Do Lottery Software program help YOU WIN lottery?

Reply #160

psykomo — Sat, 04 Oct 2014 17:06:52 GMT

GAME TIME

OVERTIME

SATURDAY

Reply #159

ivar58 — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 09:22:31 GMT

My answer YES.

Some programs helps me to get fast statistical review of drawings.

Like Powerball lottery statistics at google play.

Reply #158

psykomo — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 12:42:40 GMT

YES 41

NO 41

Ah tie don't count in this ball game

OVERTIME

Reply #157

RJOh — Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:50:43 GMT

To a large extent, the number of lines you plan to play will decide which if any software you will use. I usually only play 10 to 15 lines so that eliminates software that requires more than those amounts of lines.

Reply #156

ThaJackpotkid — Mon, 01 Sep 2014 08:57:01 GMT

Only one has a far way huge advantage than the others, 'System Programs that gives you wheels.

Reply #155

SergeM — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 18:00:33 GMT

Post a reply to Do Lottery Software program help YOU WIN lottery?

We might have a closer look at which programs there are first.

There are random generators giving you quickpicks.

There are system programs, that give you wheels.

There are analytical programs, that analyse the past drawings.

There are speculative, some say intuitive, programs, that make something of the analysis but you mostly don't know what.

I can think to those. Each one has a purpose. Do those help me

Reply #154

SergeM — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 17:35:42 GMT

If you read some PHP code, you will find some new old stuff like '- ' for example. Java is said to be easy, but is not. C# is similar to java for the syntax. Also PHP uses the curly brackets and the semicolon. SQL exists in dialects. With modern you might mean object oriented programming, which basically is maybe more than 30 years old. The hard thing is to use the libraries, the programs that others wrote without passing you the helping classes! - I imagine that many of the players, young and o... [ More ]

Reply #153

RJOh — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 03:56:24 GMT

From some of your previous posts I had gotten the idea while programming is hard for some of the older players here who hoped someone might take pity on them and offer to try and program some of their ideas that programming came easy for you. You seem to know something about a lot of different programming languages and some of the newer ways they were being used. I guess just reading someone's posts can give one a false impression.

Reply #152

ThaJackpotkid — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 18:12:02 GMT

Yes, there is a profit. That pick 3 game gives a prize of 450 sterling pounds. 1 pound per combo, gives you 350 combos with 100 pounds profit.

Reply #151

RJOh — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 17:49:27 GMT

My intention was to predict the UK Lottery Hotpicks pick 3 with 350 combos in every draw, but there was a bunch of critisement about my approach.

Is there any profit in that approach? Can you even break even

Reply #150

ThaJackpotkid — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 17:03:13 GMT

No, Just not yet. But there will be one very soon. I can't hold myself I'm so excited, and I just want to brag but I can't just yet. Like I always say, I would rather show than claim.

My intention was to predict the UK Lottery Hotpicks pick 3 with 350 combos in every draw, but there was a bunch of critisement about my approach. (www.lotterypost.com/thread/278570)

So it took me a month to pile up a strategy that will get hits with fewer combinations within a specific time frame.

This... [ More ]

Reply #149

MonEl — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 16:36:25 GMT

No, it is not correct English.

Do lottery software programs help you win the lottery?

Does a lottery software program helps you win the lottery

Reply #148

SergeM — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 14:44:07 GMT

Do Lottery Software program help YOU WIN lottery?

Is this correct American English

Reply #147

SergeM — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 14:11:07 GMT

Programming is not easy. I had hard times making this http://emuis.be/lotti.php . The last 10 drawings of the local lotto are displayed. Weak tutorials and books limit your ability to create what you want. It took me two years to create something with java and I am not so happy with it. Any progress is slow, and with every new form it is like, how did I do that? ...

Reply #146

RJOh — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 11:35:45 GMT

If the results of your ideas can be duplicated by anyone following your instructions then they can be duplicated by a computer following similar instructions. The problem is people think they have an idea until they have to write it down and discover believing they have an idea is not the same as actually having an idea.

Reply #145

MonEl — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 04:37:38 GMT

What I meant is that if you can make software you can put your ideas into software, prediction ideas.

Reply #144

mmx1 — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 03:52:49 GMT

If a player can record and calculate faster than a computer then he doesn't need any software or a computer.

Interesting

Reply #143

RJOh — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 13:27:03 GMT

There's nothing magic about software, a player has to have a strategy for improving his odds of winning before he or anyone else can write software that helps. Software can't do the thinking, the player has to do that and use software to instruct the computer to do things it does faster and more accurate than he can. If a player can record and calculate faster than a computer then he doesn't need any software or a computer.

Reply #142

MonEl — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 04:34:37 GMT

Probably the problem with lottery games prediction is neither the games themselves nor random, but those who hold the drawings, those people, they are the real problem, that is my opinion, as crazy as it sounds. but I like to think that I know about random and it's prediction or at least I knew well about those things.

Reply #141

MonEl — Fri, 29 Aug 2014 04:20:07 GMT

A person who can by himself make good lottery software and who is very familiar with the so called ''random'' and with it's prediction can probably beat some of the lottery games, I myself can't make software.

Since the so called random is not as random as some people think that it is, it probably can be beaten, but maybe not in every single draw.

But there are as many opinions on this as there are people.

Reply #140

rundown99 — Tue, 26 Aug 2014 06:36:27 GMT

I really don't think there is any guaranteed way to beat the lottery. I honestly think that it is totally random. The one guy on Lottery Post who won a significant amount of money (EZMoney) won a $100,000, and that was a quick pick.

Reply #139

helpmewin — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 21:35:03 GMT

Great

Reply #138

RJOh — Wed, 30 Jul 2014 15:17:02 GMT

Every drawing reveals the latest winning numbers and past winning numbers are available to anyone, so smart programmers can backward engineer programs that pick winners frequently but don't offer these programs to the general public because more money can be made by using them rather than selling them.

What is available to the general public are the failed efforts of programmers that weren't that smart but even their programs can win occasionally.

Reply #137

Stack47 — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 04:03:42 GMT

Naw it wasn't that bad, he bet $1 and won $500 on his 10,000th bet. I can't wait for him to tell us his system.

Reply #136

THRIFTY — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:44:18 GMT

HOW TO WIN THE LOTTERY BY NOT PLAYING=SAVE YOUR MONEY TO PLAY THE LOTTERY SOMEDAY.

PLAY THE LOTTERY SOMEDAY - IT IS OKAY TO DREAM!

STEP 1. PLAY THE LOTTERY.

STEP 2. THINK AND GROW RICH.

STEP 3. WIN THE LOTTERY JACKPOT.

ALL YOU NEED IS 1 LOTTERY TICKET AND A DREAM?

WINNING THE LOTTERY IS A MIND GAME.

Reply #135

THRIFTY — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:28:01 GMT

8 is a very lucky number. 13 is also another lucky number. LOL

Reply #134

THRIFTY — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:10:44 GMT

$1 bets add up over the long term.

Reply #133

THRIFTY — Mon, 14 Jul 2014 00:09:35 GMT

Did Jimmy4164 lose $10,000 playing the lottery

Reply #132

Stack47 — Fri, 11 Jul 2014 23:33:58 GMT

I think he had a very bad experience when the number he was playing wasn't drawn in ten years.

Reply #131

RJOh — Fri, 11 Jul 2014 17:55:12 GMT

Are you suggesting that Jimmy has actually being playing the lottery trying to win after years of telling others that such effort is a waste of time

Reply #130

Stack47 — Fri, 11 Jul 2014 17:14:29 GMT

Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger. It's not my fault the three digit combo you played was never drawn in 10,000 drawings. Nor is it my fault after being out $9,999, you were still betting $1 trying to win $500.

Reply #129

skydust11 — Fri, 11 Jul 2014 15:43:29 GMT

I like lotto007. It has good filters to use. It for example by using full wheel and selecting all the numbers from hot lotto (1-47) can create all the possible combinations that could come out which is 1,533,939 tickets. Therefore you can use your filters through common sense and sometimes a guessing game, to lower this number of 1533939 and obtain a much smaller list of tickets. You could also create a much smaller list by repeating the process but excluding particular numbers. Example: On 7-2

Reply #128

RJOh — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 21:19:58 GMT

Although that was quite an accomplishment I think it was more due to luck than a system because I doubt it will be repeated again soon by any of the participants in those challenges.

Reply #127

jimmy4164 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:40:24 GMT

Stack47,

After wasting an entire paragraph discussing draw observations, you are finally forced to admit it could require an infinite wait. A much more interesting answer would require a statistical approach revealing a distribution with confidence levels and intervals, but statistics are not your bag, so you're off the hook.

And after years of trying to convince people the lottery requires complex mathematics to solve it, you now imply it can be done with Third Grade Math!

You ar... [ More ]

Reply #126

Stack47 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 19:04:46 GMT

The member who predicted 5 out 12 plus 1 out 3 in the PB Challenge said they used a system, but didn't say if it was a software program. And matching 5 out of 28 plus the bonus number wasn't done by a lottery program either. The large number of Gail Howard software jackpot winners could be attributed to the players choosing the correct order (consciously or accidentally) when their wheel matched all 5 or all 6 numbers. They might have just entered the numbers by random order and got lucky.... [ More ]

Reply #125

Stack47 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 18:33:53 GMT

You either think you're so clever that no one notices your feeble attempts at sleight of hand, or you think those reading this thread are stupid. Which is it?

A few years ago we had a discussion about the Ohio pick-3 combo 023 because it wasn't drawn in over 11,000 drawings. There was a 3 digit combo in Wisconsin that was only a couple hundred drawings behind, but I don't know the exact number of drawings either went and/or if any other 3 digit combo exceed the 12,000 drawings mark. The cons... [ More ]

Reply #124

RJOh — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:57:59 GMT

Maybe the key to anonymity is winning a jackpot using one of those software programs.

I noticed both MM and PB websites has a list of winners going back to the beginning of 2010 which may be the reason these lottery software websites only mention winners that won using their software from the nineties.

Reply #123

RJOh — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 10:44:53 GMT

I only post predictions when I play but there are some members who post OCL predictions every drawing but they probably post a lot of other states also.

Reply #122

jimmy4164 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 06:37:29 GMT

Stack47

You driveled, I don't recall asking how many drawings for all 1000, but did ask how many of the 1000 combos should we expect in the next 1000 drawings and I believe your guess was 632.

You don't recall because you didn't ask me - I ASKED YOU!

Rather than continue making a fool of yourself,

click here, and then admit you don't know the answer to the question.

You either think you're so clever that no one notices your feeble attempts at sleight of hand, or you th... [ More ]

Reply #121

Igamble — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 05:52:10 GMT

Yes. as long as the software is run by human software with average or better then average inteligence that is at ease handling large amounts of data . WHY ? A-human brain is capable of 20 million calculations per second or more if you are SergeM i believe ...

A PROGRAM DONE BY A WORLD RENOWED PROGRAMMER STILL FALLS SHORT BECOUSE THAT SOFTWARE IS LIMITED BY THE COMPUTER PROCESSING POWER /SPEED = The average computer/tablet/smartphone CAN NOT RUN xxxMILLION CALCULATIONS/SECOND like an advanced... [ More ]

Reply #120

Stack47 — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 04:33:03 GMT

When I was wheeling 14 to 18 numbers, there were only 2 lotto drawings a week and some of our members have over 12,000 predictions every day. You might be the only member predicting the OCL and your lifetime profit ratio is 124,15% without ever matching 6 numbers. You made 4684 predictions which are only 0.33% so you're not expected to have matched all 6 numbers. You'll need 100 times that many predictions just to give yourself a 34% chance.

The prediction board has a 50 line limit and with o... [ More ]

Reply #119

ONEDAY — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 02:54:32 GMT

I have tried quite a few..some better then others, but none consistent..which is to be expected since the lottery in essense is random.

Now..the only program I ever seen to produce straights for the pick 4, that works really good..with 56 picks a draw in about 12 draws or so..is lotto laughs FORE spreadsheet program, posted back a few years.

Reply #118

RJOh — Thu, 10 Jul 2014 02:40:08 GMT

Just looking at the prediction statistics of predictors who post thousands of combinations every day tells me that just simply playing lots of combinations will not come close to covering your cost of playing if you don't win a jackpot once in a while. I'm surprised to see some predictors winning over 40% of what it would cost if they actually played those combinations.

Reply #117

Stack47 — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 22:04:10 GMT

Maybe the key to anonymity is winning a jackpot using one of those software programs.

I knew the odds when I first started using wheels so my plan was to get small wins to cover the cost of play. Instead of playing the 42 line 4 if 6 of 18 numbers, I played a 3 if 3 for $6 more. Matching just 3 numbers didn't cover the cost of play, but matching all six numbers almost guaranteed a four number match. The difference between then and now is the number of high jackpot games so it made sense then... [ More ]

Reply #116

RJOh — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:24:56 GMT

Ken Silver, Gail Howard and others selling lottery software have what they claim are documented lotto jackpot winners who used their software and inspite of most states publishing such winners I've never been able to find any of their names on a state list. Admittedly most won so long ago that the lists probably don't exist anymore but you would think some would have won recently enough to still be on a state winner list somewhere. Besides big winners like Jack Whittaker, Brad Duke and others ar... [ More ]

Reply #115

Stack47 — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 18:45:55 GMT

Gail Howard has 106 documented first prize lotto jackpot winners who used her software so maybe more are using software than we think. It could be that systems and software players are just less likely to give out lots of info at the press conference too.

Reply #114

Stack47 — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 17:57:45 GMT

I don't recall asking how many drawings for all 1000, but did ask how many of the 1000 combos should we expect in the next 1000 drawings and I believe your guess was 632. If you can do that math, it should be obvious why your $5 a draw QP playing simulation was useless. After 200 drawings, many of the players will be out $1000 and you're trying to con real pick-3 players into believing they would not only continue betting $5 a drawing, but would make bets that couldn't help them break even just... [ More ]

Reply #113

RJOh — Wed, 09 Jul 2014 15:47:37 GMT

Using lottery software is just part of an overall strategy that some players use to play the lotteries. Very few winners admit to using software to pick their winning combinations but a lot of them do admit to using family birthdays and just plain getting lucky.

Reply #112

tonym6261 — Mon, 07 Jul 2014 12:26:31 GMT

I'm giving lottoprofdotcom a try. They got a free trial. Wouldn't hurt any.

Reply #111

Goteki54 — Tue, 01 Jul 2014 20:29:01 GMT

If anyone uses lottery software thinking it gives them some sort of magic edge draw wise, of course they are going to be disappointed and say lottery software is junk. It's like duh!! However, if you use lottery software as part of your overall methodology of analyzing trends, formations and behaviors of numbers, patterns, skips, repeats etc, then you'll probably say that lottery software is an invaluable tool. I use Lotto Pro along with four other custom excel spreadsheets. All together that is... [ More ]

Reply #110

LuckyMick — Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:46:58 GMT

Hello,

The system, wheel, i use for Take 5 in NY is from The Lukcy Gene. I also play WIN 4 regularly, but that is all combos based on a sum of a number of personal importance to me and not really a system.

I think the wheeling system I use does help win lower scale prizes, but I have yet to hit a 5 of 5. I have had 3 different 4 of 5 hits in the past few years though and numerous 3 of 5 hits and 2 of 5 hits. I do not know if there is a better system, but I think i at least hit en... [ More ]

Reply #109

jimmy4164 — Sun, 29 Jun 2014 05:05:27 GMT

Stack47, Here'some unfinished business...

Your response to the question of how many draws would guarantee that all 1000 combos in a Pick-3 would be drawn was to change the subject to an earlier simulation of mine. I didn't know we were talking about that.

So, how many draws will it take?

--Jimmy4164

Reply #108

basil19 — Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:12:31 GMT

The best system is to be flexible until something works for you. you can be lucky or actually win at times by will.

Reply #107

Stack47 — Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:25:12 GMT

It means players are collecting their fair share of the 50% of ticket sales payoffs.

Reply #106

jimmy4164 — Wed, 11 Jun 2014 21:30:11 GMT

Stack47,

I asked you, What do you mean by your 'fair share' of the daily and weekly prize payouts?

And this was your reply:

On average pick-3 games pay out 50% of their ticket sales meaning there is plenty of room for a few players to get their fair share. You're stuck on the notion all pick-3 players play every drawing and play the same number every drawing.

I love the way you use the phrase fair share in your definition of fair share!

Your other replies were equally... [ More ]

Reply #105

Stack47 — Wed, 11 Jun 2014 19:40:16 GMT

The answer depends on what you mean by expect. If you mean what would the average be if you observed many sets of 1000 draws, then the answer would be approximately 632.

Expect like in the lottery can expect more play on 214 on Valentine's day . Or Expect like in if we can expect only 632 different straight three digit numbers in the next 1000 drawings, then 368 straight three digit numbers won't be drawn. All lotteries know which three digit numbers are highly played and if the highly play... [ More ]

Reply #104

jimmy4164 — Wed, 11 Jun 2014 08:41:31 GMT

Stack47,

You asked, When are you going to answer that simple question I asked you a long time ago; of the 1000 possible pick-3 three digit straight combos, how many should we expect to see in the next 1000 drawings?

I'm surprised you didn't dazzle us with the answer when I ignored you.

The answer depends on what you mean by expect. If you mean what would the average be if you observed many sets of 1000 draws, then the answer would be approximately 632.

Now, perhaps you ca... [ More ]

Reply #103

DaExpert — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:21:26 GMT

The right program will defiantly HELP

Reply #102

Stack47 — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 06:07:01 GMT

Your pick-3 raffle simulations have no value to real players and are useless.

complicated computer simulation accurately mimicking

If I'm reading that correctly, you're unaware that some state lotteries are using complicated computer software for their actually drawings. I'm pretty sure a complicated computer simulations of the TN Lottery drawings would be close to the real thing providing the no repeat digits was unchecked. You never provide the actual simulated drawing results when you... [ More ]

Reply #101

Stack47 — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:35:41 GMT

I downloaded Lottery Director's Free Wheeling system in the 90s because of the analysing tools. I don't know if Jimmy is claiming he debunked that wheeling systems too, but it shouldn't matter because it's free.

When Bob wrote for Lotto World, I thought his articles were for the more experienced lottery players who understood wheels and the value of playing one as opposed to another. I believe Jimmy falls into the glass of clueless gamblers who can't understand why the real gamblers are betti... [ More ]

Reply #100

jimmy4164 — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 03:44:16 GMT

Stack47 you also said, You'll never understand that you're not simulating real pick-3 wagering making your efforts useless.

Useless? Your problem is that you [might] really believe that a complicated computer simulation accurately mimicking your way of playing Pick-3 would produce results indicating that it's possible to gain an edge that would allow you to beat the lottery over a long period of time.

I'm here to tell you that it won't.

Several of my simulation recaps clearly s... [ More ]

Reply #99

rcbbuckeye — Mon, 09 Jun 2014 23:47:32 GMT

He always thinks Bob has some ulterior motive. Personally, Bob put together a string of combos for Cash 5 for me, didn't charge me, didn't ask for anything. Bob is only interested in helping others increase their chances of winning.

Reply #98

Stack47 — Mon, 09 Jun 2014 20:25:37 GMT

Jimmy still has no clue about the playing strategies of the average lottery player making it impossible for him to comprehend why BobP's website is a valuable tool for lots of lottery players.

Reply #97

Stack47 — Mon, 09 Jun 2014 20:22:10 GMT

You know, I know, and anybody who examined your simulations know you create a 1000 number raffle and call an average pick-3 game.

Reply #96

RJOh — Mon, 09 Jun 2014 18:35:52 GMT

Regardless of what Jimmy says, your website has been a valuable resource for lottery players researching what lottery programs are available. Some of the free ones might be harder to find without your website.

Reply #95

lottoarchitect — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 23:12:43 GMT

I didn't expect a different answer really given your blind belief lottery draws in a barrel are completely random events, I don't blame you most people believe that for granted. You didn't even bother to do the maths, perhaps you get confused with the astronomical odds beaten. It's ok, nothing to worry about. All I can say then, my clients are really very very lucky every so often. At least they smile

Reply #94

jimmy4164 — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 23:06:08 GMT

Stack47: Don't you want to ask professors Binder and Heermann how their work with computer simulations in Statistical Physics helps in the analysis of Traffic Flows and Stock Market Fluctuations?

Lottoarchitect: Dumb Luck. And you're confused.

--Jimmy4164

Reply #93

lottoarchitect — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 22:52:14 GMT

@mypiemaster

There is no reason, for a program that works, to be on sale to the public. If it actually works, the developers will be too busy, raking in millions every week, instead of wasting their time selling the program for mere pittance. People by nature, do not like to share a cashcow.

Of course, if it was possible for any program/method to propose a small set of lines and have the winning combination in there every so often, nobody would share it. We don't talk about that here, thi... [ More ]

Reply #92

Stack47 — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 22:07:32 GMT

It does no more than continue to reveal your total misunderstanding of the purpose and value of computer simulations.

You'll never understand that you're not simulating real pick-3 wagering making your efforts useless.

Reply #91

jimmy4164 — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 20:01:41 GMT

Stack47,

It would really help your simulation result credibility if you could find even one real live lottery player who bought five $1 pick-3 QPs every drawing for five years.

You never seem to tire of repeating this ridiculous mantra. It does no more than continue to reveal your total misunderstanding of the purpose and value of computer simulations. Such a simulation is not designed to prove that people do or should play this way, (although, given the randomness of the draws, it i... [ More ]

Reply #90

SergeM — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 22:51:49 GMT

I picked up keno again this week. I won 63 + 1 + 7.5 euros this week thanks to Serge++.

Reply #89

mypiemaster — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 22:03:56 GMT

SEMANTICS. A program that helps you put money in your pocket...WORKS. A program that helps you lose money, no matter what it does, or how brilliantly designed, is PURE CRAP. I sincerely hope, that people that play the lottery, do so to put money into their pockets and not just to throw their hard earned money away purchasing some silly-ass programs that can do wheels even if it can jump on your table, and do cart-wheels for you.

Reply #88

RJOh — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 21:47:25 GMT

There is no reason, for a program that works, to be on sale to the public.

I think you are confusing works with wins. When lottery software designed to tell you the number of time numbers have be drawn in past drawings does that it works but that not winning a lottery. When a wheeling program come up with lines to cover all the possible combinations of threes or fours in a small pool of numbers it works but that's not winning a lottery. When lottery software does what it's designed to do it w... [ More ]

Reply #87

mypiemaster — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 21:01:15 GMT

There is no reason, for a program that works, to be on sale to the public. If it actually works, the developers will be too busy, raking in millions every week, instead of wasting their time selling the program for mere pittance. People by nature, do not like to share a cashcow.

Reply #86

Stack47 — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 20:43:49 GMT

Lottery software (and all lottery systems) have been debunked, theoretically, and through simulations, some of them published here at LP.

LMAO @ theoretically!!!

It would really help your simulation result credibility if you could find even one real live lottery player who bought five $1 pick-3 QPs every drawing for five years. Is theoretically debunking lottery systems and software anything like when LP members discuss spending theoretically jackpot winnings?

they jump to the conclus... [ More ]

Reply #85

jimmy4164 — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 19:37:34 GMT

BobP,

If you don't believe in lottery software, prove it can't work.

Lottery software (and all lottery systems) have been debunked, theoretically, and through simulations, some of them published here at LP. But most readers and posters in these forums either don't understand or mistrust the results. When they observe (the fact) that playing sets of lotto lines with careful attention to coverage can increase their chances of winning small prizes, they jump to the conclusion that their... [ More ]

Reply #84

BobP — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 11:30:49 GMT

Promotes is a carefully chosen word that can mean a number of things to different people.

Lotto-Logix is a hobby site, not a business, accepts no paid ads or ads in exchange for products, etc.

Some things that may look like ads, such as the USA MEGA ad, is there because it makes the site look more professional at no charge or exchange of any kind. I still pay full price for my subscription like everyone else who pays here.

I do not review software, except in a few rare cases wh... [ More ]

Reply #83

RJOh — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 03:58:11 GMT

Your post was His business is promoting lottery software as if he did it for a living. I assumed you wouldn't have posted that unless you had evidence of such. There are lots of LP members promoting ideas for improving ones chances of winning lotteries but unless they ask for money I assume they are doing it for reasons other than business. I doubt if any of them could make a living doing it.

Reply #82

rcbbuckeye — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 03:50:49 GMT

Dude, there's a hell of a lot more going on in that website than just lottery software.

And... if he has some kind of agreement with those selling software, so be it. That's not illegal. I rather doubt that he does though.

YOU just seem to have a major problem with BobP for no good reason. Except you are jealous, or just pathetic.

Reply #81

jimmy4164 — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 00:43:55 GMT

Do you have evident that one of the above definition describe BobP's website.

Read my post again and check out the latest incarnation of the website. I asserted that he PROMOTES lottery software.

Do you have eviden[ce] that he does NOT get kickbacks when people link from his site to the sales sites

Reply #80

RJOh — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:55:59 GMT

Your first ten lines have the best chance of winning something, save yourself $40 more by only playing 10 lines.

Reply #79

LottoBoner — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:52:34 GMT

Thank you for your sage advice!

I will take your advice and play $50 bucks tonight, instead of buying a new software at this time.

You are truly an angel.

P.S.

I was going to play $80 bucks but I figure I save $30 for some new software.

An angel!

P.P.S.

I was going to do a martingale, but decided not to, It was going to run me $400, but now it should cost me only $200.

what would be your advice? Should I go for the $400

Reply #78

RJOh — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 22:50:47 GMT

busi ness [ b zn?ss ]

line of work: a particular trade or profession commercial organization: a company or other organization that buys and sells goods, makes products, or provides services commercial activity: commercial activity involving the exchange of money for goods or services

Do you have evident that one of the above definition describe BobP's website.

Reply #77

rcbbuckeye — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 21:17:39 GMT

Honestly...

I have never gotten the sense that BobP is promoting his software either on LottoLogix, or in his recent post. He was merely advising someone to try software on the cheap .

For the record, I enjoy reading his website, even though I'm not a player who uses software, or wheels.

Frankly, I don't understand why you have such h**d on for him.

Reply #76

jimmy4164 — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 20:46:06 GMT

It's no surprise that Mr Perkis (BobP) would advise spending money on software rather than buying more tickets since...

His business is promoting lottery software.

Reply #75

RJOh — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 19:13:38 GMT

Now, if a system, or software, had produced numbers like that, would anyone really play them? Not me. LOL.

Players who use systems have decided a system can pick combinations that are more likely to win than they can. If you don't believe that then you shouldn't be using a system.

Reply #74

rcbbuckeye — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 16:53:53 GMT

As far as jackpot games, I'm beginning to think that software, systems, whatever, doesn't do a whole lot of good, unless that is your form of entertainment.

In Texas Lotto, the jackpot was won with a QP on May 31. The numbers drawn?

3-5-9-32-36-37.

Now, if a system, or software, had produced numbers like that, would anyone really play them? Not me. LOL.

History has shown that in this game, 4 decades plays the most. (6/54 game). Someone is rich playing a QP that produced a set of numb... [ More ]

Reply #73

RJOh — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 15:46:44 GMT

The idea is to buy the right ticket, not more tickets.

Mind if I adopt that as my signature

Reply #72

lottoarchitect — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 11:07:12 GMT

Assuming this requence refers to an individual number, you can get that information relatively easy using Lotto Architect too.

The process is to open the number groups, select the desired number of which we want to get that hit/delay sequence and generate the statistics for it. If you right-click on the statistics panel, a menu shows up that allows a detailed view of the occurrence of that specific number.

The detail view does not give this sequence as it is but you can gather the abbrevia... [ More ]

Reply #71

BobP — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:56:24 GMT

See if you can get what you need from the free demo first. You likely don't need more then a single state package and if you see potential you can rent the thing for a month on the cheap.

The idea is to buy the right ticket, not more tickets. For people who spend hundreds a month wheeling real money can be saved by filtering down to a few tickets per draw. Circumstances vary, figure out what's best for your strategy and stay within your budget.

BobP

Reply #70

jimmy4164 — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 06:59:29 GMT

Although some of the deluxe packages are a little steep in price.

Don't be a sucker - use your money to buy more tickets.

Reply #69

LottoBoner — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 02:09:46 GMT

I took a look. It looks kinda cool. They have some histogram charts for hit counts I noticed, although I can make those in excel.

I may do the trial period when I cease procrastinating.

Although some of the deluxe packages are a little steep in price.

Reply #68

LottoBoner — Thu, 05 Jun 2014 02:06:32 GMT

Thanks for the reply.

I just downloaded lotsoft again, I am going to try and make it work, but I will give your program a whirl also LottoA

Just to compare them.

Well if you know what a drawing since hit chart, or what I call a matrix walk, but what it is really is just a lottograph.

So if you chart the numbers you have X for hit.

So you have

XX12345678910X12345678910X123456789101112131415X

THE ABBREVIATED FORM WOULD HAVE just

0 10 10 15

I like tables, I can use those.... [ More ]

Reply #67

RJOh — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 03:32:16 GMT

As long as it's only for personal use, it shouldn't matter what you name it as long as it doesn't conflict with other programs on your computer.

Reply #66

rdgrnr — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:46:08 GMT

I could have called it Oracle but the name was taken.

Dadgum straight it was.

Reply #65

SergeM — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 21:47:10 GMT

I use my own program, which is not finished and I jokingly call it sometimes Serge++. I could have called it Oracle but the name was taken.

Reply #64

RJOh — Tue, 03 Jun 2014 15:34:26 GMT

I believe there are many P-3/4 players who don't care what they lose to win. They have an entertainment budget to tap and play, that simply doesn't matter what it goes for.

That's the main goal of state lotteries, to help people who enjoy gambling their money away. If one has a large entertainment budget for that then go for it.

I have a budget of $10 two or three times a week which covers all the entertainment I need. Some times I win most times I don't.

Reply #63

BobP — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 21:21:41 GMT

I believe there are many P-3/4 players who don't care what they lose to win. They have an entertainment budget to tap and play, that simply doesn't matter what it goes for. For fun they can afford to throw money at simple one up/one down kind of systems you see posted on LP. The utility value of an occasional $500 win going into a set of tires and a night out is worth it. i.e.: Hey look, I won again !!!

If you're trying to generate some income out of Pick-3/4 the trick is to use a Min/Max... [ More ]

Reply #62

Lucky Loser — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 18:32:31 GMT

Neither,

Buddy, you completely lost me with this one. In your previous post, you mentioned having a 'chance' to break even... in the context of that chance being better than losing. I'll take it at face value, though.

L.L.

Reply #61

RJOh — Mon, 02 Jun 2014 17:26:56 GMT

Right. Now, which is better? To break even and win nothing, or, to not play nearly enough and lose repetitively?

Neither, play only what you can afford to lose and hope you get lucky.