Easy pick 3 system

Reply #158

Tialuvslotto — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 12:11:45 GMT

Florida Cash 3

Sunday, 11/22/15 Eve 087

Monday 11/23/15 Eve 650

Condition 3 280 picks

{0,1} {0,2} {0,3} {0,4} {0,5} {0,6} {0,7} {1,2} {1,3} {1,4} {1,5} {1,6} {1,7} {2,3} {2,4} {2,5} {2,6} {2,7} {3,4} {3,5} {3,6} {3,7} {4,5} {4,6} {4,7} {5,6} {5,7} {6,7}

Both box hits

Reply #157

adobea78 — Mon, 23 Nov 2015 01:14:55 GMT

Assuming the digits 0 through 7(N=8) is the most frequent subset, then one can infer 'the most frequent pairs' below. Cost and waging strategy is how you deal with the conditions below.

Condition 1 640 picks

{0,0} {0,1} {0,2} {0,3} {0,4} {0,5} {0,6} {0,7} {1,0} {1,1} {1,2} {1,3} {1,4} {1,5} {1,6} {1,7} {2,0} {2,1} {2,2} {2,3} {2,4} {2,5} {2,6} {2,7} {3,0} {3,1} {3,2} {3,3} {3,4} {3,5} {3,6} {3,7} {4,0} {4,1} {4,2} {4,3} {4,4} {4,5} {4,6} {4,7} {5,0} {5,1} {5,2} {5,3} {5,4} {5,5} {5,6} {5,7... [ More ]

Reply #156

ArizonaDream — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:14:22 GMT

Well if it does work in FL, chances are there may be similar patterns in other states. In IL, playing from the high number side looks interesting.

Reply #155

adobea78 — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 19:10:05 GMT

FL

Drawing Date Pick 3 Pick 4

Midday Evening Midday Evening

Sat, Nov 21, 2015 2-3-3 4-1-2 5-1-7-8 3-7-6-4

Fri, Nov 20, 2015 3-3-4 3-7-2 5-2-3-6 8-0-1-9

Thu, Nov 19, 2015 5-6-1 8-6-2 6-4-5-8 0-8-6-5

Wed, Nov 18, 2015 4-2-0 9-1-7 7-3-5-9 9-4-4-6

Tue, Nov 17, 2015 6-0-7 2-0-1 7-5-2-4 0-0-7-6

Mon, Nov 16, 2015 8-1-3 0-0-2 9-6-4-3 3-8-5-8

Sun, Nov 15, 2015 7-8-4 2-4-4 7-5-0-0 5-2-7-8

Sat, Nov 14, 2015 8-1-6 7-0-7 1-6-5-3 3-1-9-4

Fri, Nov 13, 2015

Reply #154

adobea78 — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:07:24 GMT

The numbers 0 through 4 as the lowest number will show most often in any State's Pick-3 Game winning numbers.

This is a system forum, is left to the reader to discern the above statement into a valuable information. Many readers lurk around as guest and they appreciate your effort.

My inference of the subset 0 thru 4(01234) is frequent pairs {0,0} {0,1} {0,2} {0,3} {0,4} {1,0} {1,1} {1,2} {1,3} {1,4} {2,0} {2,1} {2,2} {2,3} {2,4} {3,0} {3,1} {3,2} {3,3} {3,4} {4,0} {4,1} {4,2} {4,3} {4,4... [ More ]

Reply #153

amber123 — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 17:46:45 GMT

Florida had a winner from the list above, 917 straight win on the 6th night (Nov. 18 eve).

017 217 317 417 517 617 817 917

But like I mentioned earlier, to make a substantial profit, a progressive wagering method has to be used when betting in that offshore place. The list of numbers were posted by me on the 12th of Nov. and 917 won on the 18th.

At the time of posting, I had a balance of 397 bucks, so obviously I would've needed to sharply increase the bets to make a profit. Us... [ More ]

Reply #152

ArizonaDream — Sun, 22 Nov 2015 15:35:57 GMT

How did the rest of the testing go

Reply #151

amber123 — Fri, 13 Nov 2015 03:08:58 GMT

Oh so close, winner was 162. Lost $99.00..(Note: In reality I would start with 25 cents offshore and build up the bets)

New balance is $397.00

There's a replacement of a back pair. The new list is below. The 86 was 86'd. It's been replaced with 69 back pair.

34

63

53

61

17

69

85

16

54

57

21

40

26

15

New combinations for tomorrow eve FLORIDA. Total, 99 combos straight.

034 134 234 534 634 734 834

063 163 263 463 56... [ More ]

Reply #150

amber123 — Thu, 12 Nov 2015 01:42:31 GMT

Winner was 548. It was boxed, so no winner.

$595.00- balance

- 99.00-cost tonight

$496.00-new balance

I do plan on conducting a limited Progressive wagering when nearing the 6th day test, usually on the 5th and 6th day, doubling and tripling the bet cost to ensure a profit. As of now it's been only $1.00 bets for a $900.00 payoff.

Based on past occurrences, the third night is common for a hit.

The back pairs remain the same for tomorrow night, and the same corresp... [ More ]

Reply #149

Rakster — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:27:34 GMT

0 didn't show in Western Canada for over 3 weeks... finally hit last night. So most frequent i'm not too sure

3 has been out 17 days now

Reply #148

amber123 — Wed, 11 Nov 2015 03:21:37 GMT

Finally, the 11th of Nov. is tomorrow. The 6 evening draw test once again starts tomorrow.

RECAP: So far, $595.00 net profit.

IMPORTANT: Apparently the system has been modified since the last time I've written here, meaning the back pairs may or may NOT change during the 6 evening draws test. So unlike before where the back pairs stayed the same, they could change after a draw.

Here are the new back pairs for tomorrow for FLORIDA ONLY:

34

63

53

61

17

85

16

54... [ More ]

Reply #147

greeneyes — Sat, 07 Nov 2015 14:00:50 GMT

key numbers are 7 my pairs are 24 27 28 47 48 78 loving the 77777 this is off 473

good luck to one and all green eyes from TEXAS

Reply #146

bigmon — Sat, 07 Nov 2015 08:26:56 GMT

Congrats amber123I'm going to ride with you starting on Nov. 11th sounds like you are on to something special. Thanks you

Reply #145

amber123 — Sat, 07 Nov 2015 06:03:10 GMT

Finally received the date. I'm glad I waited for the correct date. It starts on Nov. 11th. Next Wednesday.

Reply #144

amber123 — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 19:03:11 GMT

Thank You Laverne and Reddog.

0= 021-031-032-041-042-043-051-052-053-054-061-062-063-064-065-071-072-073-074-075-076-081-082-083-084-085-086-087-091-092-093-094-095-096-097-098

1= 132-142-143-152-153-154-162-163-164-165-172-173-174-175-176-182-183-184-185-186-187-192-193-194-195-196-197-198

2 = 243-253-254-263-264-265-273-274-275-276-283-284-285-286-287-293-294-295-296-297-298

3=354-364-365-374-375-376-384-385-386-387-394-395-396-397-398

4 = 465-475-476-485-486-487-495-4... [ More ]

Reply #143

LAVERNE MALONEY — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 14:01:02 GMT

CONGRAT'S amber123

Reply #142

amber123 — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 02:45:26 GMT

Yay, it finally hit on the fifth night. Winner was 405.

61 combinations X 5 days = 305 cost.

900 won offshore

-306-cost

=$595-profit

Reply #141

bigmon — Tue, 03 Nov 2015 00:24:20 GMT

Thanks Amber123

Reply #140

LAVERNE MALONEY — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 23:00:40 GMT

amber123, I wish you all the be$t

Reply #139

amber123 — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 18:50:59 GMT

Tonight has the same numbers and also the red numbers, but adding 153.

Reply #138

reddog — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 02:12:31 GMT

Good luck, Amber

Reply #137

amber123 — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 23:57:49 GMT

Alrighty then !

Tonight starts the test for the next 6 EVE draws for Florida, straight bets ONLY.

I narrowed them down to ones that are in red. The red ones are the ones I played tonight at the store for 50 straight using a reliable filtering method I discovered a few years ago.

The red numbers are only good for tonight.

021,029,057,061,063,085,086

105,129,134,140,153,157,163

205,215,216,234,240,257,261,263,285,286

305,316, 361,329,340,357,385,386

405,416,429,45... [ More ]

Reply #136

TasBob — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 21:37:55 GMT

No 0 like call for . 924 Hit 56 plays Just a small filter could have taken it to a profit.

This is a workable system . I would think u spot your plays, and not play every draw..

Reply #135

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 19:27:49 GMT

Just based on probability the system should win 66% of the drawings and one would think by getting a $900 to $1 payoff it must show a profit, but it really shows a loss. This systems requires winning 75% of the drawings to show a profit and that's where the potential is.

Reply #134

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 19:02:37 GMT

For starters a win of $540,000 means zero losses in 600 drawings, but you're acknowledging there were 196 losing drawings. The cost of $396,000 is correct, but it's a one time loss.

12,200-lost in doubles and triples (170 X 660=112,200)

This is your second mistake because the $396,000 is the only cost. If you're saying the system has a potential to win $540,000 than you must first subtract the cost from the potential winnings ($540,000 - $396,000 = $144,000). Because the 170 doubles and... [ More ]

Reply #133

Tialuvslotto — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 17:07:33 GMT

I always believed that this system had potential. I'm glad to see that you are moving forward with some modifications. Keep us posted on your progress.

Reply #132

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:34:00 GMT

Starting Nov. 1 eve. lol

Reply #131

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:13:28 GMT

Well, I just did the numbers from jan till now and Stack47 and tialuvslotto, you were right. My apologies. I would have lost 34 grand.

But the good news is that I've decided to integrate this system with Yunier's back pairs, and filter the 110 boxed combos down.

By only betting on straight numbers that match Yunier's back pairs, can this work.

I was told to play these back pairs for Florida starting Oct. 1 eve only for five or six eve draws. Let's go with six draws.

X34

X63

X8... [ More ]

Reply #130

TasBob — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 16:11:32 GMT

I use zero system as a filter for one of my systems I think 0 will skip mid So digits 1 2 6 and 7 (56 plays) where the keys

Filter to 25 plays posted on Florida Thread . I think the block of 92 numbers is a good starting point. I use

large blocks of number a lot. My main thing is to have winning number in the main block NO Doubles in my plays

Good Luck

PS I Play Small

Reply #129

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 15:03:49 GMT

I will track the next 30 days in Fla., so you can see this work day by day.

For today's midday draw in Florida, I will spend $660.00 for straight, or $110 for boxed version.

Oct 31

Reply #128

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 14:47:37 GMT

HOLD ON FOR ONE SECOND !!!!!

Looks like I screwed myself out of money that was not necessary.

Why am I deducting 196 losses for doubles, triples and lowest numbers above 4? Those three are ALREADY part of the losses. I'm doubling up on the losses for no reason. I AM MAKING A BIG PROFIT AT THE END OF 10 MONTHS.

600 draws X 660 cost = $396,000 Whether a double, triple or a low number above 4 shows, it's a loss, NOT ALL THREE....DUH!!!!lol

Let's look at just one draw to understand... [ More ]

Reply #127

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 12:53:41 GMT

This is my last example, and I'm moving on.

Let's use your REALITY MATH .

396,000=COST (660 X 600)

129,360= LOST, due to doubles, triples, lowest numbers above 4 (196 X 660)

The total after adding those two above is 396,000 + 129,360=525,360

So my cost and losses in total is $525,360.00

540,000

- 525,360

= 14,640-net profit.

Reply #126

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 12:30:03 GMT

Sorry, I meant $240.00 net profit. I just woke up.

Reply #125

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 12:06:32 GMT

True If I only played ONE draw. But The test involves 600 draws.

You haven't rained on my parade because using your logic, I can easily say, I WON one draw.

900

-660

=340-Net profit.

Nice try !. lol

Reply #124

TasBob — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 11:37:19 GMT

A master chart is a block of numbers for each draw..A starting point. In a Master Chart what you try to do is

have the Winning number in it , filter it down to a few numbers to play..I'm in Florida Let me give you Mid Day Numbers

Block of numbers or call it Master Chart for Mid Draw

123 127 120 143 147 140 153 157 150 163 167 160

183 187 180 193 197 190 243 247 240 253 257 250

263 267 260 283 287 280 293 297 290 453 457 450

463 467 460 483 487 480 493 497 490 563 567 560

58... [ More ]

Reply #123

Tialuvslotto — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 11:37:03 GMT

Another possibility would be in reducing the number of straights. You don't need to play all 6 variations to win. For example, the longest-out digit at each position only hits about 10% of the time, and it can stay out for many weeks. So 90% of the time you could eliminate that digit at each position and still be correct.

Also, the same straight order (LMH, LHM, MLH, MHL, HLM, HML) only repeats about 10% of the time, so you can eliminate some combinations that way.

Reply #122

sheebamarie32 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 11:15:52 GMT

What does your master chart look like and how do you use it

Reply #121

TasBob — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 11:11:03 GMT

I would think you have to run 2 systems . use the zero to 4 system with like say with my master chart 63 plays, and get

your low numbers from there..I think if you want to win with this system ,It would take 2 systems working together..

Or some very good tracking system, That could project when to play a certain digits.

Use filters and a decision support rating technique to reduce numbers down to 0 1 2 3 or 4

Don't ask me how to do that ..I'v been trying to find a programmer to he... [ More ]

Reply #120

Tialuvslotto — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 10:28:15 GMT

I agree Bob! The problem is too many combinations.

Adobea suggested a reduction using pairs -- I wonder if anyone tested it out?

Also, this system wins quite frequently, with short runs of losers. Maybe a progressive wagering scheme would make it profitable

Reply #119

TasBob — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 10:24:22 GMT

This is a systems forum ..It seems to me that this is a loss, no one is working on making the system better.

What a waste of talent here.. My math 2+2 =4 Who cares. Amber12 May u WIN BIG..Good Luck

Reply #118

Tialuvslotto — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 09:53:18 GMT

Lets simplify this:

You play one draw. A double is drawn -- you lose.

With Amber math

You play 1 draw = win $900

Deduct loss from double = -$660

You still win! 900-660=$240.

With Reality Math

You play 1 draw, cost = -$660

Your winnings = $0

Net result -660+0=-660

Sorry to rain on your parade.

Reply #117

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:47:33 GMT

I won a 500 dollar sweepstakes. But, I had to buy an envelope so i could mail the Entry form, that cost me 5 cents. Then i had to by a stamp. That cost me 32 cents. That equals 37 cents.

So in actuality, I netted $499.68

Reply #116

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:41:15 GMT

Your math is so skewed, I'm amazed that a somewhat bright person on LP such as you has taken it this far.

The 600 is the NOT the number. 600 X 900= 540,000 is the real number. You're confusing 600 draws with the amount it generated, which is 540,000

Reply #115

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:32:32 GMT

Why can't you tell me what part of this math is wrong? I asked you once already and you eluded the question.

540,000-won (900 X 600=540,000)

-396,000-cost (660 X 600=396,000)

-112,200-lost in doubles and triples (170 X 660=112,200)

- 17,160-lost due to 26 numbers with the lowest digit above 4 (26 X 660=17,160)

= 14,640- net profit for the last 10 months

1,460 net profit a month.

What part/s of this math is wrong

Reply #114

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:31:17 GMT

How? You haven't disproved my simple deductions from REAL NUMBERS.

Reply #113

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:31:15 GMT

Which part of 600 minus 196 equals 404 didn't they teach in the second grade

Reply #112

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:29:41 GMT

Every time you post on this subject, you lower LP's average IQ by several points.

Reply #111

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:28:52 GMT

I didn't ignore them.

170 doubles and trips.

26 lowest numbers above 4.

=196

Reply #110

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:26:53 GMT

It's easily becoming clear to me that my explanations aren't working for you. I've done everything I could to help you, and I failed.

Reply #109

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:25:13 GMT

$540,000 bucks if nothing got in your way.

You can't win $900 in each of the`196 losing drawings. Why are you ignoring those 196 drawings that did get in your way

Reply #108

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:23:10 GMT

What part/s of this math is wrong?

How many times must you be told your system simulated or not DID NOW WIN $540,000?

The winnings or losses are determined by the difference between the cost and the wins. In your example because you won nothing in 196 drawings *(170 X 660=112,200) and (26 X 660=17,160) you must subtract the 196 drawings you won nothing from the total 600 drawings (600 - 196 = 404). Get out your calculator and multiply 404 by $900 ($363,600). The difference between the win... [ More ]

Reply #107

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:08:48 GMT

You win in every drawing until an obstacle gets in your way, right? $540,000 bucks if nothing got in your way. Unfortunately the conditions in the real world involves THREE obstacles in this particular case.

The first obstacle is the cost-396,000 bucks.

The second obstacle is the doubles and trips. -112,200

The third obstacle is the lowest numbers above 4. That was 26 of them. =17,160

By the time we deducted all those obstacles as COSTS , the net profit I made was a measly 1,460... [ More ]

Reply #106

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 04:02:34 GMT

540,000-won (900 X 600=540,000)

With a top prize of $900, a $540,000 in 600 drawings is an average of $900 a drawing, and you're claiming you won $900 in every drawing. How many times does one have to ask how you won $540,000 from 600 drawings and then say you lost $660 in each of 196 drawings

Reply #105

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:57:32 GMT

540,000-won (900 X 600=540,000)

-396,000-cost (660 X 600=396,000)

-112,200-lost in doubles and triples (170 X 660=112,200)

- 17,160-lost due to 26 numbers with the lowest digit above 4 (26 X 660=17,160)

= 14,640- net profit for the last 10 months

1,460 net profit a month.

What part/s of this math is wrong

Reply #104

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:54:40 GMT

When will this madness STOP?

When you acknowledge the fact you're making obvious errors in your math.

Good Grief !, I'd be happy with an additional 1500 bucks a month.

That would be nice, but without a huge swing defying all probability, players will lose their shirts with easy pick-3 system .

Reply #103

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:54:35 GMT

The WIN, 540,000 comes with a cost

The only way to get a $540,000 win from 600 drawings is to win $900 IN EVERY DRAWING.

Now we're getting somewhere. Small steps.

Tell your system won $900 a drawing for 600 drawings after showing 196 drawings where you won nothing?

I thought I already did. Below is an excerpt from me a page or two ago, maybe more, I forget.

Total-170 doubles and triples.

Now there is absolutely no speculation about the tally of number... [ More ]

Reply #102

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:48:15 GMT

The WIN, 540,000 comes with a cost

The only way to get a $540,000 win from 600 drawings is to win $900 IN EVERY DRAWING.

Net profit after cost and losses =1,460 a month profit.

Your cost and losses are correct, but your profit is off by $47,040. You can't subtract losses form profits you never made (even in a simulation).

Tell your system won $900 a drawing for 600 drawings after showing 196 drawings where you won nothing

Reply #101

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:39:27 GMT

lol

660 is the cost per draw mid and eve, so you multiply it by 600 draws. That equals to 396,000, cost.

Then comes doubles and trips, 112,200

Then again another cost, aw life sucks..lol- $17,160 thanks to lowest numbers above 4. When will this madness STOP?

Good Grief !, I'd be happy with an additional 1500 bucks a month.

Reply #100

Stack47 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:33:48 GMT

Take a 3 day back test instead of a 600 draw back test.

You said you back tested 600 drawing and your system won $540,000 540,000-won (900 X 600=540,000) which is $900 a drawing. From that you subtracted the actual losses and claimed you showed a profit That would come out to 14,640 net profit every month since January.

First is was $660 a day for 600 drawings and now it's $10 a drawing for 4 drawings. Next time somebody asks where is WinD? , I'll give link to your thread.

Reply #99

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 03:33:46 GMT

So once you understand this, it's time to move on to what's below.

The WIN, 540,000 comes with a cost...

There are THREE costs...

THE COST-396,000 The doubles and trips-lost $112,200 Lowest numbers above 4. -lost $17,160 Net profit after cost and losses =1,460 a month profit.

Reply #98

amber123 — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 02:34:00 GMT

My ignorance? lol

Take a 3 day back test instead of a 600 draw back test. I obviously have to simplify this even more so You can understand better. Yikes !

Let's say my goal to win 500 bucks straight on 123 started 3 days ago. That date would be 10-27-2015.

The cost to play was 10 straight combos every mid and evening draws for three full days.

I finally won on the third day (eve draw, tonight) ...

The WIN Is $500. bucks.

The cost is $10.00 twice a day =$20.00 a day, for 3 da... [ More ]

Reply #97

Stack47 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:54:54 GMT

Probably nothing, but at least this time the math was correct; winnings ($500) minus losses ($50). The other examples showed winners in every drawing ($540,000 minus) what was spent crediting themselves with $240 for every losing drawing.

Reply #96

Stack47 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 21:37:05 GMT

This was a simulation of what I would have won (540,000) in the past 10 months had I played

You're claiming $900 wins on the drawings where you lost. The cost is what was spent in ever drawing and overall win or loss is determined by subtracting what you won. You're subtracting the losses from what you could have won .

For those who can do the real math, wagering $660 a drawing for 600 drawings is $396,000 and then determine the number of winning drawings. It looks like 196 doubles, tripl... [ More ]

Reply #95

amber123 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:42:56 GMT

Both have a payout, and both have a cost. Billy got lucky because there were no doubles, and Billy didn't know anything about numbers above 4. His only cost was the cost. 50 bucks !

Billy was more lucky than I was because unlike he, I had doubles, triples, and lowest numbers above 4, which resulted in less profit.

Reply #94

AllenB — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 03:22:17 GMT

How does Billy's Play have anything to do with your system

Reply #93

amber123 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:52:42 GMT

I made a mistake, it was 5 days not 4.

500-won

-50-cost

$450.00 net profit.

Reply #92

adobea78 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:34:19 GMT

FL-EVE

u, Oct 29, 2015 4-5-1?Prize Payouts

Wed, Oct 28, 2015 7-3-7?Prize Payouts

Tue, Oct 27, 2015 6-0-6?Prize Payouts

Mon, Oct 26, 2015 2-5-9?Prize Payouts

Sun, Oct 25, 2015 7-8-1?Prize Payouts

Sat, Oct 24, 2015 7-7-6?Prize Payouts

Fri, Oct 23, 2015 6-4-1?Prize Payouts

Thu, Oct 22, 2015 4-0-0?Prize Payouts

Wed, Oct 21, 2015 1-9-8?Prize Payouts

Tue, Oct 20, 2015 9-8-2?Prize Payouts

Mon, Oct 19, 2015 1-2-8?Prize Payouts

Sun, Oct 18, 2015

Reply #91

adobea78 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:17:51 GMT

Try reducing the picks with the selected sub-group with digit repeat option:

Assume your sub-group is 0,1,2,4, then your frequent pairs 5C2( digit repeat) will be

0,0} {0,1} {0,2} {0,3} {0,4} {1,1} {1,2} {1,3} {1,4} {2,2} {2,3} {2,4} {3,3} {3,4} {4,4}

Add remnant of pool (5,6,7,8,9) +4 members of group to the pairs:

005-006-007-008-009-001-002-003-004

015-016-017-018-019-012-013-014

021-023-024-025-026-027-028-029

031-032-034-035-036-037-038-039

-

-

-

-

340-3... [ More ]

Reply #90

amber123 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:03:39 GMT

Ok, let me explain in an easier way for those who are having difficulty understanding what I'm doing here.

Let's meet Billy. Billy had a lucky week when he decided to play 10 single combinations straight every night starting on Sunday, which was four nights ago.

Tonight, four nights later he won. The cost was 40 dollars. (10 dollars X 4 nights= $40.00 loss). And he played in a state that was NOT Parimutuel, so 500 was a flat pay-off.

500-won

- 40-lost due to cost

-$460.00 ne... [ More ]

Reply #89

amber123 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 01:25:21 GMT

Wow, I really have to explain this?

This was a simulation of what I would have won (540,000) in the past 10 months had I played, minus the cost (396,000), doubles and triples (112,200), and lowest numbers above 4(17,160).

Remember?..I was doing a back test

Reply #88

Stack47 — Fri, 30 Oct 2015 00:03:07 GMT

Total winnings possible

Should MM and PB systems consider possible winnings or should they simply subtract the losses from the winnings or vise-versa?

In the last 60 combined Midday and Evening Florida Pick-3 drawings, there were 15 doubles and 2 combos with the lowest digit over 5. Betting $660 for 60 drawings is a total wager of $39,600. It was impossible to win in 17 drawings so you subtract 17 from 60 and 43 times $900 equals $38,700 or a net loss of $900.

But don't let the actual... [ More ]

Reply #87

Stack47 — Thu, 29 Oct 2015 23:30:26 GMT

540,000-won (900 X 600=540,000)

It's no skin off my nose if you're trying convince some gullible LP members you won $900 in the last 600 consecutive drawing. But for the rest of us explain exactly how you won $900 when doubles and triples were drawn.

Reply #86

adobea78 — Thu, 29 Oct 2015 01:47:54 GMT

I subscribe to the premise of lottery, hence each event is unique, most of my predictions is based on assumptions, waging is more of a strategy. You can have the right picks and poor waging strategy, who says you have to follow distribution trend

Reply #85

AllenB — Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:05:39 GMT

Just a thought. With a frequency over 50% is there a betting strategy to double down and come out a winner

Reply #84

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 23:27:00 GMT

No disagreement here. I said the system had goog things to observe and help with predictions. I got the impression that amber123 was suggesting that the system was a guaranteed winner and that playing every day was a road to riches.

Reply #83

adobea78 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 22:58:30 GMT

If one is stuck with Statistical percentiles, which is not a prediction method, then any ideal will be discarded. These percentiles has been with mankind since inception of sampling.Is just a guild to strategies your options when waging. A good read on Non-parametric sampling will throw a light on why probability, hence statistical percentile is not the only option in inferring a data. With any ideal, the focus should be on Binomial format, which is the foundation of all lotto matrix. Do you sub... [ More ]

Reply #82

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:20:49 GMT

Simple Calculation 600/900=.733333 or 73.3% (break even) Actual Win% 73.58% Difference 0.25%

0.25$ of $47,700 is $120.00

I'm going back to strings; but, I will also monitor this trend. Opportunity exists here; but no slam dunk

Good Luck

Reply #81

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 21:12:16 GMT

FLORIDA 3 COMBINED

amber123

Games since 10/1/2015

Florida Straight Payout

$500

Offshore Straight

$900

Games

53

$26,500

Total winnings possible

$47,700

No Match

41

77%

Doubles

12

23%

Loss due to Doubles

$10,800

Loss due to Doubles

$10,800

Triples

0

0%

Loss due to triples

$0

Loss due to triples

$0

Low 0-4... [ More ]

Reply #80

amber123 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:13:53 GMT

You just make up numbers that don't exist. I tallied up the costs which includes, the cost, the doubles and triples, and lowest number above 4. If you can't understand this then there is nothing more I can say to you.

Reply #79

Stack47 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 19:50:22 GMT

Now there is absolutely no speculation about the tally of numbers that are higher than 4, tally of the doubles and triples.40,000-won (900 X 600=540,000)

Your easy system can't win $900 in all 600 drawings when even you acknowledge losses in 26 drawings when the lowest digit was above 4 and losses in the 170 drawings when doubles and triples were drawn. And even though you won nothing/zero/goose egg in 196 drawings, there were still 404 winning drawings. You're correct the cost of play is $3... [ More ]

Reply #78

pepper1 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 19:37:14 GMT

I will be trying this if it work great if not it still great.

Reply #77

Lildarryl — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:35:23 GMT

ok people. This is just basis of a system. you don't have to play every draw.

Reply #76

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:26:04 GMT

I'm not saying this system has no merit; just, that it is not a slam dunk. You are going to have to not play on the right days to win at this. So you are back at predicting like the rest of us. Your system looks like as good of a trend spotter any any I have seen; but, it still can't bridge the random Gap.

Reply #75

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:16:31 GMT

OK maybe I should go back to sleep. I must be wrong; but I still think the numbers don't lie. For Florida Combined since Jan 1, 2015 the hit percent for the 110 is 65.01%. At $150 per box you would need a 73.3% hit percentage just to break even.

Reply #74

lakerben — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:12:34 GMT

On this list 606 straight for the evening draw.

Reply #73

amber123 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:48:20 GMT

So looking at the box only at $110.00 per game wins $160.00.

The actual pay is $150.00 for a box win.

Doing the math for the box version in Florida results in small profit every month since January till now.

90,000 won (150 X 600 draws)

-66,000 cost (110 X 600 draws)

-18,700 loss due to doubles and triples, 170 total (110 X 170= 18,700)

-2,860 loss due to lowest digit above 4, 26 total (110 X 26=2,860)

Net profit $2,440 for the whole 10 months.

Monthly profit of 24... [ More ]

Reply #72

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:37:10 GMT

After a rough night and a few now embarrassing posts, I took another look at this and I think it is fairly simple to analyze.

There are only two factors to look at, 1 the ratio of the potential win$ to the Cost per game and the win percentage for the 110.

So looking at the box only at $110.00 per game wins $160.00. 110/160=.6875 or 68.75% = breaking even.

So at 65.26% for the Florida 3 Combined over the last 1353 games is 3.5% less than break even.

Reply #71

amber123 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:36:56 GMT

Thanks, they don't bother me.

Even If it takes 5 years to get to the max bet of 10.00 per number, per draw, I'll be the one laughing making 14 grand a month net profit.

This is my retirement plan.

Reply #70

Lildarryl — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:26:13 GMT

amber123 do your thing.... dont worry bout the haters

Reply #69

lakerben — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:09:42 GMT

Good luck.

Its time to move on.

Reply #68

amber123 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 13:27:09 GMT

I did make a mistake on the cost of the doubles. I listed originally as 17,820, when in fact it's actually 112,200 (includes triples). But the good news is that eventually, after about a year or so, the incremental increase of the bets from .25 to 10.00 per number, per draw will leave me with a nice profit every month. It will take patience and some time, but in the end it will be all worth it.

Here are my findings. Mid and eve combined, tally of doubles and triples.

Jan-16

Fe... [ More ]

Reply #67

LAVERNE MALONEY — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:15:54 GMT

amber123, that is the best way to show how the system is going by providing a simulation as if you were actually playing.

Reply #66

Numberloco — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 06:04:28 GMT

We must be talking about different posts. I was referring to when Amber posting the following:

For some of you who are having a problem understanding this, I'll do just this month of October.

From the 4th of October till today the 27th, equals 48 draws.

48 draws X 900 =43,200, this is how much I would win in 48 draws in an ideal world, if there were no doubles triples and lowest digit number above 4. So below you will see the deductions. The first deduction is COST. Then the next d... [ More ]

Reply #65

Stack47 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:37:42 GMT

Amber used the Florida evening drawing and this system produced 242 winners in the last 365 drawings. $900 per win is $217,800, but the cost at $660 per drawing is $240,900 and a loss of $23,100. playing the other 340 combos is still a $13,400 loss.

Reply #64

Stack47 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:19:15 GMT

I have no idea what you're writing about. There were 26 combinations during the 600 draws that the lowest digit above 4. I even tallied them up for you month by month. 26 is 4.3% of 600 draws. Why are some of you having so much difficulty understanding this?

Your system seems to be based on the 660 3 digit combos where the lowest digit is 0,1,2,3,or 4. Statistically one of those 660 combos should be drawn in 66% of of all the drawings or 396 times in 600 drawings. The same probability applie... [ More ]

Reply #63

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:06:27 GMT

Please ignore this. It is wrong.

Reply #62

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:03:50 GMT

I am reworking this because I just realized the payouts are wrong. You either have to increase the bet or play the combo. then you only get half of the winnings. Looks like you lose $323,780 with my example. I am High, I'm going to Bed.

Reply #61

Numberloco — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 05:00:48 GMT

My understanding is that Amber's goal is to play 6 ways straight to ensure the higher payout. For example:

123 - $1.00 straight

132 - $1.00 straight

312 - $1.00 straight

321 - $1.00 straight

213 - $1.00 straight

231 - $1.00 straight

Using the above example, you're guaranteed to get a straight hit if the numbers 123 fall in any order. However you would get nothing for the other 5 bets. If you wanted a box hit, it would cost an additional $1.00.

Reply #60

AllenB — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:50:53 GMT

So no Box Wins

Reply #59

adobea78 — Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:47:52 GMT

The waging strategy is in a right direction, one has to make certain assumptions and choices for it to be profitable. His assumption is that, the sub-group 0 through 4 which gives 10 frequent pairs to be wage for combo bet (straight bet actually). Do you have to play day and night?, what if one consider the sub-group with a digit repeat, your added cost is less than $100 since a combo for 3-way is $3 per pick. There are many options with his ideal.