Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 6, 2016, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Is there a "Lottery Ego?"

Topic closed. 59 replies. Last post 8 years ago by BUCK6.

Page 3 of 4
4.86
PrintE-mailLink

Which describes the average Lottery player ego?

I'm smarter than the average bear [ 5 ]  [8.33%]
The Amazing Kreskin ain't got nothing on me [ 1 ]  [1.67%]
My numbers can beat up your numbers [ 7 ]  [11.67%]
I own these numbers and I rule the world [ 2 ]  [3.33%]
I'm just the average shmegeggie who wants to win [ 27 ]  [45.00%]
Life stinks and then you die [ 4 ]  [6.67%]
I only play because I'm a masochist [ 2 ]  [3.33%]
I gave up drinking, smoking & sex. What's left? [ 7 ]  [11.67%]
I've got no ego, my ex got that too [ 3 ]  [5.00%]
Other [ 2 ]  [3.33%]
Total Valid Votes [ 60 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 3 ]  
time*treat's avatar - radar

United States
Member #13130
March 30, 2005
2171 Posts
Offline
Posted: June 26, 2008, 4:35 pm - IP Logged

The thing about models that many people don't seem to get is ~ if the model was as complex as the original problem, it would not be a "model".

The weatherman doesn't know the vector, velocity, and temperature of every molecule when he gives the forecast. But, the forecast is usually good enough for a day or two.

Insurance companies don't know exactly who will have an accident, or exactly how long a particular person will live, but they have a good idea of how many per 1,000 people, and in what age range. They set their rates accordingly.

In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.

    Avatar
    Houston
    United States
    Member #62319
    June 24, 2008
    242 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 26, 2008, 6:22 pm - IP Logged

    In a way, I wish I could just post my whole system on here just to PROVE to people the edge that is possible for you to have when playing the lottery, but at the same time, I don't want all my hard work to go down the drain either. I've put 4 years into my system and it's been a long road and I know there's still more to come. One of these days, I WILL hit the jackpot. When I first started my system, I was just able to come up with methods that only had a small improvement of my odds. Then one night about 2 years ago, I came across something that I thank God every single day for. It was something that took my system ahead in leaps and bounds. I promise I will win a jackpot.

    Guru, I have the same type of experience except it took me more than 10 years to know what I know now and like you, I thank God too -- but I think the wisdom I've gain thus far is only in increment what I must know the rest of the way.

     

    I'm just waiting for some kind of message, sign, dream from God where He says: "That's it. You know everything you need to know, go out and use it to the best of your ability."

     

    Now, that would be really cool to get an answer like that from God...hahaha.

      Guru101's avatar - rw6jhh
      Indiana
      United States
      Member #48725
      January 7, 2007
      1953 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: June 26, 2008, 9:11 pm - IP Logged

      Guru, I have the same type of experience except it took me more than 10 years to know what I know now and like you, I thank God too -- but I think the wisdom I've gain thus far is only in increment what I must know the rest of the way.

       

      I'm just waiting for some kind of message, sign, dream from God where He says: "That's it. You know everything you need to know, go out and use it to the best of your ability."

       

      Now, that would be really cool to get an answer like that from God...hahaha.

      LOL, you know it's kinda funny though. Sometimes I make a discovery about one of my methods several months after coming up with it and coding it. I'll just be going through the program and think to myself "Hmmmmm, what if I tweak this a little bit". Sometimes it's not that huge of a difference, and since it doesn't cover as high a percentage of the draws, I'll change it back. However, on occasion, I'll tweak something a little bit and see it has a huge effect on my odds. Although, it might happen 70% of the time instead of the 90% of the time I look for when coming up with my variables, the fact that it had that huge of an impact makes it negligible. So out of the $5 that I play, I might make 2 of those with that adjustment. In fact, just last night I found a killer. This is why I need to start testing sensitivity of all my variables.

      Gonna win.Big Smile

        justxploring's avatar - villiarna
        Wandering Aimlessly
        United States
        Member #25360
        November 5, 2005
        4461 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: June 27, 2008, 1:05 am - IP Logged

        The thing about models that many people don't seem to get is ~ if the model was as complex as the original problem, it would not be a "model".

        The weatherman doesn't know the vector, velocity, and temperature of every molecule when he gives the forecast. But, the forecast is usually good enough for a day or two.

        Insurance companies don't know exactly who will have an accident, or exactly how long a particular person will live, but they have a good idea of how many per 1,000 people, and in what age range. They set their rates accordingly.

        I'm not sure it's because these people (whoever they might be) don't seem to "get it" but that they don't believe a model exists for a random game. 

        What you refer to in the insurance industry is called Risk Pooling & the Law of Large Numbers. It's the basic principle that the larger the number of individual risks combined into a group, the more certainty there is in predicting the degree or amount of loss that will be incurred in any given period.  Of course nobody can predict the exact day a person will die or even the year.  However, based on historical data, it is possible to predict the likelihood of illness, death or disability that will occur among a certain group.  Insurance uses the science of probablility and statistics of morbidity & mortality.  The more people in the group and the more homogenous the group, the more certain the risk can be defined.  Example:  let's say a statistic shows that among a group of 200,000 55 year old non-smoking men living in Florida, 400 will die in a year.  In no way can anyone predict which 400 of the 200,000 men will die.   Insurance has to rely on data based on large numbers, because obviously they can't select a group of 100 or even 1,000 to reach a risk factor.  Anyway, I could continue, but my point is...what's your point? 

        I  also don't see how you can compare the weather with the lottery, since it has only so many variables (sunny, cloudy, rain) with something that has astronomical odds.  Even a state lottery game has about 1 in 23 million odds.  I mean, if I said it was going to rain tomorrow, I'd have a pretty good chance of getting it right, since it rains almost every day in FL between May & Nov.  So it's going to rain or it isn't.   I could spend $1,000 in one day on 1,000 tickets and there are still millions & millions of other possibilities.  A meteorologist uses science to predict the weather using instruments that measure temperature, air mass, wind, etc.  (and even then forecasts are wrong!) 

        Tonight Fantasy 5, which "only" has odds of about 1 in 377K was won by 1 person.  The numbers were 22-24-27-31-33    Please tell me what scientific data or what highly sensitive instrumentation was used to make the little white balls pick these numbers.

          justxploring's avatar - villiarna
          Wandering Aimlessly
          United States
          Member #25360
          November 5, 2005
          4461 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: June 27, 2008, 11:21 am - IP Logged

          My signature is "what happens most is most likely to happen again" and that is the idea behind my system. 

          Obviously my system doesn't look at winning numbers as a group because groups of winning numbers seldom appear together more than once during the life of the game even when the number pool is quite small as with West Virgina Cash25 (6/25) with only 177K possible combinations.  Groups of numbers do however share characteristics more than not many times and it's those shared characteristics or "trends" that I evaluate hoping to find one or two that might give me an edge when picking numbers to play.  When I reduce the number pool by half, I'm still looking at a lot of possible combinations.  If the winning combination is among them then the system has worked, its job was to reduce the size of the playing field, not predicting the winning combination.

          I want to elaborate, although we've gone way off the "lottery ego" subject...or have we?  Is it ego or logic that makes someone believe that a system can pick the right numbers?   Is it ego that makes someone feel that, if a person doesn't accept his reasoning, that person is wrong or confused?

          RJOh, I agree with you that the smaller the number pool, the better a system will work.  However, to use the examples time*treat listed (weather & insurance) these patterns are based on years and years of data.  Although I still believe weather is a science and the lottery is not, there are certain conditions in which a hurricane, tornado or other disaster can occur and yet, after hundreds of years of history, nobody can still predict exactly what areas will be affected and to what degree.  Recently a tornado hit OK and a boyscout camp and there were several deaths.  The warning was only minutes before it actually touched down.  This tragedy was very sad, but my point is ..  weather is probably a good example of how analyzing patterns, even those that aren't random, using multi-billion dollar equipment and information shared around the world, can't really determine the exact time & place or severity of a storm.

          Insurance is mathematically based on the law of probability. But it is also based on much larger numbers as I wrote in my last post. Take a lottery game that is drawn twice a week.  That is only 104 games.  Even in 10 years (if the matrix doesn't change) that is approximately 1,000 results to analyze.  No actuary with a job and a real desk would use 104 people to determine financial risk in a year or 1,000 in 10 years. 

          Regarding elimination & comparing it to insurance tables, if someone has a pre-existing condition, they are eliminated from the risk pool. If you have DUIs, too many accidents, an unsafe driving record, you are either eliminated or put in a high risk group. However, if you eliminate numbers from your system, they might still be drawn since you cannot eliminate numbers from the actual game. So, whether or not you believe the numbers will come out, they still exist and they still impact the results. People who are eliminated from a risk pool are no longer part of the group.  This is why I disgree with the analogy given. Of course I'm not saying these people don't continue to exist, but that they are not a risk to the insurance company.  Just because a lottery player removes numbers from his personal system, he must still include them as part of the playing field whether he likes it or not, since there is always the possibility they will being drawn.  If a person gets sick or has an accident without life, health or auto insurance, it has no impact whatsoever on the insurance company that didn't insure them.  On the other hand, you are still betting real money on a game with numbers you say probably won't be drawn.  I hope I am making sense here although, as one person often puts it, I don't "get it."  

            Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
            Zeta Reticuli Star System
            United States
            Member #30470
            January 17, 2006
            10350 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: June 27, 2008, 12:28 pm - IP Logged

            Think about this folks.

            Keno in its earliest form financed the building of the Great Wll of China. The original tickets had 80 characters of the Chinese alphabet, not numbers.

            Then came lotteries, which have been around for a very long time- before calculators, computers, software, etc...and still no one can "crack the code".

            As has been said here on LP, a specific set of numbers will hit, you just have to have 483 years to make sure it happens.

            Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

            Lep

            There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
              mid-Ohio
              United States
              Member #9
              March 24, 2001
              19825 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: June 27, 2008, 1:08 pm - IP Logged

              "I want to elaborate, although we've gone way off the "lottery ego" subject...or have we?  Is it ego or logic that makes someone believe that a system can pick the right numbers?   Is it ego that makes someone feel that, if a person doesn't accept his reasoning, that person is wrong or confused?"

              Quote by justxploring

              It may be more ego than logic that makes a player believe he can improve his chances of winning a jackpot by observing past drawings but I doubt is anyone would think others who follow a more conventional logic are confused.  Most people want players to try and explain the logic behind their unconventional thoughts even if it's illogical.

              When Columbus sailed west to reach lands that were to the east, many probably believed he was foolish and illogical too but they were basing their beliefs on what they thought they knew.

              The worst one can do picking lottery numbers illogical is lose which is likely to happen no matter how the numbers are picked.

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

                time*treat's avatar - radar

                United States
                Member #13130
                March 30, 2005
                2171 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: June 27, 2008, 2:27 pm - IP Logged

                @jxp, in the context of your comment to RJOh, your comment to me (now) makes sense... so I will respond.

                There is a premise that all system writers seek to eliminate individual numbers. This is not the case. Not everyone uses the same approach.

                Insurance (and lottery) and many other things can be analyzed using stats. The only thing that will exactly mimic a 5/36 game is itself. That may be a critical stumbling block for some, but not for everyone. E.g., some people toss everything out when there is a matrix change.

                There are potentially far more than 104 data points. I have compared results on my state's p5 game to p-5 games with larger and smaller pools in other states. From comparing notes with other people, I can say that many things happen with similar percents even though the overall total number of possible combinations may be 50% larger or smaller. In effect, those of us who kick around ideas together don't just have our individual game history. We have (in effect) the history of each others' games, too. (A pick 3 analogue would be "sister states")

                Besides, in jackpot games, how many times do you have to successfully predict 5 of 5? (It's less than the hit ratio of what is considered a great baseball player.) It's not like pick-3. Now, that's "work". Jester

                In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
                Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.

                  Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                  Zeta Reticuli Star System
                  United States
                  Member #30470
                  January 17, 2006
                  10350 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: June 27, 2008, 5:55 pm - IP Logged

                  Since we're on systems, consider the game of blackjack.

                  (Or any game for that matter, but we'll use blackjack).

                  Those strategy cards that tell you when to hit, stand, or double down - and never take insurance- are based on millions and millions of hands (results).

                  The thing is, you're not going to sit down and play millions of hands. You're going to play for a relatively very short time, and just maybe in that time, this is the night that the dealer has a "snapper" every time they ask you if you want insutance. Maybe this is the night that every time you double down on an eleven you get a three.

                  Granted in lotto you only have to get that solid hit once and you've got one heck of a sweet payoff, but you still have to realize what you're up against.

                  Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

                  Lep

                  There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

                    justxploring's avatar - villiarna
                    Wandering Aimlessly
                    United States
                    Member #25360
                    November 5, 2005
                    4461 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: June 27, 2008, 7:21 pm - IP Logged

                    Okay, time*treat, but is the insurance company the player or the lottery?  I would answer "Lottery" simply because it is analyzing loss/gain to make a profit.   They are gambling that the majority of people won't get sick or die or get in accidents (depending on what type of course)   The Lottery designs games that will only payout a certain percentage so they can make a big profit.  Maybe the lottery is more like an insurance company than I first admitted!  After all, both of them want the consumer to spend as much as he can for as long as he can without ever collecting the product.   

                    I guess one reason I keep bringing this up is that, even if I believed that a system might work, it only makes sense if you actually spend the money to test it.   I understand what you & RJOh are saying, but I would never gamble the amount of money needed to bet all the numbers a system might generate each week.

                      time*treat's avatar - radar

                      United States
                      Member #13130
                      March 30, 2005
                      2171 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: June 28, 2008, 12:11 am - IP Logged

                      @jxp: You would have to eventually spend real money to get a real benefit. Before "eventually", you could backtest it. There is also nothing stopping you from writing down a list of "pretend" plays in the morning (paper-trading), and checking the "coulda-been" results in the evening. 

                      I understand what you mean by not playing all the numbers a system might generate. Looking around, I see people post 300-400 numbers (for p3) and say "these are good for 3 days, anywhere", bragging on a box hit, and calling that a "system". Um... no. Crazy That is an abuse of the word, to someone reasonably good at math.

                      For many of us, part of the work is to reduce the playlist to something far more manageable/affordable. When you're dealing with 377,000~576,000 combos, things like total combos generated and max drawdown are major considerations. A single 4 of 5 match has real nice payout in some places, so don't forget those.

                      Overall, it looks like 2/3 believe in luck-and-nothing-but-the-luck & 1/3 believe they can shape their luck at least a little bit (I guess that's the ego you were asking about).


                      *Well, one big difference is that with insurance, your team (usually) doesn't actually want to "win"... Leavingand, be careful who you marry. 

                      In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
                      Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.

                        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                        mid-Ohio
                        United States
                        Member #9
                        March 24, 2001
                        19825 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: June 28, 2008, 3:17 pm - IP Logged

                        @jxp: You would have to eventually spend real money to get a real benefit. Before "eventually", you could backtest it. There is also nothing stopping you from writing down a list of "pretend" plays in the morning (paper-trading), and checking the "coulda-been" results in the evening. 

                        Gold and Platinum members are already doing that when they post hundreds of predictions daily on the prediction board.  Some have even won big on the prediction board but they just haven't been able to transfer those wins to the real world probably because they haven't limited their predictions to the same limits they have when they play for real.   Most players don't play 50 lines every drawing until they win big, some may play 50 lines when the jackpot get large or join a lottery pool to play that many lines.

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

                          justxploring's avatar - villiarna
                          Wandering Aimlessly
                          United States
                          Member #25360
                          November 5, 2005
                          4461 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: June 28, 2008, 3:36 pm - IP Logged

                          I actually started this thread for fun, which is obvious from the choices I listed.  But it's gotten interesting, and I guess we'll all have to agree to disagree on some issues.

                          I understand what both time*treat and RJOh are saying about systems.  I guess I could never jot down some numbers and see them hit that evening without pulling out some hair.  When I had most of my IRA invested in the stock market, I once read that making money has a tummy meter.  If you feel as if you're going to throw up & pass out everytime you lose a bundle, then you shouldn't be investing too much in something that fluctuates or is volatile.  You also can't live in the world of "what ifs" and "if onlys" or you'll go crazy.  Although the lottery isn't exactly the same, the mindset of a person who plays it can be.  So if someone can't play numbers without actually buying tickets, then it is probably best for him/her not to have a system. 

                          This "neurosis" probably applies to me since I still feel sick once in a while about numbers I didn't play that won a lot of money and try very hard not to write down combinations I don't actually play! 

                            jarasan's avatar - new patrick.gif
                            Harbinger
                            D.C./MD.
                            United States
                            Member #44103
                            July 30, 2006
                            5583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: June 28, 2008, 3:51 pm - IP Logged

                            I actually started this thread for fun, which is obvious from the choices I listed.  But it's gotten interesting, and I guess we'll all have to agree to disagree on some issues.

                            I understand what both time*treat and RJOh are saying about systems.  I guess I could never jot down some numbers and see them hit that evening without pulling out some hair.  When I had most of my IRA invested in the stock market, I once read that making money has a tummy meter.  If you feel as if you're going to throw up & pass out everytime you lose a bundle, then you shouldn't be investing too much in something that fluctuates or is volatile.  You also can't live in the world of "what ifs" and "if onlys" or you'll go crazy.  Although the lottery isn't exactly the same, the mindset of a person who plays it can be.  So if someone can't play numbers without actually buying tickets, then it is probably best for him/her not to have a system. 

                            This "neurosis" probably applies to me since I still feel sick once in a while about numbers I didn't play that won a lot of money and try very hard not to write down combinations I don't actually play! 

                            Good observation.  Why bother if you don't win or lose real money, for this reason I don't post a lot of predictions I play what I pick, because coulda, woulda, shoulda bum me out.

                            I wanted to say earlier about computers, they are just tools, ultimately  I decide from intuition and  gutz what maybe coming down the pike, and the numbers I am willing to wager on. At least I do it that way. 

                            Crazy

                              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                              mid-Ohio
                              United States
                              Member #9
                              March 24, 2001
                              19825 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: June 29, 2008, 1:07 am - IP Logged

                              Obvious developing and testing lottery systems and strategies is not for everyone who comes to LP looking for ways to improve their chances of winning but for some it's part of the enjoyment of playing the games and hopefully getting an edge on winning.  To them it makes as much sense as playing QPs, birthdays, hunches and numbers deride from dreams interpretations.

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