Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 6, 2016, 4:42 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

My digit system for pick-5 or pick-6 lottery

Topic closed. 684 replies. Last post 6 years ago by jimmy4164.

Page 26 of 46
4.910
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
Posted: July 26, 2010, 4:16 am - IP Logged

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

decide what is best for the rest of us.

Unbelievable!  So, then, are you telling me that you don't believe the "Gambler's Fallacy" is really a fallacy?  If your answer is yes, then that explains why you believe that "some things occure more often then others" and why you're baffled that I don't agree with you.

Furthermore, what have I said at this site that gives you the impression that I want the lottery to go away?  If you check, you'll find I'm on record on several occassions declaring that I play the lottery and feel the money I spend is well worth it to me as entertainment, with the addional bonus that I COULD win a pile of money.  And why would I want the stock market to go away?  I make a living as a trader!

Here is a challenge for you.  You say you are a computer programmer with 25 years experience.  There are sufficient past results available to write a program to BACKTEST any system you can design.  If it's simple enough for a player to use for picking numbers it's simple enough to program a BACKTEST for.  I'm sure you already know this.  Make it easy; program for the Pick-3, Straight.  Pennsylvania has 33+ years of Pick-3 results available, 1977-Date.  You can start your backtest as many days into the data as the system being tested requires.  The input data file is simple - 12,200 lines containing 2 fields, Date, NNN.  So, you'll have 33+ years testing REAL data to determine to what extent your system beats the odds expected from probability theory.  I'm really surprised that no one even discusses backtests of the various systems proposed.  I'm new here.  How have you all been validating your work?

Based on Pennsylvania's payoff of $500 on a $1 wager on the Pick-3 Straight: 

I PREDICT that if you start with, say, $12,000.00, and your program is bug-free, no matter what system you design, at the end of the 33 years, you will end up with approximately $6,000.00.  (The reason for starting with $12000 is to cover the POSSIBILITY of going the entire 33 years without a hit. Smile ) (Do you know anybody like that?)

Remember, you will be using the actual historical Lottery draws, so there can be no quibbling over the results.  And of course, you must be willing to make the source code available for an independent audit.  Wink

PROVE ME WRONG!

If you aren't happy with the results of the Straight backtest, you can then tackle the more complex problem of backtesting Box tickets, or even a Box/Straight Combo system.

    Rockwell's avatar - redordead
    New York
    United States
    Member #66776
    November 6, 2008
    91 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: July 26, 2010, 2:24 pm - IP Logged

    Wikipedia is a website that contains "opinions" of people like me and you. It's not a factual database, like an encyclopedia.

     

    Thanks RL for your system. You cannot debate with the ignorance of others. Why would anyone post anti-lottery notions on a lottery website? There's only one fallacy here...

     

    ROCK

    Tomorrow's numbers are in Todays results!

      GiveFive's avatar - Lottery-026.jpg
      NY State
      United States
      Member #92609
      June 10, 2010
      3701 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:11 pm - IP Logged

      Wikipedia is a website that contains "opinions" of people like me and you. It's not a factual database, like an encyclopedia.

       

      Thanks RL for your system. You cannot debate with the ignorance of others. Why would anyone post anti-lottery notions on a lottery website? There's only one fallacy here...

       

      ROCK

      "Thanks RL for your system. You cannot debate with the ignorance of others. Why would anyone post anti-lottery notions on a lottery website? There's only one fallacy here..."

      Thanks Rock!  I couldnt have said it better myself!

      About playing the lottery --  You will lose more than you win. Until you hit a jackpot.  Then everything changes!

        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

        United States
        Member #59354
        March 13, 2008
        3968 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:28 pm - IP Logged

        Jimmy

        Let me get this straight.  You want me to build you a software program that can beat the odds

        and win more often than probability theory would allow for.   You then want the source code so

        that it can be proven.  I am not a pick-3/4 player, these games consist of nothing more than picking

        a number from 000 to 999 and 0000 to 9999. This could take some time, but I will get right on it. 

        I normally ask for 50% up front for a job of this undertaking.  We can set up a funds transfer any

        way you like.  My current rate is $80.00 per hour.  This will be a little pricey but If you are willing to

        pay then I see no problem.   

        RL

        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:30 pm - IP Logged

          "Thanks RL for your system. You cannot debate with the ignorance of others. Why would anyone post anti-lottery notions on a lottery website? There's only one fallacy here..."

          Thanks Rock!  I couldnt have said it better myself!

          Where above is the most obvious exhibition of my ignorance?


            United States
            Member #43694
            July 23, 2006
            184 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:42 pm - IP Logged

            Hi winsum

             

            Do you have one for the Texas cash five 5/37?


              United States
              Member #43694
              July 23, 2006
              184 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:47 pm - IP Logged

              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

               


              Why don't you leave this thread?

              You are wasting your time here, my time, and Rl tiime, and everybodys time.

              looks like you have a phycological need to prove your point.

              If so go start your own thread.


                United States
                Member #93947
                July 10, 2010
                2180 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:48 pm - IP Logged

                Jimmy

                Let me get this straight.  You want me to build you a software program that can beat the odds

                and win more often than probability theory would allow for.   You then want the source code so

                that it can be proven.  I am not a pick-3/4 player, these games consist of nothing more than picking

                a number from 000 to 999 and 0000 to 9999. This could take some time, but I will get right on it. 

                I normally ask for 50% up front for a job of this undertaking.  We can set up a funds transfer any

                way you like.  My current rate is $80.00 per hour.  This will be a little pricey but If you are willing to

                pay then I see no problem.   

                RL

                RL,

                I thought you would be curious about the performance of your methods yourself.  I don't need anyone else to write the program I described for 2 reasons.  1) I would and could write it myself if I thought it would be a useful tool,  and 2), the result is already known from theory, which I predicted above.  Consequently, it would be useless.

                I take it you do not accept the challenge to try to PROVE ME WRONG.

                --Jimmy


                  United States
                  Member #43694
                  July 23, 2006
                  184 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:52 pm - IP Logged

                  Unbelievable!  So, then, are you telling me that you don't believe the "Gambler's Fallacy" is really a fallacy?  If your answer is yes, then that explains why you believe that "some things occure more often then others" and why you're baffled that I don't agree with you.

                  Furthermore, what have I said at this site that gives you the impression that I want the lottery to go away?  If you check, you'll find I'm on record on several occassions declaring that I play the lottery and feel the money I spend is well worth it to me as entertainment, with the addional bonus that I COULD win a pile of money.  And why would I want the stock market to go away?  I make a living as a trader!

                  Here is a challenge for you.  You say you are a computer programmer with 25 years experience.  There are sufficient past results available to write a program to BACKTEST any system you can design.  If it's simple enough for a player to use for picking numbers it's simple enough to program a BACKTEST for.  I'm sure you already know this.  Make it easy; program for the Pick-3, Straight.  Pennsylvania has 33+ years of Pick-3 results available, 1977-Date.  You can start your backtest as many days into the data as the system being tested requires.  The input data file is simple - 12,200 lines containing 2 fields, Date, NNN.  So, you'll have 33+ years testing REAL data to determine to what extent your system beats the odds expected from probability theory.  I'm really surprised that no one even discusses backtests of the various systems proposed.  I'm new here.  How have you all been validating your work?

                  Based on Pennsylvania's payoff of $500 on a $1 wager on the Pick-3 Straight: 

                  I PREDICT that if you start with, say, $12,000.00, and your program is bug-free, no matter what system you design, at the end of the 33 years, you will end up with approximately $6,000.00.  (The reason for starting with $12000 is to cover the POSSIBILITY of going the entire 33 years without a hit. Smile ) (Do you know anybody like that?)

                  Remember, you will be using the actual historical Lottery draws, so there can be no quibbling over the results.  And of course, you must be willing to make the source code available for an independent audit.  Wink

                  PROVE ME WRONG!

                  If you aren't happy with the results of the Straight backtest, you can then tackle the more complex problem of backtesting Box tickets, or even a Box/Straight Combo system.

                  RL

                   

                  Please ignore this sucker!!

                  do not dignify him with a reply.Bat


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: July 26, 2010, 3:54 pm - IP Logged

                    Why don't you leave this thread?

                    You are wasting your time here, my time, and Rl tiime, and everybodys time.

                    looks like you have a phycological need to prove your point.

                    If so go start your own thread.

                    Good idea RedToad!

                    Regarding psychological needs, perhaps you and RL will now have more time to ponder your need to believe in the predictability of lotteries.

                    --Bye


                      United States
                      Member #43694
                      July 23, 2006
                      184 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: July 26, 2010, 4:01 pm - IP Logged

                      Good idea RedToad!

                      Regarding psychological needs, perhaps you and RL will now have more time to ponder your need to believe in the predictability of lotteries.

                      --Bye

                      YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                       

                      Now get the hell out of this thread.

                        Avatar
                        Clearwater, FL
                        United States
                        Member #31472
                        January 29, 2006
                        167 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: July 26, 2010, 4:24 pm - IP Logged

                        YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                         

                        Now get the hell out of this thread.

                        Please Do Not Feed the Troll!

                          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                          United States
                          Member #59354
                          March 13, 2008
                          3968 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: July 26, 2010, 4:24 pm - IP Logged

                          RL,

                          I thought you would be curious about the performance of your methods yourself.  I don't need anyone else to write the program I described for 2 reasons.  1) I would and could write it myself if I thought it would be a useful tool,  and 2), the result is already known from theory, which I predicted above.  Consequently, it would be useless.

                          I take it you do not accept the challenge to try to PROVE ME WRONG.

                          --Jimmy

                          Jimmy

                          You are fixated on the belief that everyone is trying to predict the next numbers from only what has or

                          has not happened in the past. 

                          If I used only this method than I would have quit this effort very long ago.  This is what you don't

                          understand.  There are far better methods; far, far, better.  You are living in the past and cannot bring

                          yourself to believe that anything can be done to improve ones play.  And yes I am interested but don't

                          ask me to invest my time to teach you.   You would not believe it if you seen it, This is a work in progress

                          that has proven to me that it can and has been done.  Yesterday I played 15 sets and hit one 3of5

                          and 1 2of 5. I lost $4.00.  This was what I would call a bad day.  This however still beats the odds for

                          a 3of5 match.  Since I was trying to predict the exact set and not just leaving it up to chance I think

                          this would show that it can be done.  I play on paper most days and it cost me nothing. I also build

                          into my software a method that allows a person to play from a randomly selected drawing within the

                          database. This allows a person to play real data, All filters and data match everything from the day of

                          that drawing.  It is like going back in time and playing with only what was known up to that point.

                          This gives a person the ability to test the system without buying any tickets using real data.  

                           

                          Please don't waste any more time here.

                          RL

                          Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                          I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                          they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                          USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                            US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                            United States
                            Member #59354
                            March 13, 2008
                            3968 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: July 26, 2010, 5:04 pm - IP Logged

                            "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."


                            "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."

                             

                            Albert Einstein

                            Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                            I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                            they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                            USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                              US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                              jimjwright's avatar - Yellow 3.png
                              Park City, UT
                              United States
                              Member #69864
                              January 18, 2009
                              993 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: July 27, 2010, 12:18 am - IP Logged

                              My comment is not really lottery related but I think it relates a little to this conversation.  I am a software architect and was fortunate enough to cash in some stock options from a previous job that allowed me the luxury to take a few years off and travel across Europe.  Once I got back I built a game room and bought a 9' pool table.  I becames obsessed with pool (I do have an obsessive personality) and would play all day.  I bought an advanced training tape that was a workout for developing a pure stroke.  Alot of the workout was about being able to repeat a shot 10 times in a row and to continue practicing a particular shot until you could do it 10 times in a row.  After each shot was demoed on the tape I would stop the tape and go to the pool table until I could do it.  Well it came to the end of the tape and he had one last show.  The instructor said if you could do this shot then you had had an absolutely perfect stroke in that you hit the ball dead center every time.  So I turned off the tape and went to the pool table to try and do it 10 times in a row.  Most of the other shots it took me anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours.  This one took me 2 days before I did it one time 10 times in a row.  I then wanted to accomplish this feat again and it took me another day.  So it took me 3 days to accomplish the shot 10 times in a row two times.  I continued to practice the shot and finally by the end of the week, I got to where it took me less than 5 minutes to make the shot 10 times in a row.  Another week past and I finally turned on the tape expecting to just see credits rolling.  This is when the instructor said "For the last shot just shoot it until you do it 10 times, no one can make that shot 10 times in a row!".    If I had watched the tape completely thru I would have had a completely different expectation of my results.  Because I hadn't watched that last 10 seconds of the tape I worked by butt off for 1 week under the assumption that any good pool player could make this shot 10 times in a row.  This is the power of the mind.  Those that say that you "can't" have already biased there mind to an expected result, its those that can keep there minds free are the ones that are going to make the next progression.

                              Jimmy

                                 
                                Page 26 of 46