Randomness of the lottery

Reply #66

psykomo — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:23:25 GMT

the FEW i play<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

are NOT RANDOM

that's a FACT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HOPE other's will send me>>> MONEY......... $$$$$$$$$$$$$

HELP HELP>>>>WELL THANKS anyway and LOL TOO!!

PSYKOMO

Reply #65

Wintariofan — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 05:17:25 GMT

IN REGARDS TO LOTTERY OFFICIALS LOOKING AT GAME INFORMATION AND MOVE BALLS SET AND TUBES/MACHINES....

Incorrect information, as someone who attends lottery draws here in Ontario, the lottery draws coordinators only receive sales information after lottery terminal shut down. Only information dealing with how much money was spent on Pick 3, Pick 4, our Tag game, Lottario, 649, Ontario 49, daily keno. The sales information is displayed on the machines base so they can reconsile after th... [ More ]

Reply #64

pacattack05 — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:28:40 GMT

Even though randomness has patterns, it's all an illusion. Fabricated by the mind.

The mind, from it's evolutionary state, was and still is, always trying to make sense out of chaos.

The mere fragments of light that are reflected to the lenses in our eyes, are interpretated by our brain. Before the brain does anything at all, it must first reverse the general image to right side up, hence the way lenses work. Lenses always show the image upside down.

And then go ahead and piece all th... [ More ]

Reply #63

pacattack05 — Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:11:40 GMT

Now, this will only be a success if you understand number relations .

I think you meant Numba relations.

Reply #62

Stack47 — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 04:44:47 GMT

RJ won $150 on MM and that sure trumps your 3 bucks

Reply #61

Stack47 — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 04:40:41 GMT

In the statement you was responding to, your answer has no correlation to what was discussed.

I was asking what you meant by While the patterns may be easy to predict in 2 out of 5 sets, the other 3 and BB may be a situation where it's too hard identify just yet . A set of numbers in Mega Millions can mean from 2 to 56 numbers. How many numbers did you have in each of the 5 sets?

The last five draws are called the last five draws. If you mean 2 out of 5 numbers, why are you calling the n... [ More ]

Reply #60

NumbaTuff — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:28:50 GMT

In respect to Rjoh response to me, I'm convince you guys are seeing it from the another side of the spectrum. Not that it's wrong but it's complicated and reveal too little insight to win Mega Million money.

If what Rjoh suggest as patterns are actually how you all see patterns, I'm speechless.....just speechless.

Good luck, though.

Reply #59

NumbaTuff — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:20:38 GMT

Mega Millions draws 1 set of 5 numbers 1 to 56 so it looks like you're saying your patterns can predict 2 numbers out of 25 numbers (five 5 number sets). A 2if2 25 number wheel has 30 sets of 5 number combinations but matching 2 numbers in Mega Millions pays nothing and you still lose money if you happen to trap 3 numbers.

In the statement you was responding to, your answer has no correlation to what was discussed. So when you say, it looks like you're saying... is that your assumptio... [ More ]

Reply #58

Stack47 — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:22:42 GMT

RJ just showed him a pattern that can be used for digital positioning filtering but he wants valuable information .

Reply #57

Stack47 — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:14:12 GMT

While the patterns may be easy to predict in 2 out of 5 sets, the other 3 and BB may be a situation where it's too hard identify just yet.

Mega Millions draws 1 set of 5 numbers 1 to 56 so it looks like you're saying your patterns can predict 2 numbers out of 25 numbers (five 5 number sets). A 2if2 25 number wheel has 30 sets of 5 number combinations but matching 2 numbers in Mega Millions pays nothing and you still lose money if you happen to trap 3 numbers.

Now, this will only be a su... [ More ]

Reply #56

RJOh — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:04:23 GMT

The pattern is the 1/ 1 2/ 2 3/12 4/15 8/23 at the bottom. However, that by itself, it doesn't show much, it's only after analyzing most of the 262 drawings since the last matrix change and comparing them can I decide if there's a pattern there. Ditto for the number distribution letters chart.

I wasn't expecting you to share your methods, I was just sharing some of the ways I look for patterns in past drawings. When it comes to jackpot style games most LP members are will... [ More ]

Reply #55

jarasan — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:27:18 GMT

OMG

Reply #54

NumbaTuff — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 22:16:56 GMT

That's interesting that all the winning numbers for the last draw have actually played in previous draws but I see no patterns that you speak of. A Pattern speaks out without you knowing it. A Pattern shows its' trail without meaning to. That's why I say it's like looking at it naked. It's also the reason why it so hard to win it.

It's there in plain sight but your eyes have to be trained to see it. The way to see it is totally different, unthinkable, and surprisingly shocking ---- it's... [ More ]

Reply #53

RJOh — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 21:37:29 GMT

I have come up with several ways to look at patterns in the MegaMillions drawings. One is the numbers of past drawings that had the winning numbers and their total counts.

MEGAMILL 1 586 12/25/07 19 36 37 48 52 +08

______________________________________________________________

MEGAMILL 585 1 12/21/07 14 19 20 43 53 +07 1*

S/NUM 1 ----------------------------------------

~ DRS 584 2 12/18/07 03 23 46 48 49 +02 1

Reply #52

NumbaTuff — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 20:43:35 GMT

If I may add, to help further your insight....

Yes, there are patterns in the Lottery Matrix. In fact, without patterns the game will be un-playable. It's a reason there's an odd in winning the lottery. There has to be an odd of winning... in order for the game to be playable. It may not make sense but it's what I've come to see and understand.

And I tell you, there are 3 set of patterns in the Mega Million Matrix. Sometimes a certain pattern plays straight for a while. Sometimes... [ More ]

Reply #51

Lotterologist — Tue, 25 Dec 2007 00:05:10 GMT

That all depends on if you use the Martha Stewart method.

Reply #50

Omniscient — Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:23:41 GMT

Visions of winning the lotto : Luck

Visions of doing exceptionally well in the stock market: Inside information

just my 2 cents

Reply #49

LottoBuster — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 23:59:46 GMT

In a N.Y. newspaper, an article stated that very thing. When an official was asked why they performed pre-tests and rotation, he said...."To eliminate as much possibility of a pattern emerging".

What this official doesn't seem to get is that such procedures will have little overall effect if one is looking for patterns not necessarily visible.

One example is to take lottery numbers from certain dates in each month from within the past several years, say the 1st, 10th, and 20th then pu... [ More ]

Reply #48

JADELottery — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:59:25 GMT

I understand.

It could be expressed mathematically as a probability of the improbable.

I'll just monitor for now.

Reply #47

LOTTOMIKE — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:21:28 GMT

good 'ol rip snorter.i miss that feller.......him and 'ol chewie.if they would come back to LP it would be like the beatles getting back together.

Reply #46

justxploring — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 05:53:31 GMT

That's a very good example. Anyone who's been pregnant, for example, knows this feeling. Wherever you look, you see another woman who is pregnant.

Reply #45

Thoth — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 05:41:12 GMT

Each of the two sets appears to be random within itself - but the bottom most set contains one to three of the same exact numbers as the same corresponding line for the first set. Obviously, the drawings in the second set occur the next day after the drawings in the first set. The amount of winning numbers that float over from set one to set two does seem to defy probability. However, its NOT IMPOSSIBLE. How far back does this continue? Does it go back far beyond 10-3-2007? Does it continue on... [ More ]

Reply #44

Coin Toss — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 05:11:33 GMT

Good points four4me.

Folks, you ever notice that when you're thinking of buying a certain model car you start seeing them all over the place? Think a few thousand more of them hit your town after you started thinking about them?

No, not at all, the only thing different is since you're thinking of that model (substitute numbers, patterns here) you start seeing them. There's nothing at all different about how many of those cars are on the road (or numbers are drawn).

Reply #43

four4me — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:55:00 GMT

You only think you see patterns when you see numbers appear more frequently as a pattern. Your thought process makes you think patterns are forming. You might want to believe there are patterns if for some reason they used the same balls over and over consistently and for whatever reason certain balls had a better chances of being drawn over other balls. But it's still random or coincidence.

You could even track how many times each ball was drawn this year and in previous years just because... [ More ]

Reply #42

Stack47 — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:16:09 GMT

I think that they change balls and machines constantly to avoid patterns to try and make it as random as possible again.

In most pick-3 drawings they use 3 sets of 10 numbered balls (0-9), put each set into 1 of 3 clear plastic containers, and mix them up using a forced air and maybe a devise to stir them up. There is a covered tube at the top of each container that when uncovered allows one of those balls to enter the tube, the cover is closed and that ball becomes one of the winning digit... [ More ]

Reply #41

Lotterologist — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 03:05:42 GMT

Whether the lottery is random or not, all depends on your perspective. To Yao Ming, I am short, but to Gary Coleman, i'm tall. The UNIVERSE was designed , yet on a quantum scale it appears random .

It's Yin and Yang. I'm looking at both sides now.

I've looked at life from both sides now

From win and lose, but still somehow

It's life's illusion, I recall

I really don't know life at all ----Joni Mitchell

Reply #40

Lotterologist — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:07:17 GMT

Does that necessarily cancel out the event being random, or just tell us that these people had a vision of the results of a random event?

Some would say that if the lottery is predictable, it is not random. I believe that nanolike alluded to that in his opening post.

If the winning combination can be consistantly predicted through logic, reasoning, dreams, visions, e.t.c, that would suggest that someone broke the code to the lottery.

Reply #39

JAP69 — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:34:15 GMT

pay attention

Past Lottery Results for South Carolina Daily Numbers Games

This page displays past lottery results for Pick 3 and Pick 4 drawings in South Carolina. Use the breadcrumb links above to go back to the previous view.

Drawing DatePick 3Pick 4

MiddayEveningMiddayEvening

Fri, Dec 21, 20074-8-72-8-70-7-3-45-1-8-8

Thu, Dec 20, 20073-4-31-4-97-2-9-65-3-4-4

Wed, Dec 19, 20070-7-63-6-22-7-3-30-1-3-7

Tue, Dec 18, 20075-3-84-1-55-4-4-72-0-5-1

Mon,... [ More ]

Reply #38

pacattack05 — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:23:28 GMT

Each tube has it's history and pattern whether it's yet developed and predictable. When the officials rotate the tubes, they don't inform what new positions they are in. New York used to show the orientation, but stopped around 10 years ago.

I don't feel that the premise being set here was just on whether the lottery is random or not. I'm pretty sure most everyone knows this. Just acknowledging the fact that quirks within any system exists is the real message. Random maybe random, but even ra... [ More ]

Reply #37

Coin Toss — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 23:47:56 GMT

Lotterologist

Remember, there are people who can see into the future(psychics, prophets, e.t.c). Consider that when pondering the randomness of the lottery.

I've known people who could dream a 3 or 4 digit combination and shortly afterwards, it would fall. If the lottery was truly random, how could they dream what the winning combination would be?

Does that necessarily cancel out the event being random, or just tell us that these people had a vision of the results of a random event... [ More ]

Reply #36

Lotterologist — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:47:52 GMT

That would put your head in a transcendental state.

Reply #35

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:45:56 GMT

And that would put your head... where

Reply #34

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:43:37 GMT

I brought proof, what did you bering nothing but your opinion!

Bull. You've brought a bunch of fictional numbers with nothing to back up your claims. If you've got the proof tell us which lotteries the real non-random results are from.

Reply #33

Lotterologist — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:42:02 GMT

Predicting the lottery, like predicting the weather, is not an exact science. To see the past, one must look deep into space...billions of light years away.

To see the future, one must look deep inside of THEMSELVES.

Reply #32

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:40:08 GMT

The old story about a proof that bumble bees can't fly is a myth, but suppose it were true? What would be the point in trying to refute it by throwing a fake bee in the air and claiming it's flying? I have no idea what the author's intent or integrity is, but the author has acknowedged that the data presented is fictional. Perhaps the underlying belief is true, but there's no rational point in trying to support the belief with a fictitious proof . So far, the author is just throwing up a bun... [ More ]

Reply #31

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:36:50 GMT

I can't really answer you, because I don't know what it means when you say pre-tests throw off the randomness ? Do they prevent things from being random? Do they make things more random? Is there a reason that either of those should be considerd a problem?

If anything, pre-tests would make it easier to find any patterns that exist, because you're given more data. If the lottery wants to be sure that the drawings are random (and not being much of a conspiracy theorist, I'm assuming that... [ More ]

Reply #30

Tenaj — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:28:35 GMT

What happened to Rip Snorter Coin Toss? Is he still a part of LP

Reply #29

Lotterologist — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:18:35 GMT

It is my belief that thought can travel faster than the speed of light, which is why some people can glimpse into the future and see or dream the winning numbers in the lottery.

Photons (light particles) are met with resistance as they travel through the universe and enter earth's atmosphere.

There is no such resistance on thought.

Reply #28

Lotterologist — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 21:46:44 GMT

Remember, there are people who can see into the future(psychics, prophets, e.t.c). Consider that when pondering the randomness of the lottery.

I've known people who could dream a 3 or 4 digit combination and shortly afterwards, it would fall. If the lottery was truly random, how could they dream what the winning combination would be?

Scientists are already working on a time machine. The past, present, and the future are cosmically linked.

http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94.379/163... [ More ]

Reply #27

Coin Toss — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:39:46 GMT

nanolike

You told us:

Coin Toss I am only making a pOINT a serious one! The best point anyone has ever made on this site!

That's pretty strong, arrogant, and boastful for someone who has been here all of three or four months and has all of 53 posts.

When you gotta shoot, shoot, don't talk

- Ely Wallach as Paco, The Good, the Bad, the Ugly

(In other words, hit a jackpot, then expound...)

The best point ever made on this site was an avatar that a member known as Rip S... [ More ]

Reply #26

Lotterologist — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:56:26 GMT

Is reality random? Likewise, is the lottery.

Reply #25

Omniscient — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:26:47 GMT

I beleive lotto officials look close to see if pattens start to emerge. When they do, it calls for action to make the lottery random once more. I think that they change balls and machines constantly to avoid patterns to try and make it as random as possible again. I used to create charts on graph paper, months worth of them, to try and find patterns and everytime I saw a pattern forming, the next days drawing was totally ascued from what should have happened, even though past patterns showing si... [ More ]

Reply #24

konane — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:00:58 GMT

Excellet point! Events like that were referred to as number affinities in long since out of print Lotto World Magazine articles.

They happen, no one knows why and no one can control them.

Also have to agree with ThatScaryChick random, but not random if computer drawn. Waaaaay too much room for Geek-Tweak (my term) using computer draw.

Using computer draw lotteries figuratively in science fiction land have the option of having drawings adjusted to show whatever level of income t... [ More ]

Reply #23

time*treat — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:51:24 GMT

Heh, my old signature line.

Anyway, it looks like nano may have found a p6 version of 'followers' or whatever the p3 p4 players are calling it, these days.

Reply #22

Coin Toss — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:53:16 GMT

nanolike

As far as your comment anyone could just about come up with any theory and keep data mining until it appeared they have found results that prove their theory Really DO IT THEN! I challenge you to put your money where your mouth is!

Well first off, you're the one with the theory, not me. I'm saying it's random.

Secondly, I do put my mpney where my mouth is , $1 or $2 at a time, and that's all, because I do believe it's random.

On one of the threads here it's been poin... [ More ]

Reply #21

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:24:56 GMT

Coin Toss, your arguement holds no weight!

First off you may be under the impression that I am piecing my two drawings together looking for matches as I see fit! Or using numbers from several different lottery drawings. I am not, only two. Drawing 1 and Drawing 2. From two diffeent lotteries only!

As far as your comment anyone could just about come up with any theory and keep data mining until it appeared they have found results that prove their theory Really DO IT THEN! I challenge you... [ More ]

Reply #20

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:27:33 GMT

ThatScaryChick wins Best answer!

Yes Exactly, how can something be random if it were designed by someone. Someone designed it to behave in a certain FIXED way! Even if they say it isnt fixed iT STILL IS!

Now wouldnt it be something if one lottery was using a computerized drawing system and another were using ping pong balls and both got the same exact pattern.

Now that would be something

Reply #19

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:20:57 GMT

Tenaj, I agree 100% BUT in two completely different lotteries. yes patterns do occur in one lottery and these pattens are simple to see if one is looking for them

but imagine seeing the same exact pattern in a completely different lottery mimicking the 1st lottery. Wow those are some pretty big odds?

So would you believe it were random if I showed you a 3rd pattern mimicking the 1st and 2nd lottery?

How many lotteries with the exact same pattern would it take to convince one that it is

Reply #18

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:54:50 GMT

I suppose you would also trust that if you walked into a room, where someone had just thrown 6 silver dollars into the air and they were marked 1 thr 6 and number 1-3-4 all landed on their side instead of laying flat that you would believe those silver dollars actually landed on their side like that. Ok I suppose it could happen. Maybe you have some validity.

O by the way, walk over here to this other room with me cause 6 other silver dollars where thrown into the air in this other room... [ More ]

Reply #17

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:37:44 GMT

I appreciate you sticking up for me. This is no scam, the pattern is real in its integrity. The pattern does exist, but only the names have been changed to protect the INNOCENT,

Truth be told, there has never been a more predictable lottery. In fact to look at the 2nd drawing and compare it to the first and not see the pattern one would have to be blind.

To be close minded is a sure way of not seeing the pattern or using it to win or increase ones advantage over others.

To come against... [ More ]

Reply #16

nanolike — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:19:25 GMT

Raven, Exactly and so it is Raven you have proven the point that this lottery, for if it were random I could not deternmine that one to three of the numbers that will show will be one to three of the 6 numbers given in the first lottery. Random means without pattern or boundrys without a fixed goal. caios, no way to tell what might happen, where all numbers have equal probability, if anyone takes a look they will definiately see a clear pattern so clear one would have to be blind not to see it

Reply #15

pacattack05 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:32:39 GMT

That's like saying....on paper that mathematically, a bee can't fly. So just because another area of the subject might not warrant just cause, dosen't mean the underline is somehow invalid or incomplete.

The author's lack of attention to detail in one or two areas does not define where the integrity lies . To me...the mere statement in the thread title tells my gut feeling that this was not some misinformed scam with an agenda.

Reply #14

justxploring — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:29:55 GMT

I can't answer you, because mine doesn't stink. You will probably really come up with some more colorful posts when I tell you that pre-tests throw off the randomness of the drawings, in my opinion. If people think what will be will be and then human interference says nope, not that one and that one then how can anyone here use a system that chooses the next number when you don't know what next is. If the FL Lottery, for example, has 5 pre-tests before the televised drawing and you have... [ More ]

Reply #13

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:18:07 GMT

Whether or not the lottery is random is definitely a good question, but how good are the answers being offered? If I ask you if you think my roast beef sandwich is rotten and then wave a pile of BS under your nose, is it meaningful when you tell me, Why, yes, that smells absolutely terrible

Reply #12

pacattack05 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:02:35 GMT

Reply #11

pacattack05 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:47:40 GMT

I admire your tenacity and knowledge, but the title of the thread is a valid one, whether the data he presented is flase or not.

The author raises a good question regrading Randomness in general.

Reply #10

justxploring — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:45:30 GMT

I deleted my original reply because I said I agree with Tenaj. Then I agreed with Coin Toss. Then I agreed with Pac.

Guess I am having random changes of thought!

I think there are patterns, but no definites. If you ever studied Meteorology, you know that it's based on physics. Predicting the weather isn't random. But when Hurricane Charley was headed straight for us, it took a sudden turn and headed toward Tampa. Then it made a sharp right and devastated Punta Gorda which is 100 mile... [ More ]

Reply #9

KY Floyd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:30:37 GMT

Google already knows about the numbers you used in the post, but can't find any other results for the strings you used, from alottery or anywhere else. Until you tell us where the numbers came from all I see is a delusion, a bunch of made up BS, and good evidence that somebody doesn't have a clue about probability.

Reply #8

ThatScaryChick — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:21:51 GMT

I think all drawings are random up to a point. I think however, that certain computerized drawings are fixed, so they are less random.

Reply #7

pacattack05 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:13:51 GMT

You took the words right out of mouth.

In about the past 6 or 7 years, I've been fortunate enough to find that the old school of thought is no longer the truth, or atleast conceived to be in today's contemporary insiders like me...lol No...but really, I've stumbled upon a select few who explained a different view of chaos and it's behaviors.

Chaos 101: Studies of basic random computer programs placing a random dot on a sheet of paper were tested, and the results was a fuzzy shape of a snow... [ More ]

Reply #6

Coin Toss — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:02:23 GMT

nanolike

With the number of lotteries that exist and the internet anyone could just about come up with any theory and keep data mining until it appeared they have found results that 'prove' their theory, but in the long run the lottery is random.

It's designed to be random and if anything ever happens where someone does break the code and beat a game consistently that game will simply be withdrawn and no longer available. However, nothing even close to that has happened yet (other than... [ More ]

Reply #5

Todd — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:30:50 GMT

Reply #4

Tenaj — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:23:01 GMT

There are patterns in randomness. For unknown reasons numbers move in circles, traveling with each other. There's no explaination. Just is.

Want to know what the patterns are - pay attention.

Reply #3

Raven62 — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 02:16:33 GMT

Maybe we should start off by defining what Random is!

A sequence of digits from the set (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) can be considered Random if and only if, given any digit in the sequence, their exists no way to predict the next one.

In order for a sequence of digits to be Random, their must exist no algorithm capable of generating the next digit in a sequence, on the basis of the digits already generated in that sequence.

Reply #2

RJOh — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:03:30 GMT

Every thing about those drawings are random, even the days of the drawings, they are different for each month.

Reply #1

Blackapple — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:47:10 GMT

Clearer patterns in Pick3 4

Have'nt studied Pick5 yet

Randomness of the lottery

nanolike — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 11:39:11 GMT

IS IT RANDOM OR NOT! ?

Please view the following 2 lotteries below. Based upon the results Your task is to ask yourself whether you are viewing a random lottery or not.

The months,days and even numbers have been changed BUT NOT THE PATTERN to protect the INNOCENT so not to give away where these drawings were conducted the 2 lottery drawings I am using are REAL and the PATTERN is REAL.

In otherwords if a 12-24 showed in the 1st drawing then a 12-24 showed in the second. The purpose of