How do I prove my state lottery's CGNs are fixed?

Reply #147

Greg — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:47:46 GMT

Hi,

1- How about first proving the Null Hypothesis: that they are not fixed? Can you sooner prove (mathematically) that they are not fixed? If you cannot, then you have proven that they are indeed fixed .

2- I can give you a non-mathematical way: find an ethical way to examine the software packages of states who purchase these. I believe you would probably discover that states with computerized lotteries use super computers to run software that can run a set of pre-determined combinations

Reply #146

RJOh — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:08:03 GMT

Being a system player, I assume all random drawings for jackpot style games have certain bias and I play accordingly. I assume:

Once a combination of numbers hit, they won't hit again.

Future combinations will match 0-3 about the same amount as previous winning combinations had in the same number of previous drawings.

75% of winning numbers distributing patterns are a third of the possible patterns.

80% of the time no one will win the jackpot.

I assume much more but this gives you... [ More ]

Reply #145

jayemmar — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 15:59:37 GMT

Hi RJOh:

I agree with you 100%. The point I'm trying to make is that if we see a bias over a short period of time, it's no reason to conclude that the lottery itself is unfair because of this short term bias. Indeed, we should exploit this opportunity and generate our selections based on the current trend or bias.

jayemmar

Reply #144

RJOh — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:09:15 GMT

Even if you were to find a bias within these 90 draws, the finding would be inconclusive because, in a random selection process there are always hot spots that do occur, and in a fair draw they iron out in the long run.

Systems designers and players are looking for bias in lottery drawings all the time to take advantage of, if such bias could be found someone would probably have won several jackpots in the same game by now. In fact if someone was interested in proving a systems was bias, the

Reply #143

MillionsWanted — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:12:54 GMT

Regarding Gail Howard's statement about the 1-2-3-4-5(-6) scenario. She has also pointed out that one of the reason to avoid the combination was that it was purchased by several thousand ticket buyers each draw. You will only win a few hundred dollars if that combination occurred.

Reply #142

jayemmar — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 21:13:01 GMT

Hi Jade:

I'm afraid your sample set of 90 past draws is really insufficient to make a quality statistic, and hence, a solid conclusion about the fairness of the computer drawn lottery in your state. If you are talking about a 5 or 6 ball lottery, I'm sure I don't have to remind you of the total number of possibilities that there are, so 60 or 90 past draws constitue a drop in the bucket. I'm reminded of a statement that Gail Howard has made in several of her publications. It's about the... [ More ]

Reply #141

JADELottery — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:02:54 GMT

Those of you paying attention should be seeing some interesting numbers being selected.

Regardless if the lottery is CGN or NOT, the kind of feedback that is generated from a Quantum Selection has some very Unusual Effects in a system of selection that is being controlled.

Only in a truely Random selection will Qauntum Selection have no Unusual Side Effects.

Look for it, it's happening right now in at least one of the Pick 3 Looteries we have been monitoring.

Reply #140

JADELottery — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 15:46:38 GMT

Those of you watching and playing the Pick 3 should take notice of the numbers for the past year.

There is a reason why I released JADE's Pick 3 Pick 4 Selector on my Birthday (2008-04-27); so it would be a memorable date.

However, as a matter of reference, it's a good date to establish a beginning.

Reply #139

JADELottery — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 00:49:59 GMT

That remains to be seen.

Although, there may be some interesting findings coming up that are not necessarily restricted to just Badger 5 or the Wisconsin Lottery.

Reply #138

bigato1010 — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 00:20:03 GMT

Hey JADE. execellent graphs . Do you think Michigan lottrey is fixed in your opinion

Reply #137

JADELottery — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 20:57:56 GMT

Thanks needawinner and TechBox,

It's great thinking about the possibilities and theories about gambling establishments, state or private. This post is about the detection of those activities; if any exists. There can be any number of reasons why and how number fixing is done. This post deals with the way we can quantify it, represent it and see it. As we continue, this will become more evident as the data is collected and analyzed.

Keep up the Great work.

Reply #136

TechBox — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:09:48 GMT

Not necessarily. In fact, I would say that for the person who makes the balls, it's in their best interest to make them function as perfectly and randomly as possible; that's the service they're selling. Especially in the cases of large state lotteries, where the number of rules and regulations surrounding them is huge.

Now, if we're talking about smaller operations, like casinos, then yes, it's certainly in their interest to cheat (like the video poker machines that were set to never pa... [ More ]

Reply #135

needawinner — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:19:02 GMT

i think that anytime a person is involved wheather it be a computer programmer or the person who makes the balls used for some lottery drawing that there is a chance for someone to try to cheat. im not saying that it is happening im just saying that i think it is possible. do you agree

Reply #134

JADELottery — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 13:10:38 GMT

we're working out a few programming details.

working the equations on my system is taking a longer than expected processing time.

must be that each observed point has to be calculated for every possible xy point.

in a graph for 800 x 600, that's 480,000 individual xy points for each observed point.

it takes a fair amount of time to do the calculations.

we're trying a bit of C++ programming to get the job done quicker through a DLL function.

Reply #133

JADELottery — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 02:07:02 GMT

Ok, this should be a final update on the Quantum Points for a while.

It's fairly complete so we can move on to the rest of this post.

Remember, you can see these in a PDF format at my website, http://home.mchsi.com/~jadelottery

Reply #132

JADELottery — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:04:06 GMT

An update to my PDF's.

To see the equations better, visit my website for the PDF's.

The post has to be in an image format here at the Lottery Post because of the displayed math equations.

You can also see the following posting in a PDF format at my website http://home.mchsi.com/~jadelottery.

You will need Adobe Reader (free) or Adobe Acrobat (buy) to view the PDF's and you can get it at http://www.adobe.com.

Reply #131

JADELottery — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:54:00 GMT

I have not read the book Digital Signal Processing and currently many projects, home and work, are going to take up my time to do so. I can understand how the Normal Distribution can mimic a Random Selection. However, as you have stated, there is not enough information to understand the approach. I have posted before a topic that utilizes the normal distribution to mimic Random Selection with a known standard deviation. The topic is Random Number Transforms - Normal Distribution and has some Vis... [ More ]

Reply #130

JADELottery — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:31:11 GMT

This post has never been about 'why' a state would fix a lottery drawing. This topic is about the detection of a possible fixation of draws relative to a players picks. If you'd like to open up that discussion with Lottery Post Members, we'd recommend you start a new topic about 'why a state would fix a drawing'.

Reply #129

dougplayer — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 04:59:14 GMT

you fail to answer the question of why any state would FIX the drawing of the numbers. They take there cut of the money BEFORE the pay out on the big games. The odds of paying out on the daily 3 and 4 games is in there advantage. The have a money maker. Why would they do any thing to casue public mistrust???????? Most states are very happy making 300 to 400 million a year.

Reply #128

JADELottery — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:23:21 GMT

I'll get back to this probably next week.

I will be traveling to Wisconsin and possibly Illinois this weekend; in addition to finishing the Quantum Points PDF.

Reply #127

pick4hawk — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:51:55 GMT

Firstly, thank you for the PDF. AS moving graphics don't print well. Solid things that can be printed I can view off line.

Great !

Some things I'm trying to answer:

Many digital electronic book authors, have stated that the Normal distribution function equation can be used to derive uniform random numbers--like a rng does.

One author: Steven W. Smith --Digital Signal Processing Isbn 0-750674-44-x

He states that if the mean of the equation is .5 and the SD is the sqr(12)^-1 then x... [ More ]

Reply #126

JADELottery — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 07:20:46 GMT

The following work is still in progress.

I'm just releasing what I have now and will update more later.

You can also see the following posting in a PDF format at my website http://home.mchsi.com/~jadelottery.

The post has to be in an image format here at the Lottery Post because of the displayed math equations.

To see the equations better, visit my website for the PDF's.

You will need Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat to view the PDF's and you can get it at http://www.adobe.com.

Th... [ More ]

Reply #125

JADELottery — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:08:54 GMT

I haven't forgot about ya. I'm working out a display format for both the PDF's at my webspace and here at the Lottery Post.

Reply #124

pick4hawk — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:47:25 GMT

Interesting graph --so how exactly are the equations related to the graph. are you trying to relate that greater the probablity density then choose in that area?

How do the equations differ from normal distribution?

there's log normal distribution ect.

There are many forms of distribution.Please define your terms.

I'd still perfer pdfs of your posts containing explainations.

In what book or books --are you using for reference material?

Thank - you

Reply #123

JADELottery — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 07:26:10 GMT

ah, got ya. i'll try to keep it as simple as possible. however, i do like to give out the information for those that would like it. don't worry about the math stuff, just look over the whole thing to get a feel for what is being talked about. i'll present it in both ways if possible, so everyone can be in on it.

Reply #122

Guru101 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 06:32:04 GMT

Those symbols in those equations.

Reply #121

JADELottery — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 02:30:53 GMT

Can you explain a little more?

Are the pictures not showing or is it something else

Reply #120

JADELottery — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:33:55 GMT

In the previous example, the color of the Quantum Points is a Gray Gradient from Light to Dark. The Darker the Quantum Point the more Probable you would likely find an actual data point. This is ok, but it doesn't clearly define what more probable than other areas of the graph. This is where a Color Gradient comes in. It helps with showing the more probable areas without taking away from the whole Quantum Point Graph. The following picture show how to read the graph's Color Gradient.

The... [ More ]

Reply #119

Guru101 — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 01:30:18 GMT

JadeLottery, I wish I could read that stuff you're posting.

Reply #118

JADELottery — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:53:15 GMT

Quantum Points have the advantage of showing patterns that might not be easily seen when looking at raw Classic Points. The following animated graph shows the differences by displaying the Classic data points, then overlaying the Quantum data points and then just the Quantum data points. You can see from the animation that it's easier to see where the data tends to be more in the Quantum data point example. You can also see at certain places along the X axis the data is deficient for a period ne... [ More ]

Reply #117

JADELottery — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:03:38 GMT

Quantum Gaussian Points are slightly different, but the goal is still the same as Classical Cartesian Points. Quantum Gaussian Points work similar in that they give us a generalized concept of where the invisible, dimensionless point is. However, instead of having a ridged defined circle the Quantum Gaussian Point is more like a fuzzy dot with no apparent edge to the circle. Below show the difference between a magnified Classical Cartesian Point and a Quantum Gaussian Point.

Classical C... [ More ]

Reply #116

JADELottery — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:04:23 GMT

Ok, now that I have some time, we can talk about the difference between Classical Cartesian Points and Quantum Gaussian Points. Classical Cartesian Points are the points drawn on a graph that show the abstract concept of points. Actual points are dimensionless; they have absolutely no size at all. In order for us to visualize the abstract and invisible, a small dot of some specific size is approximately placed on a graph to show the ideal, the concept, the representation of that point. By compar... [ More ]

Reply #115

JADELottery — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:03:22 GMT

Reply #114

JADELottery — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 06:24:55 GMT

Great, it worked

Reply #113

JADELottery — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 06:22:52 GMT

Another test... just a test... think this will work...

Reply #112

JADELottery — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:31:03 GMT

Thank you for the feedback dougplayer and fastrak.

I'd like to redirect for a moment on the difference between this topic and a common misperception about this being a post of the lottery's sneaky way of increasing the bottom line. We know that even without some kind of number manipulation the lottery is going to make money. So, that's not the issue. Also, with number manipulation there may be some added increase to revenue. However, that would be in this case, just a side effect of the true... [ More ]

Reply #111

fastrak — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:46:45 GMT

Like the boys in Vegas would say you're trying to make your point the hard way. This is so simple.

The state lotteries that use computers for their million dollar jackpots don't have disclosure. Gee I wonder why?

When the lottery commissions start giving out public information of The who? The where purchased? and what type of ticket won? i.e. Quick Pick Ticket or was it a written in slip with personal numbers I'll think otherwise.

The small 2, 5, 10. 100, 150 dollar tickets.... we don't... [ More ]

Reply #110

dougplayer — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 23:08:23 GMT

nice post jade. Iam new to this site. But a long time lottery player. I have been waiting for some one with math skills to show how numbers can have more meaning than just random picking.

For those who think state lotterys are fixed. Think again. They are makeing around $400 million a year from there lotterys. They take there cut out before paying off on the Big games. As for the daily 3 and 4 games. They can take pay off hits and still make millions. THEY DONT HAVE TO CHEAT. It is a money ma... [ More ]

Reply #109

JADELottery — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:40:48 GMT

Before we can release any additional information. We'll have to discuss the difference between Classical Cartesian Points and Quantum Gaussian Points. We are working on presenting this in the most simple way possible without getting too technical for everyone.

Reply #108

JADELottery — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:45:07 GMT

I'm in the middle of a cyberspace move in addition to my move to Minnesota. Check my posts in the topic ' JADE's Pick 3 Pick 4 Selector Now Available ' and my Blog.

Reply #107

Stew12 — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:42:41 GMT

You must be a platinum member to view abbreviated wheels. Sign up and receive all kinds of bonus's, and access to hundreds of wheels

Reply #106

atapi — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 09:55:56 GMT

can anyone help me with this wheel abbrev 4 if 6 of 20=66

please.

Reply #105

JADELottery — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:17:46 GMT

The 1 year anniversary is on 10-04. If all goes well with work and other home related items, I hope to fill in the blanks.

Reply #104

JADELottery — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 15:02:16 GMT

We are coming up on one year since the start of Experiment 1 in October. The data we have collected is very revealing in addition to other observations.

Reply #103

JADELottery — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:09:30 GMT

a few more prediction posts and we can add some withheld info.

Reply #102

JADELottery — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:05:03 GMT

pick3hawk,

you are in the correct general area, however, there is some additional infomation that has not been posted here that will explain a lot more. I'm currently in traveling mode for work and I'll be on the road bouncing between home and Minnesota these coming weeks. Also, the additional information is still in a test and is producing some interesting results. I'll update as soon as work related matters calm down.

Reply #101

pick4hawk — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:09:48 GMT

Or are you talking about changing the distribution to normal distribution by:

like:

10 v1 =2 *rnd -1

v2 =2*rnd -1

r= v1^2+v2^2

if (r =1) then goto 10

fac =sqr(-2*log(r)/r)

gauss =v2*fac

Reply #100

pick4hawk — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 18:44:50 GMT

Current applications of Gaussain Probability Density are encouraging. This will expand into other

representations of available data.

I know the f(x): 1/ sqr(2*pi o^2) Exp(1) ^- abs(((x-u)^2)/(2*o^2))

How are you applying it???

For normal distribution RNG??

Upon what types of sets

Reply #99

CurtisC — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 09:38:40 GMT

Thank you for your work.

Reply #98

JADELottery — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 02:20:23 GMT

My ATT DSL outage has interfered with the last three Badger 5 postings. I'll have to post a weeks worth Badger 5 combos, while limping along with dialup, and hope ATT gets its MFS togther.

Reply #97

JADELottery — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:39:25 GMT

That was explained on Post 1, Pretext section, Paragraph 5, Sentence 1. Read carefully the first post and quite possibly several times to fully understand this posted topic.

Reply #96

Atomic Dog — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 22:41:05 GMT

Ok ..... after 3 months of trying to read through this post (sorry ... I'm dyslexic), I am still trying to take this all in and see where it leads.

My simple question for you, and I'm assuming others are curious as well, is what state lotteries and state lottery games are fixed and which ones aren't? Plain and simple ... please help us out!

Thanks,

John

Reply #95

JADELottery — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:42:05 GMT

Current applications of Gaussain Probability Density are encouraging. This will expand into other representations of available data.

Reply #94

Stack47 — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:42:21 GMT

The Badger 5 game is 5/31 with 169,911 combinations that is drawn everyday using a RNG. If the drawing is truly random, matching the winning combo out of 10 would be a lucky guess. The side of effect of knowing how the game is rigged is that you would know one of your 10 combos would be drawn. Something that should happen in about 60% of the drawing but happens in 80% of the time is a bias but you never said how long your testing period was. Is that from all the draws or some of the drawings

Reply #93

JADELottery — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:35:53 GMT

I'd like to redirect everyone. I have read the replies and there are good points in either pro or con. However, the original heading of the topic is 'How do I prove my state lottery's CGN is fix?' As of now, there is some indication that something is going a skew, but not the real 'gotcha betch!' moment; that's yet to come.

This was broken up into three different experiments, labeled Experiment 0, Experiment 1 and Experiment 2. Each follows on the other; Experiment 0 is the control setup for... [ More ]

Reply #92

pumpi76 — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 05:00:58 GMT

There are over 146 million possible Powerball combination; how many drawings would you have to simulate before you even start to determine what should or should not happen?

People been saying this for years that there is 150 million combination...There is actually 3 million combinations if you count the 5 white balls..And those 3 millions are MULTIPLIED by the bonus ball meaning that they repeat 42 times...I notice that 80% of the bonus ball for Powerball is bellow 30 and above 5...So if you... [ More ]

Reply #91

Stack47 — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:25:00 GMT

Thorpe didn't use a computer to play blackjack; he used one to simulate thousands of blackjack hands from a single deck and analyzed the results. At that time, casinos use one deck and some dealt out all the cards, shuffled the discards and kept on dealing. He knew it was possible to track the discards and know which cards remained in the deck and used the data from the simulated hands find out if it could be an advantage to the player.

It's called card counting and variations of it are still... [ More ]

Reply #90

time*treat — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:03:57 GMT

The various filters ( AABBCC , odd/even ratios, etc) are much like elements on the periodic table, they need to be combined with each other to get full use of them.

The limits of what can and cannot be simulated on a modern computer are mostly determined by what is between the keyboard and the chair.

Reply #89

pumpi76 — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 02:16:54 GMT

you can't use a supercomputer for blackjack or casino games or horse betting...YOu can only use a supercomputer for the lottery and the stock market...

they watch too much star trek and tv...

and the supercomputers they got know are nothing compare to what they had in 1985, 1975, 1965 or 1955...even though a supercomputer of 1985 could be helpful...

i said this several times before...

Reply #88

Stack47 — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 00:24:08 GMT

If you also see four 5's and multiples of it and by that i mean if you see 5, 15, 20, 30, and then a number, and if you see this appear 2 times in less than 3 months, then your game is rigged..

Excluding the power ball, there are 14,520 combinations with 4 numbers with multiples of 5 and you could expect to see it happen once out of every 250 drawings. I did a quick look back to January 2006 and couldn't find where that happened once so maybe it's due. And since it should average two hits in... [ More ]

Reply #87

pumpi76 — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 17:04:05 GMT

How you prove is rigged? whenever you see in Powerball combinations that have four 6's, or four 3's, or four 2's or four 8's , etc, etc twice in less than 1 month...What do I mean? if you see the combination 6, 16, 26, 36 42 (with four 6's on it) and if you see such a combination play twice in 1 month or 2 months or 3 months, then your game is rigged....

If you also see four 5's and multiples of it and by that i mean if you see 5, 15, 20, 30, and then a number, and if you see this appear 2 ti... [ More ]

Reply #86

RJOh — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 22:00:27 GMT

I tried tracking games with better odds than PowerBall using that AABBCC system and while the odds were improved 200% the payouts amounts eliminated any advantage gained.

For example I played the Ohio Classic Lotto which has overall odds of 1:54 of winning a prize (the smallest and most likely being $2). The odds of matching 3 for $2 is 1:57 and I've regularly matched three 1-2 times with 20 lines which wins $2-$4. To make any money or break even I would need to match 4 for $70 more often an... [ More ]

Reply #85

lottobrain — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 02:30:49 GMT

I use lottery software to print out basic charts to aid me in making my own paper and pencil charts that I use to see various trends in the number patterns. I am usually looking for patterns in the way the numbers come so that I can try to pick my numbers to play along these patterns. I also made up a chart to track Powerball with the AAABC , etc. type of pattern that you had discussed in another post. I break this pattern up based on the last 20 draws in powerball. Any numbers that hit in the l... [ More ]

Reply #84

RJOh — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:47:34 GMT

Lottobrain, I've read post about the charts in GH software by members who used her stuff but non so far have said they actually used them to pick a winners.

Reply #83

lottobrain — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 02:08:03 GMT

RJOH - In a past post......I think it was in a discussion about position play....I mentioned that 4 of the winning Powerball numbers would come out of the first position or first column perhaps every 5 to 8 draws. Once all 5 came out of the first position in just the last 12 draws. You are right about the last 20 draws having 4 or 5 of the winning numbers much of the time, at least in Powerball. I use Gail Howard's software to print out chart B, a chart that prints out 40 or 50 of the last draws... [ More ]

Reply #82

RJOh — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 01:16:01 GMT

What are these repeating patterns that you have identified and how did you find them? I've been trying to come with a way to identify patterns and classify them so I might use them to pick combinations for future games. Winning combinations in most games have numbers that have hit in the previous 20 drawings or less. If they are more likely to also have a pattern, it's possible that they may be covered with less than 50% of the number pool which would give a huge advantage to any players with th... [ More ]

Reply #81

MysteryMan424 — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:44:05 GMT

I don't think the Wisconson Badger game is rigged, I just think there's a lot of repeating patterns. Besides who benefits from the rigging? Lotteries don't have to rig thier games since they clearly have the advantage. Also one can use the repeating patterns to ones advantage no

Reply #80

JADELottery — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 23:51:14 GMT

irmediator, KebRyo and Stack47,

I'll get back to ya's later. I've got a lot going on now: son's recent graduation, an up and coming career advancement with my current employer, prepping my home for a possible sale and additional programming issues as it relates to this topic, other topics and JADE LSG 2.0.

Reply #79

Stack47 — Thu, 29 May 2008 00:54:56 GMT

Badger 5 is a 5/31 game that uses a RNG and I believe the affects of trying to prove the game is fixed is to find a group of 12 numbers that consistently has 4 or 5 of the drawn numbers. Finding a flaw in a RNG could benefit players.

Get all lotto game stats (games with Balls over 50 played) and show them side by side to see if the random and 50/50 is working or is there a odd game out there that is producing a unique set of numbers and patterns.

The Tennessee Lottery had some unique pat... [ More ]

Reply #78

Stack47 — Wed, 28 May 2008 21:36:32 GMT

I've followed this discussing since it began back in December and never though the object was to prove the Wisconsin lottery is cheating. That would be more like knowing which batch of scratch-off tickets had the jackpot winner, placing those tickets in an area or in a specific store, or not offering them for sale until they made their expected profit. It's possible they could scan the played combinations in pick-5 or lotto games and program the RNG to exclude them or only include the combinatio... [ More ]

Reply #77

KebRyo — Wed, 28 May 2008 16:58:16 GMT

Hello, I'm new here but this grabbed my attention, I would like to add more Data here...no I would like More data.

While you are clearly on a mathematical track to a target using the probability system with what would happen IF. If you are trying to say A lotto is rigged you would be in fact saying some one rigged it, without all the data I would hope that a few things would be considered:

Ball weight: ball 1 can not weigh the same as ball 50, ink over area proves that.

Base Ball weight... [ More ]

Reply #76

irmediator — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:22:36 GMT

Dear benmas:

Option 4) play and win! :) The patterns in the numbers repeat themselves too often to be ignored. Tell you what... hand input the results of just one game of your choice from 5 years past into an excel sheet. What you will see are inexplicable patterns in the numbers. Clusters of the same numbers and pairs repeating themselves within short time spans. Even the most casual observer will come to the same conclusion, that statistically this shouldn't be happening. Therefore, ob... [ More ]

Reply #75

JADELottery — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:24:36 GMT

irmediator and benmas,

thanks for the feedback; i do appreciate your comments. however, i'm working over a surprising discovery right now. just keep a look out for something amazing to come up.

Reply #74

benmas — Tue, 20 May 2008 02:00:54 GMT

OK, lets say he is right and somehow proved that is not random but manipulated....So next what do you do...I see only three options left for a player after these findings:

1) Not play this game anymore

2) Not play all the Wisconsion RNG games anymore

3) Write to lottery or newspapers and tell them to switch to balls ( this will in all likeliness be largely ignored as well as your claims that they are manipulating the games)

In my opinion if you have reason to beleive that something i... [ More ]

Reply #73

irmediator — Tue, 20 May 2008 01:35:37 GMT

To be brief:

Jade is right.... it can't be random.

Reply #72

JADELottery — Mon, 12 May 2008 20:56:06 GMT

Update: I'm chugging along here with this Badger 5 data, however, I'm working several other projects at the same time and in the same subject matter. There's a possible topic morph in the works as it relates to this one.

Reply #71

JADELottery — Sun, 04 May 2008 07:18:17 GMT

teuffelhund37,

thank you for the input. this is just a small piece of a much larger project i've been working on in my spare time. i'm always thinking about something math, physics or programming related, even if it has nothing to do with the lottery. however, in piecing things together i noticed a lot of similarities in various studies that appeared to fit together. they worked amazingly well in describing other points of view in seemingly unrelated topics.

as i said, this is just a small... [ More ]

Reply #70

teuffelhund37 — Fri, 02 May 2008 18:43:44 GMT

I am of the opposite opinion as this poster. I say- Jade- keep on keepin' on! As I said in another post, just because a goal seems tough, doesn't mean it isn't worth pursuing. We all know that lottery and casino officials have the best mathmaticians in the world working for them. IF JADE can prove something to them that they haven't previously thought of, I guarantee they will rethink the process.

Jade- keep dreamin' man and don't listen to what the naysayers on here say. I am sure some, espe... [ More ]

Reply #69

teuffelhund37 — Fri, 02 May 2008 18:32:32 GMT

WOW! I checked out your math and I think that you have a tough task. However, just because a task is tough doesn't mean it isn't worth trying to pursue. I have seem lottery wheels, software, etc and I can tell you one thing, THOSE THINGS ARE BUNK! Not because I haven't HIT yet, but because they suppose there is some way to bring order to a totally random event.

I can not find any information that says (save 1) that any of these system creators are actually, provable winners themselves. It is... [ More ]

Reply #68

JADELottery — Thu, 01 May 2008 07:09:25 GMT

Below is the total run down of what we have so far.

Data Stream Chrono Badger 5 Draw Wheel, Matched Draw #'s, Line Match Distribution Scramble Order (Implemented 2008-03-04)

Index 0 Index 1 Posted Year Month Day A B C D E W M 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1 1 Yes 2007 12 4 2 4 11 15 22 0 3 12 23 11 4

2 2 Yes 2007 12 5 1 2 9 20 29 0 1 31 19

3 3 Yes 2007 12 6 4 12 14 16 20 0 4 6 18 20 4 2

4 4 Yes 2007 12 7 1 12 13 15 18 0 4 3 22 20 5

5 5 Yes 2007 12 8... [ More ]

Reply #67

JADELottery — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:21:32 GMT

In reference to the Ohio 023, is that midday, evening or both

Reply #66

JADELottery — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:53:12 GMT

I'm working on making fraud detection a part of JADE LSG 2.0. That way anyone can number crunch themselves. This is just a test run of a few detection methods.

Reply #65

dewaa — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 18:36:12 GMT

Jadelottery's number crunching is well over my head. Sladgemooto's post makes it very obvious that Wisconsin had maybe has a big problem.

But to prove the game is fixed I think you should crunch the numbers on other games as well. The larger the pool of numbers the greater the variation from what we might consider random will be in a relative short time span.As an example, chart. the first digit in either a pick three or four game.The odds tell you any given number should come up an average o... [ More ]

Reply #64

JADELottery — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 06:00:55 GMT

We're approaching draw 200 for Exp. 1 and Exp. 2. We'll add more data and fill in some additional information sometime after.

Reply #63

JADELottery — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 06:40:07 GMT

Site updates are interfering with the auto posting of the Badger 5 wheel on a tight random schedule of 19:54 to 19:58 daily. I've reprogrammed the auto posting to an expanded random selection time frame of 00:00 to 19:58 daily to increase the probability of auto posting the Badger 5 wheel when LP site updates are being done.

Reply #62

JADELottery — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:55:53 GMT

Ok, now that most of you have viewed the graph animation, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfYxlTZYE8c, of just one of the anomalies that have plagued the Badger 5 drawings since 2007-10-05. I'd like to address some other issues that have arisen during this topic. There is a misperception being injected into the mindset of those who are reading this. The misperception is that my objective in this post and others is to bring down my state lottery. That is not correct; at no point during this topic... [ More ]

Reply #61

JADELottery — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:36:02 GMT

Sledgemoto,

Thanks, I try to make this as easy to understand as possible. However, some of the number crunching can get a bit wielding at times. I find that graphs help a lot when trying to talk about an abstract number analysis and animated graphs help out even more. It's as close to laymen as I can get without loosing much of the fundamental concept of the analysis, method or idea.

Yeah, there are many unreasonable occurrences during the entire span of this computer generated number sche... [ More ]

Reply #60

Sledgemoto — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:51:14 GMT

Bravo JadeLottery,

I've been watching your progress on this in the background for quite some time. I am a player and do monitor the badger5 on a daily basis. While I will admit I'm not a wheel player and most of your analysis is way beyond my comprehension I have been very intrigued by it.

I to have noticed many things that seem out of the norm from your traditional ball lotteries. It was very obvious to me that there have been adjustments made during the life of badger5 especially at the... [ More ]

Reply #59

JADELottery — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 06:30:52 GMT

Boy I tell ya.

If there are any people in Wisconsin monitoring and playing the Badger 5, there is some major anomaly galore going on here.

I won't say too much here, but dee-amn.

Tell ya what, how about we out Flank 'em?

While I'm distracting them, team up, a few of you go Left and some go Right, then radio when you're in position.

I'll set of the flash bang distracter system.

Right you lob a few smoke grenade diffusion systems at 'em.

Left you rush in full fire attack syste... [ More ]

Reply #58

JADELottery — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 07:10:41 GMT

Sorry, posted a program test sheet by mistake.

Here's the actual update from my post earlier this week.

Data Stream Chrono Badger 5 Draw Wheel, Matched Draw #'s, Line Match Distribution Scrable Order

(Implemented 2008-03-04)

Index 0 Index 1 Posted Year Month Day A B C D E W M 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

95 91 Yes 2008 3 7 1 4 9 12 13 0 2 16 30 4 20 15 10 14 22 13 19 12 17 11 18 16 21

96 92 Yes 2008 3 8 1 10 14 18 21 0 4 3 25 14 8... [ More ]

Reply #57

JADELottery — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:12:58 GMT

State ignore me? I'm counting on it.

Never prove anything? Well, as long as I prove it to myself, that's all I need.

This information is posted for your benefit.

You can use it any way you'd like or not at all.

I'll let you decide.

Reply #56

benmas — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:05:51 GMT

JAde, i respect your knowledge in mathematics and computer programming but in my opinion you are going overboard with this thing....most likely you will never prove anything, even if you come close the state will still ignore you...everyone aknowledged that there was a problem in tennesse and they didnt do anything about the situaton so....on the other hand if you are trying so hard to figure a statistical way to win just keep it simple ...

Reply #55

JADELottery — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:02:00 GMT

If the link for the graph animation doesn't work, try this --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfYxlTZYE8c

Reply #54

JADELottery — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:45:19 GMT

I given that much thought. That's why I think BOT Picking might be the way. A BOT, short for roBOT, can be programmed the pick up on those kinds of subtle things to hack the lottery's computer picking method, fixed or not.

Reply #53

MillionsWanted — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:39:11 GMT

If your statistics can show which numbers those fixing the lottery are playing, perhaps you should play those numbers as well.

Reply #52

Blackapple — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:27:35 GMT

If it is at all possible, lotteries may be rigged to provide one of two outcomes - either certain numbers played by those who do the rigging can be selected or the most popular numbers selected can be eliminated from the draw - and keep in mind that around 70% of all tickets purchased in any lottery will be quick picks. With the second possibility in mind data like this can be analyzed to eliminate certain numbers from non-QP selections to maximize the winning possibilities. Interesting thread

Reply #51

JADELottery — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:08:06 GMT

Alright, I think I can post some additional information. First is the update from the last post.

Data Stream Chrono Badger 5 Draw Wheel, Matched Draw #'s, Line Match Distribution Scramble Order

(Implemented 2008-03-04)

Index 0 Index 1 Posted Year Month Day A B C D E W M 0 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

95 91 Yes 2008 3 7 1 4 9 12 13 0 2 16 30 4 20 15 10 14 22 13 19 12 17 11 18 16 21

96 92 Yes 2008 3 8 1 10 14 18 21 0 4 3 25 14 8 14 1... [ More ]

Reply #50

JADELottery — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 08:16:00 GMT

While working the numbers on this last update, I've come across a few interesting things. I'll get back to this in a few days to see how and where this is headed. Unreasonable is a word that can best describe what I'm seeing. To be continued...

Reply #49

JADELottery — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:56:24 GMT

Here is the data obtained so far for this 90 successful draw set for dates from 2007-12-04 to 2008-03-06; additional information to follow.

Index 0 Index 1 Posted Year Month Day A B C D E W M 0 1 2 3 4 5 Scramble Order

1 1 Yes 2007 12 4 2 4 11 15 22 0 3 12 23 11 4

2 2 Yes 2007 12 5 1 2 9 20 29 0 1 31 19

3 3 Yes 2007 12 6 4 12 14 16 20 0 4 6 18 20 4 2

Reply #48

JADELottery — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:08:05 GMT

We're lost in a sea of information.

Actually, 2008-03-06 is the 90th successful draw, but that's ok.

We've been using wheel 0 to post our number anyway even though the numbers are scrambled and using the exact same numbers.

We'll continue the scramble postings anyway.