Welcome Guest
You last visited January 22, 2017, 7:16 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 36 of 46

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4091 Posts
Online
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 8:51 am - IP Logged

RL

I Do plan to take a break.

But I will be watching the trend, and practicing.

The only thing with practicing, is when you hit it big in practice, I say only if I had played !!!!

RT

Wait tell you hit a 5 by 5 which you did not play.  But think of it this way if you can hit once you

can hit it again.  I have hit 5 many times in practice and this is why I keep going.  I like to think

this way, If I can hit more 3's then expected then why not a 4.  If i can hit 4's more than expected

then why not a 5 and if I can do it once I can do it again.

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

Trump / 2016 & 2020

Emerald City
United States
Member #83324
December 4, 2009
64 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 8:56 am - IP Logged

I've been testing out this system and done this on pen and paper and yes this system works, i've just matched 5 numbers from my states lotto game, and this past powerball draw 4 numbers

really tested this system out since its first inception, used about 50 lines, and only if i could reduce this even more.

thanks RL for a logical system, now if i have put money where there pencial and paper is!!

RT same thing here if i only had played.  So thats my testimony on this sytem

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 12:27 pm - IP Logged

Thanks for your confirmation. I personally have not doubted it.

Btw if playing 50 combos is way to many for you why not wheel them ?

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 12:44 pm - IP Logged

Forgot to add that I will start tracking my game using RL's system with pen an paper. If I see I'm able to reduce number of combination to a playable set then will most probably switch to that one from the strategy I currently use for pick-5, though it beats random play, but have not seen when testing any 5 of 5.

Emerald City
United States
Member #83324
December 4, 2009
64 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 3:09 pm - IP Logged

Forgot to add that I will start tracking my game using RL's system with pen an paper. If I see I'm able to reduce number of combination to a playable set then will most probably switch to that one from the strategy I currently use for pick-5, though it beats random play, but have not seen when testing any 5 of 5.

i know that 50 was quite alot, but i was practicing on pen and paper.

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 4:05 pm - IP Logged

RL,

If I may I have a following question. As I play 5/42 the data shows some differences as compared with 5/39.

That is Base Digits 1, 2 and 3 are on average in 58% of the draws, while 1 and 2 in 80% of draws. Going for a higher probability  should I then select 1 and 2 only and skip 3?

Non- base digits are a bit differently distributed:

1-  2% of draws

2- 34% of draws

3- 34% of draws

4- 22% of draws

5-  3% of draws

ID of 6 seems to be the best with 42% of hits, then comes ID 5 with 28%.

Non-base repeating digit rate is 50% for 0 and  38% for 1 while Double Basic ones show :

0- 12%

1-  42%

2-  32%

3-  14%

What, in your opinion, would be the best strategy, given the data?

Best rgds

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 14, 2010, 5:37 pm - IP Logged

i know that 50 was quite alot, but i was practicing on pen and paper.

Yes, I realize that, but anyway I think that even practicing it would be interesting to see where wheeling them would take you.

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4091 Posts
Online
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 4:48 am - IP Logged

RL,

If I may I have a following question. As I play 5/42 the data shows some differences as compared with 5/39.

That is Base Digits 1, 2 and 3 are on average in 58% of the draws, while 1 and 2 in 80% of draws. Going for a higher probability  should I then select 1 and 2 only and skip 3?

Non- base digits are a bit differently distributed:

1-  2% of draws

2- 34% of draws

3- 34% of draws

4- 22% of draws

5-  3% of draws

ID of 6 seems to be the best with 42% of hits, then comes ID 5 with 28%.

Non-base repeating digit rate is 50% for 0 and  38% for 1 while Double Basic ones show :

0- 12%

1-  42%

2-  32%

3-  14%

What, in your opinion, would be the best strategy, given the data?

Best rgds

With a 5-42 matrix then you have 14 one's and 14 two's but only 13 three's, you also have three

more four's and one more zero then in a 5-39

01-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-31 + 41

02-12-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-32 + 42

03-13-23-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39

04-14-24-34 + 40-41-42

05-15-25-35

06-16-26-36

07-17-27-37

08-18-28-38

09-19-29-39

10-20-30 + 40

Using the above it is very easy to calculate the expected percents for each digit within

a set of numbers.

I should have included this within the post and thank you for bringing it up.  The set

played should always mimic the expected distribution of digits based upon the whole.

This is why I say that before the first drawing I knew the values I would use most in building

the sets I play.  When I remove digits not to play I use the same technique.  This is also

the reason I don't have any special regard for the so called randomness of the drawing.

People see the balls bouncing around and say that there is know way to predict what the

next set will be and they are perfectly right.  What they don't understand is that I don't

predict anything.   I use the word predict when I should have used mimic because this is

really what I am doing.  I know the exact number of the balls that have a digit "1" and

what the odds are for one of those balls being drawn.  I think in terms of what is really

going on within the drawing process.  I wish they would add more air and speed up the

tumbler and really mix the balls up, the more the better.  I have seen many drawings that

resembled a bad shuffle of a deck of cards.  The balls are just kind of scooted back and

forth and don't get properly mixed before the selection begins.  I want to see a popcorn

on steroids mixing before any ball is drawn.  Some people think that the set 1-2-3-4-5

is as good of play as any other but not me.  While it is one of the possible sets and in

that regard has the same odds as any other set, many other factors must be considered.

I think if it ever happends it will be a RNG that produces it.   My advice to everyone would

be to find commonalities of sets that are drawn most and then mimic those commonalities

in every set you play making a few adjustments along the way. Anything that is removed

be it a digit, number or whatever always has it's risk but I know of no way to reduce sets

without removing something.

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

Trump / 2016 & 2020

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 4:57 am - IP Logged

With a 5-42 matrix then you have 14 one's and 14 two's but only 13 three's, you also have three

more four's and one more zero then in a 5-39

01-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-31 + 41

02-12-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-32 + 42

03-13-23-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39

04-14-24-34 + 40-41-42

05-15-25-35

06-16-26-36

07-17-27-37

08-18-28-38

09-19-29-39

10-20-30 + 40

Using the above it is very easy to calculate the expected percents for each digit within

a set of numbers.

I should have included this within the post and thank you for bringing it up.  The set

played should always mimic the expected distribution of digits based upon the whole.

This is why I say that before the first drawing I knew the values I would use most in building

the sets I play.  When I remove digits not to play I use the same technique.  This is also

the reason I don't have any special regard for the so called randomness of the drawing.

People see the balls bouncing around and say that there is know way to predict what the

next set will be and they are perfectly right.  What they don't understand is that I don't

predict anything.   I use the word predict when I should have used mimic because this is

really what I am doing.  I know the exact number of the balls that have a digit "1" and

what the odds are for one of those balls being drawn.  I think in terms of what is really

going on within the drawing process.  I wish they would add more air and speed up the

tumbler and really mix the balls up, the more the better.  I have seen many drawings that

resembled a bad shuffle of a deck of cards.  The balls are just kind of scooted back and

forth and don't get properly mixed before the selection begins.  I want to see a popcorn

on steroids mixing before any ball is drawn.  Some people think that the set 1-2-3-4-5

is as good of play as any other but not me.  While it is one of the possible sets and in

that regard has the same odds as any other set, many other factors must be considered.

I think if it ever happends it will be a RNG that produces it.   My advice to everyone would

be to find commonalities of sets that are drawn most and then mimic those commonalities

in every set you play making a few adjustments along the way. Anything that is removed

be it a digit, number or whatever always has it's risk but I know of no way to reduce sets

without removing something.

RL

"Anything that is removed be it a digit, number or whatever always has

it's risk but I know of no way to reduce sets without removing something."

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 4:58 am - IP Logged

With a 5-42 matrix then you have 14 one's and 14 two's but only 13 three's, you also have three

more four's and one more zero then in a 5-39

01-10-11-12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-31 + 41

02-12-20-21-22-23-24-25-26-27-28-29-32 + 42

03-13-23-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-38-39

04-14-24-34 + 40-41-42

05-15-25-35

06-16-26-36

07-17-27-37

08-18-28-38

09-19-29-39

10-20-30 + 40

Using the above it is very easy to calculate the expected percents for each digit within

a set of numbers.

I should have included this within the post and thank you for bringing it up.  The set

played should always mimic the expected distribution of digits based upon the whole.

This is why I say that before the first drawing I knew the values I would use most in building

the sets I play.  When I remove digits not to play I use the same technique.  This is also

the reason I don't have any special regard for the so called randomness of the drawing.

People see the balls bouncing around and say that there is know way to predict what the

next set will be and they are perfectly right.  What they don't understand is that I don't

predict anything.   I use the word predict when I should have used mimic because this is

really what I am doing.  I know the exact number of the balls that have a digit "1" and

what the odds are for one of those balls being drawn.  I think in terms of what is really

going on within the drawing process.  I wish they would add more air and speed up the

tumbler and really mix the balls up, the more the better.  I have seen many drawings that

resembled a bad shuffle of a deck of cards.  The balls are just kind of scooted back and

forth and don't get properly mixed before the selection begins.  I want to see a popcorn

on steroids mixing before any ball is drawn.  Some people think that the set 1-2-3-4-5

is as good of play as any other but not me.  While it is one of the possible sets and in

that regard has the same odds as any other set, many other factors must be considered.

I think if it ever happends it will be a RNG that produces it.   My advice to everyone would

be to find commonalities of sets that are drawn most and then mimic those commonalities

in every set you play making a few adjustments along the way. Anything that is removed

be it a digit, number or whatever always has it's risk but I know of no way to reduce sets

without removing something.

RL

RL,

Thanks a lot for your post. In the meantime I did give it a thought or two. Of course, the data must be a bit different as the game format differs.

Still 1, 2 and 3 should be played as base numbers. And 4 for sure as non-base one. Funny to say but 0 proves a good bet as well.

The things will be still different for 6/49 game.

All the best

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4091 Posts
Online
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 5:22 am - IP Logged

RL,

Thanks a lot for your post. In the meantime I did give it a thought or two. Of course, the data must be a bit different as the game format differs.

Still 1, 2 and 3 should be played as base numbers. And 4 for sure as non-base one. Funny to say but 0 proves a good bet as well.

The things will be still different for 6/49 game.

All the best

Try to time the plays when using digit 3, If you can do this with any accuracy then it would

be very much to your advantage.  Look at the difference between 1-2 and 1-2-3.  I would

include 1-2 in every drawing and add 3 on days based odds given for the overall.  Meaning

if digit 3 was out 2 or more days I would include it for sure.

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

Trump / 2016 & 2020

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 5:30 am - IP Logged

Try to time the plays when using digit 3, If you can do this with any accuracy then it would

be very much to your advantage.  Look at the difference between 1-2 and 1-2-3.  I would

include 1-2 in every drawing and add 3 on days based odds given for the overall.  Meaning

if digit 3 was out 2 or more days I would include it for sure.

RL

RL,

That's correct, but stiil the problem I will be facing is ID's. Six is definitely the best( 50% better than) 5,  with 5 lagging behind, not to mention 7 or 4. That means that anyway playing 3 on quite a regular basis is better than playing 1 and 2 only as that leaves me with more less frequent digits to fill in. Or I'm mistaken?

I see you bet more on trend reversal than riding on it meaning waiting for , say 3 occurences and then switch around.

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 5:38 am - IP Logged

I wanted to ask you guys if in your game you also see some cases when Base numbers consitute as few as 1 , 2 or 3 of total digits?

Krakow
Poland
Member #86302
February 2, 2010
892 Posts
Offline
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 6:43 am - IP Logged

Well, I will have a try. I followed the procedure( hope with not toomany mistakes) and wound up with 9- number set for pick-5. Altogether it gives 126 combinations.

I made a 3 of 5 wheel that gave me 2 combos to play. Let's have a try. What the say is " Fortune smiles at the brave ones"

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4091 Posts
Online
 Posted: September 15, 2010, 6:45 am - IP Logged

RL,

That's correct, but stiil the problem I will be facing is ID's. Six is definitely the best( 50% better than) 5,  with 5 lagging behind, not to mention 7 or 4. That means that anyway playing 3 on quite a regular basis is better than playing 1 and 2 only as that leaves me with more less frequent digits to fill in. Or I'm mistaken?

I see you bet more on trend reversal than riding on it meaning waiting for , say 3 occurences and then switch around.

I use what I call a bias search.  It's kind of like looking for runs within the secondary data

which I believe gives a little insight as to the interworkings of the RNG.  I don't know how

effective it would be for a Ball-Drop lottery but works well enough for RNG's.  It only gives

the stats for each value and with a little study can often lead to the correct choice.  when I

can lock in on the ID and TD values then the rest is childs play.  I can hit them 3 or 4 times

within 7 days but never know for sure which days are correct.  Lets say that we have from

the possible ID values of 2 to 8 and TD 5 to 10 which gives 7ea ID's and  6ea TD's  7*6= 42

different possible settings.  ID=5 to ID=6 and TD=8 to TD=10 make up a very large percent

of drawings.  This still gives 6 choices when selecting from these values.  91% of drawings

fall under the TD=8 to 10 and 72% of drawings fall into the ID=5 or 6 for my game. The best

method I have for selecting these is still on the drawing board.  It uses the combined data

gotten from all the secondary data which when cross referenced produces a set of all filter

values that most likely will be drawn.

I am working on 2 systems that when combined can reduce sets to a very playable amount which

require no filtering most drawings.  This to me is the (holy grail) of lottery systems and I am making

much progress but I have little time to work on it and it still has a ways to go.   The system that

has been given out is nothing more than a filtered set generator with a bias search for each filter

and a few other tools to help make selections.  It is very effective but still requires the user to make

correct choices.  I wish I could make the process of selecting TD and ID values easy but so far I

have been unable to do this on a regular bases.

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

Trump / 2016 & 2020

 Page 36 of 46