Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 7:09 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

how many weeks should i back check to know if my system is for real?

Topic closed. 7 replies. Last post 10 years ago by RJOh.

Page 1 of 1
PrintE-mailLink
kellmellus55's avatar - 53882ptr8it6sv1
Clarkston,MI
United States
Member #35082
March 12, 2006
594 Posts
Offline
Posted: March 12, 2007, 5:57 am - IP Logged

When ever i get a system i back check to see how long it goes before it fails.(99%)Most systems fail in 2 to 3 weeks of back checking.

Now if i were to find a system that would makes a profit week after week let's say for 4-5 weeks would you consider that system  be for real or would i have to back check further?how many weeks or months?

Since i never have had a real system work long enough i need a gauge of back testing weeks to know if i am going in the right direction ?

What was the longest time someone had a system work before it failed?

I have gone 3 weeks(paper+pencil) than i lost more times than i won(84#boxed ea draw) on the 4th week.Trying for straight numbers is a losing game.

    Avatar
    woodville,ohio
    United States
    Member #48490
    December 29, 2006
    126 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: March 12, 2007, 6:46 am - IP Logged

    Rember that systems go in to hot stages and cold stages.

    Weather or not the system is real... the question is... does it work consistly?

    You will be able to tell by back testing until you find where it did not work.

    If you back test and it keeps on hitting and does not fail... then I would say you are on to big winnigs.

    By back testing ...this gives you a true foundation of how well the system really works.

    I have gone for 6 weeks...before the numbers just went cold.

    hope this helps

    Rod

      Badger's avatar - adu50016 NorthAmericanBadger.jpg
      Wisconsin
      United States
      Member #1303
      March 27, 2003
      1508 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: March 12, 2007, 7:38 am - IP Logged

      When ever i get a system i back check to see how long it goes before it fails.(99%)Most systems fail in 2 to 3 weeks of back checking.

      Now if i were to find a system that would makes a profit week after week let's say for 4-5 weeks would you consider that system  be for real or would i have to back check further?how many weeks or months?

      Since i never have had a real system work long enough i need a gauge of back testing weeks to know if i am going in the right direction ?

      What was the longest time someone had a system work before it failed?

      I have gone 3 weeks(paper+pencil) than i lost more times than i won(84#boxed ea draw) on the 4th week.Trying for straight numbers is a losing game.

      Rather than setting a certain number of weeks back, you may perhaps consider a different approach to backtesting.

      What I do is check back 1 month, and if that looks acceptable, I go back random numbers of months...for instance I may just pick a month from last year, or two (not necessarily consecutive months) and the same for the previous year as well.  This seems to give a better gauge than just the games "current" state, which can be deceiving.

      Also, understand that there are things that make the game "change", but that also means it can "change back" ---- IOW, any system can have a "cold month" where you don't like the results. But if overall, you test for several random, none-consecutive months, and the overall results are satisfactory to you, then it would perhaps be worth pursuing in reality.

      Part of the most difficult part of any system, IMHO, seems to be knowing when to stop playing your chosen combinations, and "gear up" again with the system.  Depending upon your system, you have to look for telltale signs that your combinations are not going to hit within a few days, based upon what is drawn. For instance (just one instance) if your system includes 239, and they draw any form of 739, I have observed that since one of the digits drawn was a mirror of the combo I was chasing, it is probably a good idea to stop playing those combos and do your workout again, based upon the 739, because the 239 is not likely to be drawn within a few days, and the system is only going to be "close" but no cigar.

      You know that any system is not always going to produce a hit within a reasonable time. So knowing when to stop chasing a losing cause can help a great deal in stopping wasted wagers.

      ============

      How can you tell if a politician is lying?

      Answer: His lips are moving.

        kellmellus55's avatar - 53882ptr8it6sv1
        Clarkston,MI
        United States
        Member #35082
        March 12, 2006
        594 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: March 12, 2007, 8:59 am - IP Logged

        Thanks  Badger and Redtag  I wish i had a system go 6 weeks but your both right it will take  many months of testing and differant years.I will also have to look for hot stages + cold stages, and consistently over all.

        I am glad some people out there is having success in developing worth while systems.Hmmm......I guess it all just take time like everything you do in life,in order for you to find something that works.

        I'll keep on working on my 8 wheel for the 3 digit, someday i will perfect it.

          LANTERN's avatar - kilroy 28_173_reasonably_small.jpg
          Tx
          United States
          Member #4570
          May 4, 2004
          5180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: March 12, 2007, 4:15 pm - IP Logged

          I think that if a system works for 3 to 4 months then it just works.

          As to playing straight, it is no wore than playing boxed, but to win you might have to play very many more numbers, maybe from 3 to 6 times as many. 

          BibleOnline  ParishesOnline  ChristianRadioOnline   MassOnline   Mass

          "Ten measures of beauty descended to the world, nine were taken by Jerusalem."


            United States
            Member #50319
            March 3, 2007
            42 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: March 12, 2007, 4:30 pm - IP Logged

            I think that if a system works for 3 to 4 months then it just works.

            As to playing straight, it is no wore than playing boxed, but to win you might have to play very many more numbers, maybe from 3 to 6 times as many. 

            Or a straight/box, less money in the winnings, but hopefully cut down on on the money paid out as well.

              guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

              United States
              Member #41383
              June 16, 2006
              1969 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: March 12, 2007, 4:46 pm - IP Logged

              Keep in mind the data is only relative from the date you start compiling it, ie If you decide you want to go back 50 games, that's fine, but there may be MUCH different info that would massively skew the results if you went back 60 games, let alone 100 or more games.

                RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                mid-Ohio
                United States
                Member #9
                March 24, 2001
                19817 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: March 12, 2007, 8:24 pm - IP Logged

                How much you can depend on back testing may depend on whether your system is dynamic or static and the odds of the game you're testing.  Simulating conditions of pass drawings can be tricky and knowing what the results were can cause you to simulate success. 

                I prefer to backup my back testing with some  forward testing, that is once I think a system is showing some promise I'll use it to make a few predictions and if it continues to be successful then I have some confidence in it.

                Since I test systems for jackpot or pick games, I measure success differently than one might for pick3/4 games. For me success is having all the winning numbers in a small pool of numbers, the smaller the better. 

                 * you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket * 
                   
                             Evil Looking