20

JADELottery — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:08:04 GMT

There are some people who just don't get it and then there are Some People Who Just Don't Get It.

The odds and equal probability of each combination is not in question and the probability of each combination for both Self Picks and Quick Picks are the same on a combinatorial basis, only.

Also, the proportion of separate sales and wins for the respective play types is not the problem.

Herein lay the problem, it's when Quick Picks are compared to Self Picks.

It reminds me of the snotty... [ More ]

Reply #19

jarasan — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:09:02 GMT

There is a name for that QP phenomena, Quick Pick Clustering.

Reply #18

four4me — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 05:30:12 GMT

Let me see if i can explain this better. Lets say i go to 10 different farm stores and by 10 quick pick tickets then go home and check each ticket i have found that for some reason 8 of ten tickets out of the 100 have numbers like 01-03-05- others might have 34-35-39 and still others might have the same or similar numbers etc.

Now on a piece of paper i write down all the numbers 1 thru 46 in the pool and then check every number on the tickets and make hash marks for every number i have on the... [ More ]

Reply #17

four4me — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 05:02:03 GMT

A lot of times my chosen picks i wheeled for mega i have got 3 of 5 which i know isn't even close and 2 x i got 4 of 5 no bonus ball.

I have three mega tickets with personal numbers they also have came in 2 of 5 --- 3 of 5.

I guess my story isn't much different than many others. Cause close only counts in horse shoes.

I would like to be one of the winners that can say i chose the picks and won with them. Whether they are my personal numbers or a random wheeled set i picked form observ... [ More ]

Reply #16

KY Floyd — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:45:08 GMT

You can make a good guess at the answers by looking at the odds, but why does it matter? The statistics say that 70 to 80% of sales are QP's and 70 to 80% of winners are QP's. That also tells us that 20 to 30% of sales are self picks and 20 to 30% of winners are self picks. Both win in proportion to sales, and neither one has a better chance than the other.

Reply #15

KY Floyd — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:39:22 GMT

I see a lot of comments about QP numbers that people aren't happy with, but if you acknowledge that each combination has the same chance of winning, why is that a problem?

Look at the winning combination for the last MM jackpot. All 5 regular balls were even and 2 of them were from the low 40's. Based on the comments I see I'm guessing that most of the people here would have been unhappy to see those numbers on their QP's, but we know there are 4 other people out there who are very happy to... [ More ]

Reply #14

JADELottery — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 03:23:59 GMT

Notice the left out information:

1. The total number of Quick Pick purchases it took to get that(those) win(s) for that day's draw.

2. The total number of Quick Pick purchases for the draws spanning 2007-08-03 to 2007-08-08 even when there was no jackpot Quick Pick win.

3. The numerous stores where people bought Losing-jackpot Quick Picks.

And at 70% to 80% of the purchases, I think you can get the picture.

Reply #13

jarasan — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:23:14 GMT

I'd like to add, that in addition to discretion there is intuition . Human intuition cannot be measured empirically and therefore cannot be discounted as a good resource.

You can analyze, quantify, and calculate with all the tools we have at our disposal, but there is nothing that can match the human brain's ability to assimilate, process, and draw conclusions from any set of data it is given, instantaneously.

I think therefore I pick my own........

Reply #12

Coin Toss — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:50:02 GMT

four4me

But how often are the numbers drawn ones we would have played? Evidently not all that often

Reply #11

four4me — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:47:17 GMT

I buy a quick pick for most every mega draw. I am usually never happy with the numbers on them --- meaning i rarely get quick picks that have numbers i would have even thought of playing. When we bought quick picks in a pool i would go over the numbers and shake my head having found that out of 100 or so tickets many tickets had similar combinations of numbers either sequentially or by position. I expected to see lines that are completely different from one another. Not tickets with the same num... [ More ]

Reply #10

Coin Toss — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:45:37 GMT

If you subscribed to the list of winners e-mail for any given lottery game you might think differently.

I get the one for the Illinois Little Lotto since it's the one I play the most, there's a drawing everyday, and it gets hit pretty often. Most of those hits are quick picks, that's al there is to it.

Here's August:

LITTLE LOTTO PRIZE PAYOUTS FOR FRIDAY, AUGUST 03, 2007

Winning NUMBERS: 01 - 05 - 26 - 36 - 39

PLAYER(S) MATCHING 5 OF 5 NUMBERS

INCLUDING... [ More ]

Reply #9

JADELottery — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:31:27 GMT

I'd like to say that in no way should Quick Picks be etched of the equation.

However, when someone uses Quick Picks as the banner headline to indirectly put down those who choose their own numbers, well, that's just not right. From my pervious post I stated first, This makes reasonable sense, Quick Picks out weigh the number of Self Picked purchases. This would be like having a football game and on the Quick Pick side you have all 12 players and on the Self Pick side you'd have only about 3... [ More ]

Reply #8

RJOh — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:05:51 GMT

One of the advantages of picking your own numbers is you can introduce a bias that shouldn't and can't exits with QPs.

For example, since MegaMillion changed its matrix 231 drawings back the winning combinations have matched 2000 of the 27720 possible combinations of 3's in a pool of 56 numbers. Each combination of 5 have 10 of them and about 50% of the winning combinations have 10 new ones and 40% have 9 new ones every drawing. By making sure the combinations you play have as many new co... [ More ]

Reply #7

jarasan — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:04:27 GMT

It has always been my experience, excellent derivation and conclusion. Thanks Doug.

Reply #6

KY Floyd — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 16:50:06 GMT

I appreciate recreational math at least as much as the next guy, but that was a lot of unnecessary math to figure out that if 80% of tickets are QP's there are 4 QP's sold for every self pick sold. Wouldn't it have been a lot simpler to just divide .80 by .20?

Now, what about the actual data on the number of QP winners vs selfpick winners? The rest of the quote from the powerball site says that about 70 to 80% of the winners are QP's, so their (extensive) data seems to suggest that QP and S... [ More ]

Reply #5

reddog — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 22:09:50 GMT

Amen ! I have no relationship with any lotto computor so why would the computor do me any favors? I look out for myself and pick my own to control my destiny. Just my opinion.

Reply #4

JohnLottery — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 21:51:16 GMT

Your thesis is very well written and presented. I too believe that self picked numbers are better than quick picks. And, your post helps to convince me of this belief. Thanks for doing the math and sharing your findings

Reply #3

RJOh — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 14:29:14 GMT

Many self-picks are random-picks as are quick-picks, but have the advantage of being edited for duplications, grouping and formation of numbers that players may want to avoid or include on their tickets.

Even when I play randomly picked numbers I like making out my playslips which allows me know what they are before I buy my tickets.

Reply #2

Guru101 — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:06:02 GMT

I think self picks have the edge too.

Reply #1

Thoth — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:20:47 GMT

Interesting Doug

Quick Picks can't match the power of Self Picks

JADELottery — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:04:03 GMT

I get a big laugh when I see someone post about how Quick Picks are the greatest. Then they'll post some winning numbers and prizes with a Look! See!... See! Look!... Loooook...seeeee. attitude. Well, there are a few problems with comparing Quick Picks to Self Picks (a.k.a. Personal Picks). It has to do with proportionality of work being done. From Powerball's Frequently Asked Questions page, under the heading WHICH HAS THE BETTER CHANCE OF WINNING: COMPUTER PICKS OR PLAYER PICKS? They say,... [ More ]