Statistical Analysis of Lottery Results

Reply #42

LANTERN — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 02:55:11 GMT

No, the information I have given is still good, at least most of it is.

What I was talking about there is that there are 10 digits on a pic 3 game and that filtering out a digit or digits is a Digit(s) Filter , just as there are Sums Filter , LDR Filters, Width Filters, Etc.

And if you filter out 1 or more digits, they would be filtered out either straight by position or boxed for all 3 positions.

I made up a possible way with which to filter out 3 Boxed digits and somehow I thought tha... [ More ]

Reply #41

RJOh — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:42:05 GMT

Are you now discarding all the information you've shared about using filters to get a win

Reply #40

savagegoose — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 02:02:09 GMT

yeah but i have a biased game to analyse

Reply #39

RJOh — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:21:44 GMT

Software can allow you to play what if with past drawings but most times that's too general to be successful during future drawings unless you're willing to cover a lot of lines. For example, you can know that 35% of the time had you picked 30 or so numbers in a certain manner during past drawings that all the winning numbers would have been covered, but wheeling 30 or so numbers for possible winning combinations 35% of the time during future drawings can be expensive.

Reply #38

truecritic — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 04:53:31 GMT

Yeah, I don't blame you. Just give me winners, who cares about the facts

Reply #37

LANTERN — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 04:00:44 GMT

I was wrong I can't now get the 3 digits boxed filter to work nor can I get any other kind of 3 boxed digits filters to work at all, 1 digit often fails.

I finished trying many filters tricks techniques and they all often failed on 1 of the 3 digits.

Maybe I should have tried for 2 boxed digits instead of 3, I will try that next time, but not today.

Reply #36

savagegoose — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 01:52:16 GMT

i would like to know of software than does analyse past draws and show any leads, i dont want to debate the is it worthwile game i want the software.

so aNYONE GOT ANY LEADS

Reply #35

jimmy4164 — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 01:42:44 GMT

RJOh,

All I know is winning a lottery jackpot makes playing the lottery a profitable venture.

...for the Winners.

--Jimmy4164

Reply #34

RJOh — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:11:42 GMT

Why should a jackpot winner have any reason to disagree with anything I've said, and if so, what?

I didn't say should but would with doubts, however I can't answer that question for you. You'll have to find some lottery jackpot winners and ask'em. All I know is winning a lottery jackpot makes playing the lottery a profitable venture.

Reply #33

jimmy4164 — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:58:10 GMT

RJOh,

Why should a jackpot winner have any reason to disagree with anything I've said, and if so, what? Of course we know it will happen for some. If it didn't, no one would play! Where do you think the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars come from to pay off the first time QP player who hits the PB jackpot? It comes from the 60 or more being lost on the average non jackpot winning tickets purchased by millions of other people. A jackpot winner's opinion on whether the lottery is random o... [ More ]

Reply #32

RJOh — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:25:07 GMT

Mathematics and physics will not allow you to turn a lottery game into a profitable venture.

I doubt if lottery jackpot winners would agree with you. While the odds says it's not likely to happen any particular player, we know it will happen for some. May it's just luck and presistents but are other factors contributors too

Reply #31

jimmy4164 — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:25:02 GMT

GASMETERGUY,

With our present inadequate knowledge of mathematics and physics, we have no way to predict random events.

Inadequate knowledge?

Probability theory has been well established for at least 2 centuries, and I don't think the authors of this book would agree with you.

http://ee.stanford.edu/~gray/sp.pdf

I'm not trying to vilify you; I'm trying to open your eyes to the truth. I'm sure you know what I mean when I tell you that, since I arrived here, it's me who has been... [ More ]

Reply #30

GASMETERGUY — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 00:37:03 GMT

Mathematics and physics will not allow you to turn a lottery game into a profitable venture

I could not agree more. With our present inadequate knowledge of mathematics and physics, we have no way to predict random events. Nor is anyone attempting to rectify this situation except for us nut-jobs here on LP. That does not mean we should be vilified for trying.

Reply #29

jimmy4164 — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 20:12:40 GMT

Filter out is a key concept here. Remember, to break even in most Pick-3s you must hit the jackpot twice for every 1000 tickets purchased. Unless there are forces at work for you that we discussed earlier, this probably won't happen often enough to keep you in the black. This is especially true when you are discarding 875 (1000-125) of the possible combinations that the ball machines are likely to produce about 87.5% of thetime.

I believe that if you buy 125 ($1) tickets every day for a year,... [ More ]

Reply #28

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 15:33:05 GMT

Well, yes, but as it is or might be, most of us, don't have any kind of Faith not even as much as that of a grain of sand, so we can't move no mountain nor even ping pong balls and if anybody out there can, they probably would not bother to do so.

No.

No, an experiment can never be exactly reproduced.

The Universe is always in motion and a-changing.

The World moves and so does the Sun and so does the Galaxy, Etc.

Every particle no matter its size is unique to itself, including thi... [ More ]

Reply #27

jimmy4164 — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 07:35:52 GMT

In the case of, say, a Lotto game with a million possible outcomes, wouldn't the cumulative effect of the several hundred thousand people holding differently numbered tickets bringing these kinds of forces to bear on the Ball Machines just sort of turn out to be a wash, so to speak

Reply #26

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:48:44 GMT

I have not read it, nor will I, but I can tell you that if what produced a particular result is exactly reproduced the outcome might be exactly the same unless, everything created and or what controls it or them has a kind of awareness and control over itself and or over other matter and or energy or what-ever forces there might be.

If somebody sees an experiment and or thinks about it, its outcome might also not be the same as it might have been otherwise, that might be another factor also.

Reply #25

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:39:31 GMT

If you filter out 1 digit for each position you have:

729 Straight pick 3 numbers left, if you filter out 2 such digits then:

512 Straight, if 3 digits then:

343 Straight pick 3 numbers, if 4 digits are filtered out of the 10 then:

216 Straight numbers, if 5 then:

125 Straight.

Reply #24

jimmy4164 — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:32:43 GMT

LANTERN,

But what is your reaction to the rest of the book excerpt discussing Laplace's metaphysical way of stating Spinoza's case?

--Jimmy4164

Laplace argued to the effect that given complete knowledge

of the physics of an experiment, the outcome must always be

predictable. This metaphysical argument must be tempered

with several facts. The relevant parameters may not be

measurable with sufficient precision due to mechanical or

theoretical limits. For example, the... [ More ]

Reply #23

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:26:51 GMT

As to jackpot kind of games, I have not spent enough time in their study to come up with good enough filtering techniques that can be used with the mediocre filters software that is available now for those kind of games.

Jackpots filters software is pityful, that is, very inadequate.

Reply #22

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:21:10 GMT

I know of an easy way to more often than not filter out 3 boxed digits out of the 10 that are good for both, boxed and straight filtration on the pick 3 game and for straight play on top of that I know of other ways to filter out even 1 or more digits from each of the 3 positions and that is just digits filtration, besides counting everything else, of course I have not posted about everything that I know about nor did I make predictions that use those digits filtering techniques.

Take into ac... [ More ]

Reply #21

jimmy4164 — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:15:11 GMT

GASMETERGUY,

You seem to believe that because an algorithym does not presently exist, that one is not possible.

Unless humans learn how to see into the future, I believe this to be true.

In PA the Evening Daily Number is a 3 digit Base 10 number drawn with 3 ping pong ball machines. The expected value of playing this game with Straight Win tickets is 50 for each $1 wagered, since the odds are 1:1000 but the payout is only $500. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you found a... [ More ]

Reply #20

LANTERN — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:08:56 GMT

Nothing in nature is random . . . A thing appears random

only through the incompleteness of our knowledge.

Spinoza, Ethics I

I never before read that, but I in my own came to know it and hardly know anything at all about Math, you only need a kindergarden kind of education to know that much.

I, on very many of my LP posts have said that.

Reply #19

jimmy4164 — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 04:53:51 GMT

four4me,

Statistical analysis when referring to the lottery could yield many results but it's unclear if it could produce future wins.

This has been my point all along! Mathematics and physics will not allow you to turn a lottery game into a profitable venture. The only possible exception to this would be where fraud is involved, and it is highly likely that only the perpetrators of the fraud would benefit.

--Jimmy4164

Reply #18

GASMETERGUY — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 17:53:19 GMT

What I have noticed, and dissented on, is the belief of many that, an algorithym which will make playing the lottory profitable exists.

You seem to believe that because an algorithym does not presently exist, that one is not possible. I guess you and I have to agree to disagree. I believe that one does exist. We need to find it. History is replete with examples of It can't be done! with subsequent results proving It can be done and I did it! .

There is the old story of Christopher Columbu... [ More ]

Reply #17

four4me — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 16:12:50 GMT

Statistical analysis when referring to the lottery could yield many results but it's unclear if it could produce future wins. If you had a complete data base of lottery numbers to work with they could be broken down to their various parts. By separating the pick 3-4-5-6 games and breaking them down.

A couple of those feature exist here on Lottery post deflate, and inspect. Excel is also a great way to formulate analysis to find out certain things you might want to know about the number h... [ More ]

Reply #16

jimmy4164 — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 15:48:00 GMT

Here is an easy to use Combinatorics Calculator

http://www.vpgenius.com/tools/combin.aspx

Reply #15

savagegoose — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 09:15:08 GMT

yeah got the win 32 version.

Reply #14

jimmy4164 — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 06:58:23 GMT

Must be ESP!

I was in the middle of installing MinGW so I could begin the process of building PSPP when you posted.

But gnumerics looks awesome and doesn't seem to have as many prerequisites. The Monte Carlo Tools

alone are good for keeping you away from air and sunshine! Did you DL the precompiled Windows 32 binary?

I don't believe what time it is

Reply #13

savagegoose — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 04:51:06 GMT

grabbed gnumerics, its a spreadsheet, i candeal with themm, and has a lot os statistical routines, hopefull i can find something i can use

Reply #12

jimmy4164 — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 03:57:40 GMT

RJOh,

I believe it's possible to come up with a system that improves the odds of winning.

If you're referring to winning money over the long haul, I disagree.

If you mean increasing the NUMBER of WINNING TICKETS, I agree!

I doubt if playing lotteries can ever be profitable without winning a few second prizes or eventually a jackpot.

I Agree!

--Jimmy4164

Reply #11

jimmy4164 — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 03:51:26 GMT

GASMETERGUY,

I do not think anyone on this site believes it is possible to mathematicqlly predict the outcome of each and every draw at any given time or place.

Although you must admit there are some here who are not as realistic as you, I don't think anyone has ever claimed that such a feat is possible! I have never ascribed that belief to anyone. What I have noticed, and dissented on, is the belief of many that, an algorithym which will make playing the lottory profitable exists. For t... [ More ]

Reply #10

RJOh — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 01:38:10 GMT

As GASMETERGUY says, no reasonable player would believes it's possible to mathematically predict the outcomes of each drawing every time but I believe it's possible to come up with a system that improves the odds of winning. I doubt if playing lotteries can ever be profitable without winning a few second prizes or eventually a jackpot. If such a system or algorithm is ever developed we'll probably read about one person or group winning several lottery jackpots within a year, I doubt if they woul... [ More ]

Reply #9

GASMETERGUY — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 00:40:00 GMT

I do not think anyone on this site believes it is possible to mathematicqlly predict the outcome of each and every draw at any given time or place. Mathemantics deals only wwith repeatable results.

What we are looking for is an algorithym which will make playing the lottory profitable. We fully expect to not win most of the time but hope, when the win does come, the reward far exceeds the cost.

Statistics only help us to see the problem we face; not a solution to the problem. So we try ou... [ More ]

Reply #8

jimmy4164 — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:49:51 GMT

Here is a Must Read for all those who hope to be able to

predict future lottery draws. Chapter 2 contains the most

applicable information.

http://ee.stanford.edu/~gray/sp.pdf

The following excerpts are from the Preface:

Nothing in nature is random . . . A thing appears random

only through the incompleteness of our knowledge.

Spinoza, Ethics I

(An LP Poster uses a paraphrase of this Spinoza quote as

his signature; I hope he checks out this book.)

I do... [ More ]

Reply #7

jimmy4164 — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 05:39:41 GMT

How could one person hit 2 Lottery Jackpots...

IN THE SAME DAY? !!

Listen in here to find out...

http://www.radiolab.org/2009/jun/15/

--Jimmy4164

Reply #6

jimmy4164 — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 05:21:09 GMT

The Truth About Deception !!

http://www.santafe.edu/news/item/truth-about-deception-harrington-gell-mann-bergstrom

Reply #5

jimmy4164 — Tue, 21 Sep 2010 03:26:36 GMT

For the Scientifically Curious, here is a site with challenging articles...

http://www.santafe.edu

Reply #4

jimmy4164 — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:15:54 GMT

This is a fun read...

http://www.gamblingplanet.org/editorial/Winning-the-lottery-statistics-and-superstitions/100809

Reply #3

jimmy4164 — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:43:18 GMT

Quantum Mechanics and Probability Calculus...

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-quantlog

Reply #2

jimmy4164 — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 17:28:21 GMT

This is a concise summary of the history of the development of Probability Theory. If you dig deeper, especially into the work of Bernoulli, you will understand why I made the comment [somewhere] in the Fooled By Randomness Thread that Bernoulli would roll over in his grave if he could read some of the posts here. Why not seek the TRUTH?

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/cs6751_97_winter/Topics/stat-meas/probHist.html

From Calculus, Volume II by Tom M. Apostol (2nd edition, John Wiley Sons,... [ More ]

Reply #1

jimmy4164 — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 05:30:35 GMT

Since there are a lot of Excel users here, I thought there might at least be interest in this:

http://statpages.org/javasta2.html#Excel

Statistical Analysis of Lottery Results

jimmy4164 — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 05:32:03 GMT

Here is a great source for FREE Statistical Software!

http://statpages.org/javasta2.html