United States
Member #91,937
May 28, 2010
113 Posts
Offline
yep, my brother daughter married an airforce pilot. i don't known if i can tell you about my connection down in dallas fortworth lets just say i been on base there.
United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by CARBOB on Jul 25, 2010
No , but I will!! Never noticed you were from Mo. I spent a lot of time in Mo, at Whiteman AFB, Knob Noster,Bulter, Sedalia and quite a few other towns, where there were missile sites.
CB
Iam old AF myself. I think most of the old sites are closed down now. What years were you in.
I live in SW MO. Family on dad's side setteled here in the mid 1850's in the branson area been
COLUMBUS,GA. United States
Member #4,924
June 3, 2004
6,719 Posts
Offline
Part of 61,62,63, spent about 6 months in 63. TDY out of Orlando AFB, FL. We had a detachment there. Spent quite a few evenings in Warrensburg in bar where mostly college kids hung out!!
United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by CARBOB on Jul 25, 2010
Part of 61,62,63, spent about 6 months in 63. TDY out of Orlando AFB, FL. We had a detachment there. Spent quite a few evenings in Warrensburg in bar where mostly college kids hung out!!
That was before my time, I did spend some time at Eglin down your way. We use to TDY for
training. I love the Pensacola area. use to vacation there, hate to see it now with the oil
United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
RL,
I completely agree with this statement. It's why I play the lottery.
"A lottery player considers the odds but plays anyway,
Kind of like a certain paint store worker that may of considered the
odds but choose to sing anyway. And as Forest would say "that's all I
got to say about that"
This, however, contradicts the above.
"A person will win or lose not based on the odds but on the ticket he or she holds
in their hand."
Either you believe the odds are against you, and decide to play anyway, or you don't believe the odds have anything to do with your chances of winning. You can't logically take both positions.
Also, even if something has gone awry in the winner picking process, either through human intervention or mechanical wear and tear, there can be no rationale for separating the digits in 2 digit numbers from a Pick-5 lottery machine where they are quite firmly "glued" together. Until I can get past these issues, I'm stuck at the beginning of your system description.
For me, your methods will likely produce more desirable plays than Lottery QPs, but NOT because they will increase my overall odds of winning a jackpot. What they appear to do is generate sets that increase the number of unique 2 and 3 digit sets. To do more than this would require more capital than most can muster. If you buy 10 Pick-6 tickets per draw using your method, and I always buy 10 identical tickets containing 1-2-3-4-5-6, you will get 10 times as many wins, but the size of my wins will be 10 times yours! (I prefer your approach or Quick Picks.) As Nicholas Taleb would say, unless a BLACK SWAN appears at your door some day, after a few thousand years, you will win what the Lottery Commissions are required by law to return to ticket holders. In most states, this is 50% of the gross of the tickets purchased.
United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jul 25, 2010
RL,
I completely agree with this statement. It's why I play the lottery.
"A lottery player considers the odds but plays anyway,
Kind of like a certain paint store worker that may of considered the
odds but choose to sing anyway. And as Forest would say "that's all I
got to say about that"
This, however, contradicts the above.
"A person will win or lose not based on the odds but on the ticket he or she holds
in their hand."
Either you believe the odds are against you, and decide to play anyway, or you don't believe the odds have anything to do with your chances of winning. You can't logically take both positions.
Also, even if something has gone awry in the winner picking process, either through human intervention or mechanical wear and tear, there can be no rationale for separating the digits in 2 digit numbers from a Pick-5 lottery machine where they are quite firmly "glued" together. Until I can get past these issues, I'm stuck at the beginning of your system description.
For me, your methods will likely produce more desirable plays than Lottery QPs, but NOT because they will increase my overall odds of winning a jackpot. What they appear to do is generate sets that increase the number of unique 2 and 3 digit sets. To do more than this would require more capital than most can muster. If you buy 10 Pick-6 tickets per draw using your method, and I always buy 10 identical tickets containing 1-2-3-4-5-6, you will get 10 times as many wins, but the size of my wins will be 10 times yours! (I prefer your approach or Quick Picks.) As Nicholas Taleb would say, unless a BLACK SWAN appears at your door some day, after a few thousand years, you will win what the Lottery Commissions are required by law to return to ticket holders. In most states, this is 50% of the gross of the tickets purchased.
--Jimmy
jimmy
#1. I know of know one who has won a lottery without a ticket
#2. The balls do not know what the odds are for the game.
#3. The odds have nothing to do with the winning set.
#4. The odds are beat each time someone wins the jackpot or
the lower prizes based on tickets purchased.
In the lottery the overall Odds are used to describe the chance of two sets matching.
Statistics would agree with the odds but do not allow for the individual player or
system. If you were looking at the whole picture it would be very easy to dismiss
the system player based on the stats. Blinded by the masses. You put everyone
into the same basket from calculations made using data taken from the overall
data and see nothing unusual. I would question any calculation made using this
sort of thinking. True, one can get some sort of average from this but to say that
it pertains to everyone is very short sided.
Odds are not a law that governs anything. The odds cannot be used to describe a
winning ticket other than to say "they beat the odds".
In a game with 100,000 possible sets the odds of winning are 1 in 100,000 for each set
played. If 2 sets are played by the same person then this person has a 2 in 100,000
chance of winning based on the odds.
I do not live by the odds. I do better than the odds would allow for every day. I do
make many calculations based on nCR but not to calculate odds. You may think this
is a contradiction but to me it is not. If I used it to determind my chances then yes,
but I don't. You also state that picking digits has no advantage, Well that's another
case for the basket.
In your few post you have accused me of being, "disingenuous", and perhaps a "purveyor
of lottery software". both of which are false statments. I have worked very hard to describe
this system. I have gotten many PM's from people that have done well using it. It is not
some magic software, It is a way to make fewer choices to reduce sets with the idea being
that "Fewer choices means fewer mistakes." I can still make many mistakes in my selections
and still beat the odds for my game using this system. Some people will have different results
because I built this custom for me.
Even those that have not won any big amount often say that had they changed only one or
two settings they would have been in the money. I cannot teach anyone to make the correct
decisions, I can give them better tools. fewer choices fewer, mistakes. You will most likely
accuse me of using odds because I claim to beat the odds, but I think that most people
New York United States
Member #66,774
November 6, 2008
91 Posts
Offline
Hi RL,
I appreciate your help. I appreciate your posting of it as well. Sometimes you get labeled for your beliefs, but many of us are not like that and I for one agree with your assessment.
United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on Jul 25, 2010
jimmy
#1. I know of know one who has won a lottery without a ticket
#2. The balls do not know what the odds are for the game.
#3. The odds have nothing to do with the winning set.
#4. The odds are beat each time someone wins the jackpot or
the lower prizes based on tickets purchased.
In the lottery the overall Odds are used to describe the chance of two sets matching.
Statistics would agree with the odds but do not allow for the individual player or
system. If you were looking at the whole picture it would be very easy to dismiss
the system player based on the stats. Blinded by the masses. You put everyone
into the same basket from calculations made using data taken from the overall
data and see nothing unusual. I would question any calculation made using this
sort of thinking. True, one can get some sort of average from this but to say that
it pertains to everyone is very short sided.
Odds are not a law that governs anything. The odds cannot be used to describe a
winning ticket other than to say "they beat the odds".
In a game with 100,000 possible sets the odds of winning are 1 in 100,000 for each set
played. If 2 sets are played by the same person then this person has a 2 in 100,000
chance of winning based on the odds.
I do not live by the odds. I do better than the odds would allow for every day. I do
make many calculations based on nCR but not to calculate odds. You may think this
is a contradiction but to me it is not. If I used it to determind my chances then yes,
but I don't. You also state that picking digits has no advantage, Well that's another
case for the basket.
In your few post you have accused me of being, "disingenuous", and perhaps a "purveyor
of lottery software". both of which are false statments. I have worked very hard to describe
this system. I have gotten many PM's from people that have done well using it. It is not
some magic software, It is a way to make fewer choices to reduce sets with the idea being
that "Fewer choices means fewer mistakes." I can still make many mistakes in my selections
and still beat the odds for my game using this system. Some people will have different results
because I built this custom for me.
Even those that have not won any big amount often say that had they changed only one or
two settings they would have been in the money. I cannot teach anyone to make the correct
decisions, I can give them better tools. fewer choices fewer, mistakes. You will most likely
accuse me of using odds because I claim to beat the odds, but I think that most people
understand what I am saying here.
RL
RL,
There is one unequivocally true statement in your Post above:
"In a game with 100,000 possible sets the odds of winning are 1 in 100,000 for each set
played. If 2 sets are played by the same person then this person has a 2 in 100,000
chance of winning based on the odds."
Unfortunately, I either can't agree, or I'm completely baffled by most everything else.
E.G., what value is there in pointing out the obvious fact that you must buy a ticket to win?
Most people play lotteries for years. The important question that everyone must answer for themselves is, "How much money can I expect to win (or lose) over the LONG HAUL, using my chosen method?" All references to actual winnings over specific time periods that I've read here are vague, at best.
PLEASE!
1) Go to Wikipedia and enter "Gambler's Fallacy" into the search box and click Search.
2) Read the article in its entirety, slowly.
3) If you still believe most of what you wrote above, go back to 1)
4) Great! Perhaps we can now have a more productive discussion.
United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jul 26, 2010
RL,
There is one unequivocally true statement in your Post above:
"In a game with 100,000 possible sets the odds of winning are 1 in 100,000 for each set
played. If 2 sets are played by the same person then this person has a 2 in 100,000
chance of winning based on the odds."
Unfortunately, I either can't agree, or I'm completely baffled by most everything else.
E.G., what value is there in pointing out the obvious fact that you must buy a ticket to win?
Most people play lotteries for years. The important question that everyone must answer for themselves is, "How much money can I expect to win (or lose) over the LONG HAUL, using my chosen method?" All references to actual winnings over specific time periods that I've read here are vague, at best.
PLEASE!
1) Go to Wikipedia and enter "Gambler's Fallacy" into the search box and click Search.
2) Read the article in its entirety, slowly.
3) If you still believe most of what you wrote above, go back to 1)
4) Great! Perhaps we can now have a more productive discussion.
--Jimmy
Read It, Nothing new. I remember it from psych-101 many years ago. I filed it between "Flat world"
and "If God wanted us to fly he would have given us wings" I am sure you can quote from those too.
You see, I know what I know and you cannot change my mind. Your inabilty to accept that some things
occure more often then others is what baffles me. I make choices and live by the results. Maybe your
time would be better spent trying to get the states to suspend all lotteries or just sell scratchers. And
while you are at it, maybe you can get the stock exchange closed too. This is America and the last time
I checked I was still free to play the lottery as I see fit. There are those that would like to dictate and