Search

Mathematics and the LotteryReply
Hello lootoboner, fantasy 5 california test = 6823 = 15 24 27 29 31 5 digit number the first 1_2_2_2_ leatorio 30-39 gave 31 1,2,2,2 Lottoboner these are within the 37 groups because it is 100% Sure miss the last digit, 5,4,7,9 5th number is random, does not enter the study In Example 31, the biggest problem is termina aoes, but always one or two repeats Endings of the previous test. then we have the 37 groups of 27 or 31 to 39 The accuracy is 100%, but only four endings that you can use like a
Jul 13, 2012, 6:59 pm - dr san - Mathematics Forum

Hexadecimal System for picking pick 3Reply
The hexadecimal system is just another way of counting. The numbers themselves don't change. So I can't see why it matters how you do the math in predicting lottery numbers. The only problem: The human mind has trouble with other than base 10 systems, so it just looks more mystical and sophisticated. Hot air, I say.
Jul 23, 2004, 1:55 am - dragon - Mathematics Forum

Where did you learn coding?Reply
The problem is that of two systems predict winning combinations on different days, combining them each day may be counter productive. If system A were to produce numbers 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10, and system B were to produce 5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-14-15, combining them would create 5-6-7-8-9-10. If the draw results were 2-3-4-5-6 we would be left with a 2 of 5 match where simply taking the output from System A would have given a 5 of 5 match. This would only prove produvtive if 2 systems consistently
Nov 7, 2008, 10:41 am - Stew12 - Mathematics Forum

Of Cat Washing and BacktestingReply
Back testing and simulation is based on the much heralded Bluejay challenge no system player will take . That's part of the problem if your definition of back testing is based on jimmy4164 thread. As I've said before his test seems to be picking a combination and seeing how many times it would have hit in the past which is the same as calculation the odds of it hitting any time. That may be fine for testing pick3 systems which only have a 1000 or 220 possible outcomes and over 700 drawings ye
May 17, 2011, 11:13 pm - RJOh - Mathematics Forum

Pick 3/4 Meter Made Math MovesReply
I used the combos you told me you used. I don't have a notion of perfect, I am merely running real predictions based on systems against real drawings and seeing if the results were what probability theory predicts (ie losing an average of half your bets over time) or not. Isn't validation an important part of any experiment? If you don't have a system and just pick combos based on how you feel that day, I have no problem with it because I believe every pick is exactly as good as
Jan 19, 2016, 11:28 pm - dddwww - Mathematics Forum

Middle of tweeking this system ( PROFITS- Day 180 + $4,123)Reply
Interesting to use that type betting on lottery. I have always thought about it but never really came up with a time that would be good to increase on. Normally as with most systems they run in streaks so hard to know when you are going into a streak or just skipping along to the next real streak. The other problem is once you realise your in a streak it almost to late. The major problem Ive always seen with the Martingale system is you need an unlimited pot to play with, and even the lottery
Apr 13, 2012, 12:13 am - nickbrownsfan - Mathematics Forum

Backtesting and Simulating Lottery SystemsReply
This is where brain freeze occurs. I've said this to RL privately. This accounts for the why and how people dismiss Digit Systems in general. One has to quit looking at numbers and force themselves to see digits. The problem I have with that is when you limit the number of digits to 5-6 you only cover 75% of the combinations which is fine if that's the only parameter you use but if you are limiting other parameters like sums, ranges, gaps between numbers and etc. the same amounts then you eli
Apr 8, 2011, 9:00 pm - RJOh - Mathematics Forum

Mathematics and the LotteryReply
Hi, There are a lot of things in this world that once were considered impossible. Beating the lottery with a system may or may not be one of them. If one thing is for sure, if nobody tries, a system solution to beating the lottery can never occur, if there is one. You are wise to look at all systems at the LP with a very critical eye. On a side note: Isn't it amazing, with all the analysis tools (hot/cold, skip....etc.) that nobody can triangulate wins in a somewhat consistent manner
Dec 30, 2016, 12:18 am - JKING - Mathematics Forum

Of Cat Washing and BacktestingReply
Anyone trying to beat the Bluejay challenge; all you have to do is find a system that makes a 20,000% profit in 200,000 trials. If you actually believe this statement, then you have a bigger problem than I thought understanding Probability and Statistics and the relationship between the two. It's patently false! I think you'd better take another look at Bluejay's Challenge. By the way, he replies to emails; why not share your thoughts with him? Bluejay's $30,000 Challenge Here's anoth
May 20, 2011, 12:13 pm - jimmy4164 - Mathematics Forum

Do statistics trump all other forms of math where lotteries are concerned?Reply
Hi RL. Thanks for the reply. As a practical matter I doubt the management could do itself a favor by trying to curtail it. The people who've been attacking you and who post the same messages phrased in different ways have been paying to say it over and over for a long time. They'd probably quit paying for memberships if they were forbidden to say the only thing they ever say. I was searching my mind for other means of approaching the problem that doesn't rely on the hysterical taking a nap. N
Apr 5, 2011, 3:45 pm - JosephusMinimus - Mathematics Forum