Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 9:15 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

No delusion-100% winning method

Topic closed. 535 replies. Last post 10 years ago by Kola.

Page 23 of 36
PrintE-mailLink
paurths's avatar - underground
Switching between Fairfax, VA and Belgium
Belgium
Member #19287
July 29, 2005
2254 Posts
Offline
Posted: May 22, 2006, 1:11 pm - IP Logged

Kola wrote

"

Again, the inefficient filters I was using to capture the winning number were:

1. I would perform DSUM, and eliminate the duplicates 

2. I would delete the numbers that came out for both midday

    and evening draws in the past two weeks

3. I would perform a Deflation with the Tool on this site in the

    Resources section

4. I would eliminate the numbers that were not similar to the

    numbers coming out in the draws for the past few days.

5. I would look at the pick 3 and pick 4 and I would keep those

    numbers whose digits had been coming out within some

    cyclical regularity in the past 2-3 days. 

6. I would keep the digits of those numbers that had been the

  most out of play in the draws for the past 3 days" 

 

Okay, i now have even more questions than i had before... seems like the more you write down, the distance from clarity grows and grows... Eek

1. How would you eliminate duplicats? Supose the workout has 012, 201, 210 and 120 somewhere in it. Which one of those 4 numbers would you keep, and why?

2. This is new...

3. That was very very very clear... (pehaps i should hookup any program i write to the deflation tool on LP? So, in other words, this system of yours can not be used without being a paying  LP member.)

4. Define "similar" please.

5. So now we drag pick4 into the pick3 part?

6. I don't understand that line, so do you mean playing the cold digits, or the hot digits?

Funny Paurths.

Just remember that with all that I have written about my filters, that is what has worked for me.

If its too much for you, don't use it. Maybe you can find something better. Right now I have'nt played anything online in the past few weeks. I've just been testing my new discoveries.

I'd rather not anyone use those filters I was using. Only if they want. They were particular to me and the way I think.

To answer your questions though:

1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number.

2. The thing that you called new is common knowlede. People know of the deflation tool. I mentioned it once in this thread, so maybe you could have missed it. I didn't harp on it, because I felt that there may be other tools to look into.Keep the core of DSUM, but try to expand using other techniques. Instead of taking my filtering techniques as law. Again, I was and I am still looking to refine. These filtering techniques are not specific to the DSUM pattern. I just thought they might work to a degree.

 3. Are you serious? nah you can't be. You don't have to use anything I used to aid me with DSUM. DSUM should be flexible enough to adapt it with what works for you. Try other techniques not the one I listed. Try to go outside of my DSUM design pattern. Still use it, but use some of that right-brain creativity to manhandle DSUM. Think in a linear(of course), and non-linear fashion.

4. I would eliminate draws that were not similar to the numbers coming out in the last few days means...

Suppose 217, 416, 719 is coming through in the draws. I would filter out the DSUM numbers like 850, 353 etc... because they were visibly so unlike the pattern that was coming out in the draws.

5. Nope you don't need to drag Pick 4 into it all. All the things I have listed are personal. you don't have to use the. You asked me what I happened to use. This is it. Please don't go down the "its changing again" road. It isn't Again DSUM was developed apart from these methods. I like to use Pick 3 and pick 4, because there are similarities or resonances with the numbers in both systems. Just keep looking at them and you will begin to get certain impressions. If it complicates things for you leave it alone. I

6. In general I would play the hot digits. But after 3-maybe 4 5 days, I would get the impression that the cold digits were about to appear again. These impressions were culled from the slight changes that would occur in the pattern of the Pick 3/4 digits. That 3 to 5 day wait wasn't static, It could have been as soon as two days, if I saw a change in draws I would act accordingly and play cold digits as well.  Sometimes I wouldn't know, and I would wait a couple of days for a clearer pattern.

Great question Paurths. I hope I was clear.

Question:

1. How would you eliminate duplicats? Supose the workout has 012, 201, 210 and 120 somewhere in it. Which one of those 4 numbers would you keep, and why?

.

Answer:

1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number.

.

So all these boxes you have been telling me that you had compared to my one .... now it changes again???

 

Caliduuuude, whoa!

moving too fast again.

The above quote is in response to Paurths question as to how I use to pick my numbers in DSUM. Initially, and exclusively I use to eliminate columns of duplicates.

My respnse to you Calidude about the boxes was based on the current way I do most of my DSUMMING. Even though I wil both strings and columns, I favor strings,  moreso than columns. When favoring strings, i don't eliminate anything. If you had looked closely to Paurths earlier example of where I claimed the multiple hits, you didn't have to take my word for it . They were staring you right in the face. There on the screen. Also you would see that the format of Paurths program lends itself to readily choosing strings.

Just ask me the question CD. You hardly ever have. Lots of inaccurate declarations about what you percieve I'm doing though. Oh well...I hope I have been clear.

"Answer:

1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number"

 

Okay, this is the answer i was waiting for.
You just made it a system that should only played boxed, since there are absolutely no rules on filtering outputformats.

thanks

lasas3

An onion a day keeps everyone away!!!

    Kola's avatar - image
    Blundering Time Traveler

    United States
    Member #28945
    December 25, 2005
    1527 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: May 22, 2006, 1:34 pm - IP Logged

    Kola wrote

    "

    Again, the inefficient filters I was using to capture the winning number were:

    1. I would perform DSUM, and eliminate the duplicates 

    2. I would delete the numbers that came out for both midday

        and evening draws in the past two weeks

    3. I would perform a Deflation with the Tool on this site in the

        Resources section

    4. I would eliminate the numbers that were not similar to the

        numbers coming out in the draws for the past few days.

    5. I would look at the pick 3 and pick 4 and I would keep those

        numbers whose digits had been coming out within some

        cyclical regularity in the past 2-3 days. 

    6. I would keep the digits of those numbers that had been the

      most out of play in the draws for the past 3 days" 

     

    Okay, i now have even more questions than i had before... seems like the more you write down, the distance from clarity grows and grows... Eek

    1. How would you eliminate duplicats? Supose the workout has 012, 201, 210 and 120 somewhere in it. Which one of those 4 numbers would you keep, and why?

    2. This is new...

    3. That was very very very clear... (pehaps i should hookup any program i write to the deflation tool on LP? So, in other words, this system of yours can not be used without being a paying  LP member.)

    4. Define "similar" please.

    5. So now we drag pick4 into the pick3 part?

    6. I don't understand that line, so do you mean playing the cold digits, or the hot digits?

    Funny Paurths.

    Just remember that with all that I have written about my filters, that is what has worked for me.

    If its too much for you, don't use it. Maybe you can find something better. Right now I have'nt played anything online in the past few weeks. I've just been testing my new discoveries.

    I'd rather not anyone use those filters I was using. Only if they want. They were particular to me and the way I think.

    To answer your questions though:

    1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number.

    2. The thing that you called new is common knowlede. People know of the deflation tool. I mentioned it once in this thread, so maybe you could have missed it. I didn't harp on it, because I felt that there may be other tools to look into.Keep the core of DSUM, but try to expand using other techniques. Instead of taking my filtering techniques as law. Again, I was and I am still looking to refine. These filtering techniques are not specific to the DSUM pattern. I just thought they might work to a degree.

     3. Are you serious? nah you can't be. You don't have to use anything I used to aid me with DSUM. DSUM should be flexible enough to adapt it with what works for you. Try other techniques not the one I listed. Try to go outside of my DSUM design pattern. Still use it, but use some of that right-brain creativity to manhandle DSUM. Think in a linear(of course), and non-linear fashion.

    4. I would eliminate draws that were not similar to the numbers coming out in the last few days means...

    Suppose 217, 416, 719 is coming through in the draws. I would filter out the DSUM numbers like 850, 353 etc... because they were visibly so unlike the pattern that was coming out in the draws.

    5. Nope you don't need to drag Pick 4 into it all. All the things I have listed are personal. you don't have to use the. You asked me what I happened to use. This is it. Please don't go down the "its changing again" road. It isn't Again DSUM was developed apart from these methods. I like to use Pick 3 and pick 4, because there are similarities or resonances with the numbers in both systems. Just keep looking at them and you will begin to get certain impressions. If it complicates things for you leave it alone. I

    6. In general I would play the hot digits. But after 3-maybe 4 5 days, I would get the impression that the cold digits were about to appear again. These impressions were culled from the slight changes that would occur in the pattern of the Pick 3/4 digits. That 3 to 5 day wait wasn't static, It could have been as soon as two days, if I saw a change in draws I would act accordingly and play cold digits as well.  Sometimes I wouldn't know, and I would wait a couple of days for a clearer pattern.

    Great question Paurths. I hope I was clear.

    Question:

    1. How would you eliminate duplicats? Supose the workout has 012, 201, 210 and 120 somewhere in it. Which one of those 4 numbers would you keep, and why?

    .

    Answer:

    1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number.

    .

    So all these boxes you have been telling me that you had compared to my one .... now it changes again???

     

    Caliduuuude, whoa!

    moving too fast again.

    The above quote is in response to Paurths question as to how I use to pick my numbers in DSUM. Initially, and exclusively I use to eliminate columns of duplicates.

    My respnse to you Calidude about the boxes was based on the current way I do most of my DSUMMING. Even though I wil both strings and columns, I favor strings,  moreso than columns. When favoring strings, i don't eliminate anything. If you had looked closely to Paurths earlier example of where I claimed the multiple hits, you didn't have to take my word for it . They were staring you right in the face. There on the screen. Also you would see that the format of Paurths program lends itself to readily choosing strings.

    Just ask me the question CD. You hardly ever have. Lots of inaccurate declarations about what you percieve I'm doing though. Oh well...I hope I have been clear.

    "Answer:

    1. I would eliminate all duplicates indiscriminately, and just keep one form, any form of the number"

     

    Okay, this is the answer i was waiting for.
    You just made it a system that should only played boxed, since there are absolutely no rules on filtering outputformats.

    thanks

    Thank you Paurths. Good questions. I'm glad one of your major ones was answered.

      cps10's avatar - Lottery-004.jpg
      The Carolinas - Charlotte
      United States
      Member #21627
      September 12, 2005
      4138 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: May 22, 2006, 1:35 pm - IP Logged

      KOLA

      What I was saying was taking those base 64 numbers, not applying the rolldown and using those for the "1 row". If it is unsuccessful, then you do it over the next draw. What I am suggesting is that you will not win every draw with just 64 numbers, the mathematics and random nature of the game will assure that. However, I don't see why you can't "progress" your bet to make your winnings very handsome. So, if you lose that first draw, you play the second draw, if that fails, then move to the next, and always adjust your bets to cover your losses and end up with a nice profit. You would obviously in most cases, bet more on the singles than on the doubles. I have a spreadsheet that would calculate that for you.

      RE PICK-4: Do you have the combinations of D,S,U & M for the Pick-4? Obviously you have presented the Pick-3 combinations (64 of them). Do you have those for Pick-4 as well? I believe there would be 256 of them.

      The North Carolina Education Lottery - so much a joke that here are their mascots:

      Stooges

        Kola's avatar - image
        Blundering Time Traveler

        United States
        Member #28945
        December 25, 2005
        1527 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 22, 2006, 3:15 pm - IP Logged

        KOLA

        What I was saying was taking those base 64 numbers, not applying the rolldown and using those for the "1 row". If it is unsuccessful, then you do it over the next draw. What I am suggesting is that you will not win every draw with just 64 numbers, the mathematics and random nature of the game will assure that. However, I don't see why you can't "progress" your bet to make your winnings very handsome. So, if you lose that first draw, you play the second draw, if that fails, then move to the next, and always adjust your bets to cover your losses and end up with a nice profit. You would obviously in most cases, bet more on the singles than on the doubles. I have a spreadsheet that would calculate that for you.

        RE PICK-4: Do you have the combinations of D,S,U & M for the Pick-4? Obviously you have presented the Pick-3 combinations (64 of them). Do you have those for Pick-4 as well? I believe there would be 256 of them.

        Cps 10. Yes, the method you would like to use is viable. I posted earlier that when I

        first started experimenting with DSUM,  I noticed a lot of hits in the first row without

        the rolldown. As a matter of fact I mistakenly thought at the time that that was THE

        STRING that would always have the winning result, becuase it hit alot. I soon realized it wasn't to be. There were particular numbers number groups that did not want to fall in that first row orbit. Doubles, fake doubles, 153, and 158 draws if i can recall ,were resistant to showing  the next winning number in that first string. It needs a little testing to be sure, and for different states. 

        So yes you could play it like that, and you will surely hit.

        A fellow named Bomberos also expressed this realization earlier. I forget what state he was from, but he was initially getting decent hits from his state. Also as you see, Stack found it viable as well.

         I do have the combinations for Pick 4. I will be posting them. And you are correct, there are 256 permutations or DSUM combos in one string. There are 2,560 combos from a collective of ten rows. The 2,560 combos is the prefilter number. Dupllicate boxes are all in play. Yes with progressive wagering, would make a nice profit if you could play correct string.

          cps10's avatar - Lottery-004.jpg
          The Carolinas - Charlotte
          United States
          Member #21627
          September 12, 2005
          4138 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 22, 2006, 3:19 pm - IP Logged

          Thanks Kola

          I look forward to that post with the 256...if you put them on a different post, please let us know here.

          The North Carolina Education Lottery - so much a joke that here are their mascots:

          Stooges

            Kola's avatar - image
            Blundering Time Traveler

            United States
            Member #28945
            December 25, 2005
            1527 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: May 22, 2006, 3:22 pm - IP Logged

            Thanks Kola

            I look forward to that post with the 256...if you put them on a different post, please let us know here.

            Will do cps10

              Kola's avatar - image
              Blundering Time Traveler

              United States
              Member #28945
              December 25, 2005
              1527 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: May 22, 2006, 3:37 pm - IP Logged

              For all those still interested in DSUM there is a tool on this site that may work beautifully with it. I'm not sure. But from a cursory glance, it seems highly viable.

              Sfilippo's The Duke seems very compatible. its a great tool, and the numbers that are spit out from it, can possibly be compared to the numbers in the DSUM string. If themany of the numbers in Sfilippo's program tend to show up in one string of DSUM, then that's the string you may want to play.

              More importantly, i noticed with the DUKE that there  are times the chosen number is off by 1 digit up or down, and/or by a mirror of the numbers. If that is so, and and being that DSUM strength covers those bases completely, its very possible that the winning string can be found. If  the DUKE can get us hovering around the winning number, but is often off by 1, or a mirror, DSUM will help to net it. Now I haven't down any testing, I've just been following his interesting thread.

                cps10's avatar - Lottery-004.jpg
                The Carolinas - Charlotte
                United States
                Member #21627
                September 12, 2005
                4138 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: May 22, 2006, 4:07 pm - IP Logged

                That would be an interesting situation. I will look at a few in the future, maybe it will pan out.

                The North Carolina Education Lottery - so much a joke that here are their mascots:

                Stooges

                  Kola's avatar - image
                  Blundering Time Traveler

                  United States
                  Member #28945
                  December 25, 2005
                  1527 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: May 22, 2006, 4:17 pm - IP Logged

                  That would be an interesting situation. I will look at a few in the future, maybe it will pan out.

                  Hopefully.

                    Avatar
                    Kentucky
                    United States
                    Member #32652
                    February 14, 2006
                    7297 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: May 22, 2006, 4:52 pm - IP Logged

                    cps10,

                    I used a wheel to create the 64 combinations from 709.

                      DS U M 
                     7 6
                     0 9
                     9 8

                     

                    (6-7-8-2) are the first digits.

                    (9-0-1-5) are the middle digits.

                    (8-9-0-4) are the third digits.

                    4 numbers with 4 numbers with 4 numbers = 64 combinations.

                    I assumed the DSUM system was using the previous draw's DSUMs creating 64 combinations based on those numbers, but apparently it requires a wrap-around string of 10 three digit numbers for each combination. This would create 640 combinations but in any three digit game, there are only 220 combinations:

                    10 triples

                    90 3-way boxes

                    120 6-way boxes

                    You can create 22 wrap-around strings of 10 that include every possible combination so I see nothing unique about finding the next draw using 64 wrap-around strings of 10.

                    Stack

                     

                     

                      Kola's avatar - image
                      Blundering Time Traveler

                      United States
                      Member #28945
                      December 25, 2005
                      1527 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: May 22, 2006, 5:08 pm - IP Logged

                      cps10,

                      I used a wheel to create the 64 combinations from 709.

                        DS U M 
                       7 6
                       0 9
                       9 8

                       

                      (6-7-8-2) are the first digits.

                      (9-0-1-5) are the middle digits.

                      (8-9-0-4) are the third digits.

                      4 numbers with 4 numbers with 4 numbers = 64 combinations.

                      I assumed the DSUM system was using the previous draw's DSUMs creating 64 combinations based on those numbers, but apparently it requires a wrap-around string of 10 three digit numbers for each combination. This would create 640 combinations but in any three digit game, there are only 220 combinations:

                      10 triples

                      90 3-way boxes

                      120 6-way boxes

                      You can create 22 wrap-around strings of 10 that include every possible combination so I see nothing unique about finding the next draw using 64 wrap-around strings of 10.

                      Stack

                       

                       

                      IN DSUM Stack, as posted much earlier. You can do it two ways.

                      1. In one way, you can reduce the the DSUM results by eliminating the duplicates, and in that way, you only play 1 in 22 columns. You have 220, you pick the right column .Just 10 numbers.

                      2. The 64 wrap-around strings of 10 is ONLY useful if one can see an identifiable pattern. Of course there is nothing remarkable about a list of 640. What makes any winning method viable is if you can see any identifiable pattern, if any. After doing that then you can test your reslts by trying to find a good pointer or filter. The stats you mentioned above - we are well aware. DSUM is about finding patterns a strong permuation method that accounts for different expressions for the next draw. Don't be distracted by the 640 numbers. You are only playing one string of 64 numbers. That's it. i like having all those numbers arranged in the DSUM pattern,because it gives me a "looking at the forest" systemwide approach instead of a "looking at the tree only" subset approach. I

                      If you like the subset approach cross out the columns of duplicates, and use various filters to try and reduce your numbers.

                        Kola's avatar - image
                        Blundering Time Traveler

                        United States
                        Member #28945
                        December 25, 2005
                        1527 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: May 22, 2006, 5:14 pm - IP Logged

                        cps10,

                        I used a wheel to create the 64 combinations from 709.

                          DS U M 
                         7 6
                         0 9
                         9 8

                         

                        (6-7-8-2) are the first digits.

                        (9-0-1-5) are the middle digits.

                        (8-9-0-4) are the third digits.

                        4 numbers with 4 numbers with 4 numbers = 64 combinations.

                        I assumed the DSUM system was using the previous draw's DSUMs creating 64 combinations based on those numbers, but apparently it requires a wrap-around string of 10 three digit numbers for each combination. This would create 640 combinations but in any three digit game, there are only 220 combinations:

                        10 triples

                        90 3-way boxes

                        120 6-way boxes

                        You can create 22 wrap-around strings of 10 that include every possible combination so I see nothing unique about finding the next draw using 64 wrap-around strings of 10.

                        Stack

                         

                         

                        IN DSUM Stack, as posted much earlier. You can do it two ways.

                        1. In one way, you can reduce the the DSUM results by eliminating the duplicates, and in that way, you only play 1 in 22 columns. You have 220, you pick the right column .Just 10 numbers.

                        2. The 64 wrap-around strings of 10 is ONLY useful if one can see an identifiable pattern. Of course there is nothing remarkable about a list of 640. What makes any winning method viable is if you can see any identifiable pattern, if any. After doing that then you can test your reslts by trying to find a good pointer or filter. The stats you mentioned above - we are well aware. DSUM is about finding patterns a strong permuation method that accounts for different expressions for the next draw. Don't be distracted by the 640 numbers. You are only playing one string of 64 numbers. That's it. i like having all those numbers arranged in the DSUM pattern,because it gives me a "looking at the forest" systemwide approach instead of a "looking at the tree only" subset approach. I

                        If you like the subset approach cross out the columns of duplicates, and use various filters to try and reduce your numbers.

                        Your method is viable. One string if played consistently will get hits. Often times the draw alon when permuated will give you the winning number. But there are still many expressions of the last draw that are not even being looked at. Those expressions are locked in the other 9 numbers that stem from the wrap-around.

                          Kola's avatar - image
                          Blundering Time Traveler

                          United States
                          Member #28945
                          December 25, 2005
                          1527 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: May 22, 2006, 5:27 pm - IP Logged

                          cps10,

                          I used a wheel to create the 64 combinations from 709.

                            DS U M 
                           7 6
                           0 9
                           9 8

                           

                          (6-7-8-2) are the first digits.

                          (9-0-1-5) are the middle digits.

                          (8-9-0-4) are the third digits.

                          4 numbers with 4 numbers with 4 numbers = 64 combinations.

                          I assumed the DSUM system was using the previous draw's DSUMs creating 64 combinations based on those numbers, but apparently it requires a wrap-around string of 10 three digit numbers for each combination. This would create 640 combinations but in any three digit game, there are only 220 combinations:

                          10 triples

                          90 3-way boxes

                          120 6-way boxes

                          You can create 22 wrap-around strings of 10 that include every possible combination so I see nothing unique about finding the next draw using 64 wrap-around strings of 10.

                          Stack

                           

                           

                          IN DSUM Stack, as posted much earlier. You can do it two ways.

                          1. In one way, you can reduce the the DSUM results by eliminating the duplicates, and in that way, you only play 1 in 22 columns. You have 220, you pick the right column .Just 10 numbers.

                          2. The 64 wrap-around strings of 10 is ONLY useful if one can see an identifiable pattern. Of course there is nothing remarkable about a list of 640. What makes any winning method viable is if you can see any identifiable pattern, if any. After doing that then you can test your reslts by trying to find a good pointer or filter. The stats you mentioned above - we are well aware. DSUM is about finding patterns a strong permuation method that accounts for different expressions for the next draw. Don't be distracted by the 640 numbers. You are only playing one string of 64 numbers. That's it. i like having all those numbers arranged in the DSUM pattern,because it gives me a "looking at the forest" systemwide approach instead of a "looking at the tree only" subset approach. I

                          If you like the subset approach cross out the columns of duplicates, and use various filters to try and reduce your numbers.

                          Your method is viable. One string if played consistently will get hits. Often times the draw alone when permuated will give you the winning number. But there are still many expressions of the last draw that are not even being looked at. Those expressions are locked in the other 9 numbers that stem from the wrap-around.

                            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                            Michigan
                            United States
                            Member #22395
                            September 24, 2005
                            1583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: May 22, 2006, 5:43 pm - IP Logged
                             

                            No delusion-100% winning method 
                            Hello Folks. This is my small contribution to all the great people on this site.This is for the Pick 3 system.  
                            I have been following this thread with some interest
                            and I can understand the confusion.  First off, you called
                            it a method in your title - which is true.  Then you call it a
                            system in your opening statements - which it isn't.

                            A system is not subjective - every person using it should
                            come up with the same number or set of numbers.
                            2+2 should equal 4.  In your convoluted set of things you
                            do, you might get 4 but then arbitrarily change it to some
                            other number.  That makes it a method or worse.
                            Something that is subject to your whims. 

                            And there is no way MOST people can afford $64 or
                            equivalent 64 numbers online.  To me that is ridiculous.
                            Because I know sooner or later that will lead to ruin.  It
                            doesn't win 100% of the time as suggested by the title.
                            It only has a form of the number 100% of the time. Which
                            is a huge difference.

                            I have watched CalifDude and Paurths attempt to help
                            explain this clearly and make it a system that a person
                            could use. And they were doing great until you kept
                            coming up with something that "you" didn't make clear.
                            Shame on you for not making it clear that it is a
                            method and not a system.  As such it should be posted
                            in the Mystical forum if at all.

                            You go on to tell them to not bother using it.  Then why post it?
                            If it is a method that only you can use, why post it.  Because
                            without rules, you are the only one that knows what you want
                            to do.  Just like someone that dreams numbers - no one else
                            can dream the same numbers on demand.

                            I think this is a total waste of 35 pages.  That is not anything
                            negative about you - it is just a fact that many can agree on.
                            If you think narrowing a pick 3 down to 64 numbers is good,
                            then good luck.

                              LAVERNE MALONEY's avatar - smallgirl

                              United States
                              Member #1987
                              August 5, 2003
                              8968 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: May 22, 2006, 5:58 pm - IP Logged
                               

                              No delusion-100% winning method 
                              Hello Folks. This is my small contribution to all the great people on this site.This is for the Pick 3 system.  
                              I have been following this thread with some interest
                              and I can understand the confusion.  First off, you called
                              it a method in your title - which is true.  Then you call it a
                              system in your opening statements - which it isn't.

                               

                              A system is not subjective - every person using it should
                              come up with the same number or set of numbers. 
                              2+2 should equal 4.  In your convoluted set of things you
                              do, you might get 4 but then arbitrarily change it to some
                              other number.  That makes it a method or worse. 
                              Something that is subject to your whims. 

                               

                              And there is no way MOST people can afford $64 or
                              equivalent 64 numbers online.  To me that is ridiculous. 
                              Because I know sooner or later that will lead to ruin.  It
                              doesn't win 100% of the time as suggested by the title.
                              It only has a form of the number 100% of the time. Which
                              is a huge difference.

                               

                              I have watched CalifDude and Paurths attempt to help
                              explain this clearly and make it a system that a person
                              could use.  And they were doing great until you kept
                              coming up with something that "you" didn't make clear.
                              Shame on you for not making it clear that it is a
                              method and not a system.  As such it should be posted
                              in the Mystical forum if at all.

                               

                              You go on to tell them to not bother using it.  Then why post it?
                              If it is a method that only you can use, why post it.  Because
                              without rules, you are the only one that knows what you want
                              to do.  Just like someone that dreams numbers - no one else
                              can dream the same numbers on demand.

                               

                              I think this is a total waste of 35 pages.  That is not anything
                              negative about you - it is just a fact that many can agree on.
                              If you think narrowing a pick 3 down to 64 numbers is good,
                              then good luck.

                              35 pages? truecritic to what post are you referring? To what are you referring?

                              I was expecting you to respond in this manner. I got the same feeling just like the last time & bang you marched right in on cue. Playing the same tune. WOW!!!!!!!!!!

                                 
                                Page 23 of 36