Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 8, 2016, 3:03 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Personal Numbers

Topic closed. 66 replies. Last post 10 years ago by sirbrad.

Page 5 of 5
52
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
NY
United States
Member #23835
October 16, 2005
3474 Posts
Offline
Posted: October 31, 2006, 2:01 am - IP Logged

1) If there is a bias in the ballsets and ball machines, I don't see it, and I've spent time looking.

 

2) Unless a person plays a QP, then you gotta play something that is construed as a 'system'.

 

3) Would you play all 6 of the longest shots in one game ?   NOBODY has affirmed that they do, so that leads me to believe folks DO NOT believe so much on the odds or probability that all things are equal when clearly, they are not.

 

4) Depending on how the floor is waxed, if the machine is tipped, if an air handler is turned on, etc., this affects ALL balls, not just 1 or 2 of them. 

 

5) If all things were truly equal, then all numbers would have the same number of hits over a course of time, and that is clearly not the case, either.   

1. Not seeing the bias doesn't mean it isn't there, it only means that you couldn't find it. How much data do you suppose you would need to find evidence of a bias?  Do you think the amount of bias will affect the amount of data you need? How often do they change either the machine or the ball set, putting an end to your data collecting? The lotteries go to an enormous amount of effort to make the balls uniform, so I exect we'll all agree that there isnt a lot of bias, but does anyone think the balls are so uniform that they all have exactly the same chance of being drawn?

2. Why do you have to play a system? What is the purpose of a system?

3. What people believe and what is true aren't always the same thing. Did Santa really exist when you were 6?  Until you find the bias there are no longshots, so how would somebody be able to play them?

4. Everything that affects one ball affects the rest of them, but  *nothing* affects every ball exactly equally.  The problem, as far as picking which numbers to play, is that the differences are very small.

5. If the numbers haven't been drawn an equal number of times how do you know that isnt proof of bias?  Random doesn't mean that every number *will* occur the same number of times. Random only means that there is no predictableinfluence on the results. Over a period of time perfect randomness, if coupled with balls and machines that have no bias, will result in a tendency for each number to occur a similar number of times, but the same randomness also means there will be some variation. When you're flipping a coin there are only two possible outcomes, so it won't take very long for the results to approach the 50/50 ratio that probability suggests. Picking 5 balls out of 55 will take a lot longer, so you shouldn't expect a similar number of occurrences for each number until you have a much higher number of results.

Right now the USA Mega site lists frequencies for the last  424 PB drawings. If all 55 numbers had been in play for all 424 draws we would expect each number to have been drawn about 38.5 times. 25 balls were drawn 40 times or more and 25 balls were drawn 37 times or less. Notice that 40 and 37 average out to 38.5? Since more numbers were added in the new matrix we would actually expect each of the old numbers to have been drawn a bit more than 38.5 times. The 3 numbers that turned up the least are 53, 54 and 55 which are numbers that weren't around for all 424 draws, so we'd expect them to have been drawn less than average. If we ignore them we would still have 25 numbers that were drawn 40 or more times and 25 that were drawn 39 or fewer times. The most frequently drawn number was drawn 53 times, or about 13 times more than average. Ignoring the 3 new numbers the least frequently drawn number was drawn 28 times, or about 12 less than average.  That's basically a 30% difference in each direction. If you graphed it out you'd have a fairly symmetrical bell curve with a relatively low peak. Not coincidentally, that's about what randomness should produce.

    guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

    United States
    Member #41383
    June 16, 2006
    1969 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: October 31, 2006, 11:34 am - IP Logged

    1. Not seeing the bias doesn't mean it isn't there, it only means that you couldn't find it. How much data do you suppose you would need to find evidence of a bias?  Do you think the amount of bias will affect the amount of data you need? How often do they change either the machine or the ball set, putting an end to your data collecting? The lotteries go to an enormous amount of effort to make the balls uniform, so I exect we'll all agree that there isnt a lot of bias, but does anyone think the balls are so uniform that they all have exactly the same chance of being drawn?

    2. Why do you have to play a system? What is the purpose of a system?

    3. What people believe and what is true aren't always the same thing. Did Santa really exist when you were 6?  Until you find the bias there are no longshots, so how would somebody be able to play them?

    4. Everything that affects one ball affects the rest of them, but  *nothing* affects every ball exactly equally.  The problem, as far as picking which numbers to play, is that the differences are very small.

    5. If the numbers haven't been drawn an equal number of times how do you know that isnt proof of bias?  Random doesn't mean that every number *will* occur the same number of times. Random only means that there is no predictableinfluence on the results. Over a period of time perfect randomness, if coupled with balls and machines that have no bias, will result in a tendency for each number to occur a similar number of times, but the same randomness also means there will be some variation. When you're flipping a coin there are only two possible outcomes, so it won't take very long for the results to approach the 50/50 ratio that probability suggests. Picking 5 balls out of 55 will take a lot longer, so you shouldn't expect a similar number of occurrences for each number until you have a much higher number of results.

    Right now the USA Mega site lists frequencies for the last  424 PB drawings. If all 55 numbers had been in play for all 424 draws we would expect each number to have been drawn about 38.5 times. 25 balls were drawn 40 times or more and 25 balls were drawn 37 times or less. Notice that 40 and 37 average out to 38.5? Since more numbers were added in the new matrix we would actually expect each of the old numbers to have been drawn a bit more than 38.5 times. The 3 numbers that turned up the least are 53, 54 and 55 which are numbers that weren't around for all 424 draws, so we'd expect them to have been drawn less than average. If we ignore them we would still have 25 numbers that were drawn 40 or more times and 25 that were drawn 39 or fewer times. The most frequently drawn number was drawn 53 times, or about 13 times more than average. Ignoring the 3 new numbers the least frequently drawn number was drawn 28 times, or about 12 less than average.  That's basically a 30% difference in each direction. If you graphed it out you'd have a fairly symmetrical bell curve with a relatively low peak. Not coincidentally, that's about what randomness should produce.

    1) You tell me ? By your response, you must have seen something or else you would not have even bothered to reply to this one.  And besides, the second part of your question answers specifically what I just implied, THANK YOU.

     

    2) Same reason you do, same purpose as yours.

     

    3) By paying attention.  I'd venture to say MOST of the folks on here don't play QP's 100% of the time, all the time, every time.

     

    4) See 1) above

     

    5) I know, see 1) above, again. 

     

    And this is why folks don't discuss a whole lot of what they do PUBLICLY, because no matter what anyone says, someobody comes on and refutes it.   While I don't have a problem with it, and most of what folks say I ignore, I'm still saying this is why VERY VERY FEW folks will disclose most of what they do, 'system-wise'. 

     

    If every 'system' had the exact same odds as a QP, then I'd bet this website would not exist. 

      Avatar
      NY
      United States
      Member #23835
      October 16, 2005
      3474 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: October 31, 2006, 6:28 pm - IP Logged

      1) You tell me ? By your response, you must have seen something or else you would not have even bothered to reply to this one.  And besides, the second part of your question answers specifically what I just implied, THANK YOU.

       

      2) Same reason you do, same purpose as yours.

       

      3) By paying attention.  I'd venture to say MOST of the folks on here don't play QP's 100% of the time, all the time, every time.

       

      4) See 1) above

       

      5) I know, see 1) above, again. 

       

      And this is why folks don't discuss a whole lot of what they do PUBLICLY, because no matter what anyone says, someobody comes on and refutes it.   While I don't have a problem with it, and most of what folks say I ignore, I'm still saying this is why VERY VERY FEW folks will disclose most of what they do, 'system-wise'. 

       

      If every 'system' had the exact same odds as a QP, then I'd bet this website would not exist. 

      1. I'm not sure what your response is supposed to mean.  I haven't seen any bias, but it's certain to exist. The only question is how much bias there is. I'd be surprised if any of the balls were more than 1 or 2% different than the average.

      2. I don't use a system by any reasonable definition. Again I ask *why* do you need a system, and what is its purpose? Is it to make you feel good about the numbers that you'll probably lose with, is it to help you pass the time, or is it supposed to give you an edge?

      3. Paying attention to what? You've said there is no bias, so that means every number has an equal chance of being drawn. As I see it, if you can't explain why a number is a long shot, then there's no reason to belive it is a longshot. 

      4. Since I'm not sure what you meant in #1 that does nothing to explain your thoughts. As near as I can tell, all you're saying is that  if you can't see the bias you don't believe it exists.

      5. Again, I'm not sure what you mean.

      Opinions, contrary or not, are part of everyday life if you're going to post in a public forum. Anyone who's afraid of contrary opinions would do well to keep their thoughts to themselves, or be prepared to offer a reasoned response on why their claims or opinions are valid. I see plenty of thinsg that people aren't afraid of posting, but a lot of the time the response I see to criticism are limited to things along the lines of "that's what I believe" or "everybody knows it's true" or "it  just makes/doesn't make sense".

      Every system does have exactly the same odds as a QP, which is in fact a system, and this site seems to get plenty of traffic. If everybody actually had a solid grasp of probability it would change the discussions, but it wouldn't eliminate them.

        guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

        United States
        Member #41383
        June 16, 2006
        1969 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: October 31, 2006, 11:05 pm - IP Logged

        You basically said there is a bias in the hardware, but you don't see it and I don't see it.

        To me, if a person can't see it (in the realm of this conversation), then how can you say one exists for sure ?

        I'm not being contrary to anything or anyone, I spend 100% of the time defending my own thoughts and theories, which is why I seldom post many of my own thoughts and theories, and which is also why several folks that are on here a lot NEVER post their ideas.

         

        Some day I will learn. 

          bobby623's avatar - abstract
          San Angelo, Texas
          United States
          Member #1097
          January 31, 2003
          1394 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: November 1, 2006, 12:12 am - IP Logged

          All serious lottery players have a plan, a system, a strategy, a program, or whatever. I have a couple which I use to generate the numbers I play.

          In my humble opinion, there is no way under the sun that anybody, any plan, any program, RNG, or whatever, can accurately predict what the next winning numbers will be.

          All a player can do is accept that the lottery is using equipment that produces random combinations. It doesn't matter if the equipment leans one way or the other, whether its cloudy or dry, the winning numbers change from draw to draw with a minimum number of repeats.

          All we can do is log the combinations, develop data streams that  can be used to help us generate personal numbers, for better or for worse.

          "Organized guesswork" is the best description I can come up with.

          Figuring the odds of this or that happening is just a waste of time, in my opinion, because such thinking assumes that the lottery equipment produces predictable results. Those in command of the equipment pay people to analyze the drawings to detect any bias that might exist. It's a random event and that's the way it goes, whether we believe it or like it or not.

          But, anything is possible. We can't rule out the possibility that someone with access to one or more super computers might one day 'break the code' and be able to make some valid predictions. But, we won't ever know it.

          So, lets each do what we think will provide some winners. Let's leave all the mathmatics, odds, etc, etc, to folks who find that kind of activity entertaining.

            guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

            United States
            Member #41383
            June 16, 2006
            1969 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: November 1, 2006, 1:00 pm - IP Logged

            All serious lottery players have a plan, a system, a strategy, a program, or whatever. I have a couple which I use to generate the numbers I play.

            In my humble opinion, there is no way under the sun that anybody, any plan, any program, RNG, or whatever, can accurately predict what the next winning numbers will be.

            All a player can do is accept that the lottery is using equipment that produces random combinations. It doesn't matter if the equipment leans one way or the other, whether its cloudy or dry, the winning numbers change from draw to draw with a minimum number of repeats.

            All we can do is log the combinations, develop data streams that  can be used to help us generate personal numbers, for better or for worse.

            "Organized guesswork" is the best description I can come up with.

            Figuring the odds of this or that happening is just a waste of time, in my opinion, because such thinking assumes that the lottery equipment produces predictable results. Those in command of the equipment pay people to analyze the drawings to detect any bias that might exist. It's a random event and that's the way it goes, whether we believe it or like it or not.

            But, anything is possible. We can't rule out the possibility that someone with access to one or more super computers might one day 'break the code' and be able to make some valid predictions. But, we won't ever know it.

            So, lets each do what we think will provide some winners. Let's leave all the mathmatics, odds, etc, etc, to folks who find that kind of activity entertaining.

            Bobby, you have summed up what I have been saying for months: nothing can predict all of the winning numbers.

            And your title of 'organized guesswork' is almost like mine, where i have coined 'educated guesswork'.

            I can happlily say I've never predicted numbers, nor have I said I could, but I'm doing pretty danged good at predicting tendencies, and that's about all anyone can do, yet some argue against that as well. 

              sirbrad's avatar - Lottery-062.jpg
              PA
              United States
              Member #22983
              October 6, 2005
              2226 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: November 1, 2006, 9:22 pm - IP Logged

              Whatever seems to work I stick with, regardless of whether anyone thinks it actually works or not. However when I win using a certain method I will not be telling anyone about it.