light on my feet United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2,744 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Aug 10, 2010
"what? did i just read that right, that they both have anEQUAL CHANCE ????"
Are you stupid?
In which language does "outperform" mean the same as "equal chance"?
Which part of "if we believe" or "we'll purchase" addressed to another member applies to you?
"Are you stupid?
have we switched gears now, and you and i are doing side by side intelligence comparison shopping?
because you ought to be embarrassed that guy like me with only a high school edumcation can trump a summ cum laude lottery "expert" like yourself with 46 posted QP's.
but to answer your question straight up, no......i am somewhere in between mentally challenged by birth design, and genious.
which translates into i am more than equipped to handle anything anyone can throw my way........eventually.
all i have to do is throw common sense and integrity at it
"In which language does "outperform" mean the same as "equal chance"?
you can't even copy and paste your way into integrityville.
you took a SNIPPET of what i said, and twisted it like stretch armstrong.
had you actually retained INTEGRITY, you would have noted i made the "equal chance" comment after you stated something about using systems OR qp's depending on your mood that day, thereby indicating they had "equal chance". at least that's they way it read to me
i just made the note that it was a dichotomy of what you stated all this time
Maryland United States
Member #44,102
July 30, 2006
6,619 Posts
Offline
Stack LTI, you can't teach someone how to fish, if they don't want to learn how to fish. The bait is probably ickey to someone that has very dumbness. It is so lazy it doesn't even want to learn where the CAPS key is.
Don't feed the troll. Waste of time.
I don't want to fish. I want free stuff. I don't like to work for stuff.
Darn! You have more definitions for the word integrity than the unabridged Oxford Dictionary!
i wonder how you two would fare in a trial for your life, where someone falsely accused you of a crime, and your fate was dependant on whether or not opposing counsel could "prove their case" against you (or inadvertantly FOR YOU for that matter).
Many a court case has been decided just on the basis of expert testimony. The LP experts have weighed in and said self-picks are better. I forgot...in your eyes, expert testimony is just plain ridiculous
I was just looking through this thread to see how many "on the fence" people you helped and how grateful they were that you saved them the drugery of doing self-picks vs QP. Hmmm...listen people...if visiondud helped you, could you all please post a simple "thank you?"
Is there any chance that your integrity would allow a simple "case settled out of court?" Let's just say you can lose with either QPs or SPs and it is your choice which method you use?
nope. like i said correct integrity can be applied in any society / culture in the world, and that you cannot trust people who use white out in the "version" of it. certain aspects are black and white, and are INDEPENDANT of "beliefs", and this falls into that category.
yes, they would recognize "expert testimony"...
anyone can get up on a witness stand and claim to be an "expert", and unless it's the opposing attorney's first day on the job, he would MAKE HIM --------> prove it
you forgot about that part of it
"Is there any chance that your integrity would allow a simple "case settled out of court?" Let's just say you can lose with either QPs or SPs and it is your choice which method you use?
i have maintained for 8 years in here that they both have an equal chance
never once did i say QP's are the way to go, only it's my preferred method of play.
but the technical answer to your question above is no. why? because the real contention is that "you guys" keep saying that systems outperform QP's, and that's not true proof -wise, so i would be a fool to "settle out of court".
integrity about a position demands i stick with the truth about a matter, and "settling" is akin abandoning THAT truth
light on my feet United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2,744 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by LotteryTechInc on Aug 10, 2010
VISIONDUDE
you two make me not only laugh, but you inadvertantly make me look good.
(I'm quite sure no one thinks you look good in this forum)
i "grasped" fully what your saying, allright. you keep saying "you can", "they can", "we can", followed by some excuse about "i/they/we don't have to". ("I" can and have hit the numbers using a strategy,"You" can't hit the numbers using a strategy "They" who is they?? "We" we who??? and they are not excuses they are explanations I'm explaining too you that NO one has too prove anything too VISIONDUDE because you don't count what counts are the players that have won money using a strategy or system)
even my high school only edumacation can understand that. (I seriously doubt that you are capable of getting anything other than what you post based on your personal opinion)
calling people names after not qualifying your own claims, only plays to the advantage of the board, in the "who is really who", and "what can do what" quest. (Oh my goodness stop being such a baby if you cannot take adult sarcastic criticism then go too another forum I don't have too qualify my claims based on your standards of acceptance I'm not playing the games for you I play for my enjoyment not for your approval)
name calling and "i refuse" demonstrates a weak position. (ACTUALLY it demonstrates how insignificant your postings,demands,accusations,opinions and attacks are YOU don't even use strategies too play the games so what's the point in your demanding proof?? do you wanna learn how too use your brain too play the lottery games?? are you getting tired of LOSING with your $1 quick-pick?? the only weak point is your criteria for proof that system play is a valid method)
"(I'm quite sure no one thinks you look good in this forum)"
even if that is true, it's not like that is going to dissuade me from what i KNOW is right. i don't live for popularity, and if you do, that's your social expenditure.
integrity means "even if" you are the only one in the entire room...
like i stated, resorting to calling people names is classless, and demonstrates a weak position because you cannot seperate people from "beliefs", etc. calling people names is nothing more than a smokescreen for the "i don't want to's" in life.
do you wanna learn how too use your brain too play the lottery games??
you mean do i want to expend my energy trying to "make it happen", by falsely thinking I can create some sort of edge against random odds? no. i already proved in here that doesn't work (by default, because none of "you guys" will prove it)
"are you getting tired of LOSING with your $1 quick-pick??
not at all. i am not "supposed to" win lower tier anything per se, so "losing" for me is par for my intended fate driven course.
when that time comes where i was "meant to", that day will be the end of my journey. i am completely enscounced in peace about waiting till then, and only having to expend 1QP till that day...
"the only weak point is your criteria for proof that system play is a valid method)"
i made it as easy as possible for "you guys" (systems advocates) and still zip.
i can't lower the bar any further, but the board would be MORE THAN EXCITED should you come up with a "better" validation process.
when "you guys" state systems can OUTPERFORM qp's, but yet no one can show they actually DO in a simple side by side comparison , in your world what do you call that? a victory?
light on my feet United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2,744 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jarasan on Aug 10, 2010
Stack LTI, you can't teach someone how to fish, if they don't want to learn how to fish. The bait is probably ickey to someone that has very dumbness. It is so lazy it doesn't even want to learn where the CAPS key is.
Don't feed the troll. Waste of time.
I don't want to fish. I want free stuff. I don't like to work for stuff.
i want "free stuff", and that's my push in here? anda
come on jarasan, even you can dream up a better excuse than that why you and the "others" won't.
pretty funny.
for 8 years in here i have played 1QP .
if i was in here to jack peoples "knowledge" so i could profit off of their efforts, i would have acted that way a long time ago.
you just inadvertantly proved my "reminder" in here about how integrity works.
when all else fails, and when you can't prove your deal, blame others by CREATING something that isn't there.
light on my feet United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2,744 Posts
Offline
work time.
later tonight, i will live up to my own integrity "test", and show you guys how strength of position works in life by backing up my claims that systems aren't any better than QP's.
i will do, what none of you are obviously willing to do.
(i am referring only to the ones that HAVE posted in this thread, and have REFUSED to)
i will stick my neck out as far as it CAN go, and put up something that will actually cost me.
this is an anonymous board, and yet none of you are even willing to anonymously put up your "system".
later tonight, you will see how pathetic that is .......in comparison to your own claims in here, because it literally costs you NOTHING
United States
Member #68,000
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
VISIONDUDE
i made it as easy as possible for "you guys" (systems advocates) and still zip.
i can't lower the bar any further, but the board would be MORE THAN EXCITED should you come up with a "better" validation process.
when "you guys" state systems can OUTPERFORM qp's, but yet no one can show they actually DO in a simple side by side comparison , in your world what do you call that? a victory
(NO you didn't you made it very ridiculous you don't use our method of play your a quick-picker so you don't have the authority too make any rules,set bars or expectations of us the validation process is based on OUR view NOT yours I have hit the numbers using a strategy I have never been able too hit the numbers using your pefered method so obviously my changing technigues WORKED!!! that's all the proof needed, now if I were in here selling a system or software or making claims that my way is the best THEN and only then would I HAVE too prove it "BUT" since I'm not I don't have to do anything except continue using my way while you continue using your way too lose "I NEVER" said systems outperform QP's once again your confusing me with someone else and putting words in my mouth I NEVER said.THERE is no need too show a side by side comparison each method is capable of hitting the numbers WHAT your implying is that a system CANNOT help a player win even though it HAS done just that for me,I never said my way would outperform your way or that it was better it WORKS BETTER for me that's it and I have nothing too prove too you because the proof is already there in the past year how many times have you won usng quick-picks?? so it's quite obvious MY way works better for me then your way does for you)
Michigan United States
Member #22,394
September 24, 2005
1,583 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by visiondude on Aug 10, 2010
nope. like i said correct integrity can be applied in any society / culture in the world, and that you cannot trust people who use white out in the "version" of it. certain aspects are black and white, and are INDEPENDANT of "beliefs", and this falls into that category.
yes, they would recognize "expert testimony"...
anyone can get up on a witness stand and claim to be an "expert", and unless it's the opposing attorney's first day on the job, he would MAKE HIM --------> prove it
you forgot about that part of it
"Is there any chance that your integrity would allow a simple "case settled out of court?" Let's just say you can lose with either QPs or SPs and it is your choice which method you use?
i have maintained for 8 years in here that they both have an equal chance
never once did i say QP's are the way to go, only it's my preferred method of play.
but the technical answer to your question above is no. why? because the real contention is that "you guys" keep saying that systems outperform QP's, and that's not true proof -wise, so i would be a fool to "settle out of court".
integrity about a position demands i stick with the truth about a matter, and "settling" is akin abandoning THAT truth
anyone can get up on a witness stand and claim to be an "expert", and unless it's the opposing attorney's first day on the job, he would MAKE HIM --------> prove it
you forgot about that part of it
Sorry, that is incorrect. If a person is designated an expert witness and accepted as such, he/she only explains procedures. They are not required to prove they are expert witnesses. They don't have to actually demonstrate with all kinds of lottery testing data for the Judge or jury. Of course they could bore the court to tears with reams of paper data, if they wanted, but they don't have to. Their word is accepted.
expert witnessn. a person who is a specialist in a subject, often technical, who may present his/her expert opinion without having been a witness to any occurrence relating to the lawsuit or criminal case. It is an exception to the rule against giving an opinion in trial, provided that the expert is qualified by evidence of his/her expertise, training and special knowledge. If the expertise is challenged, the attorney for the party calling the "expert" must make a showing of the necessary background through questions in court, and the trial judge has discretion to qualify the witness or rule he/she is not an expert, or is an expert on limited subjects. Experts are usually paid handsomely for their services and may be asked by the opposition the amount they are receiving for their work on the case. In most jurisdictions, both sides must exchange the names and addresses of proposed experts to allow pre-trial depositions.
"Is there any chance that your integrity would allow a simple "case settled out of court?" Let's just say you can lose with either QPs or SPs and it is your choice which method you use?
"i have maintained for 8 years in here that they both have an equal chance
never once did i say QP's are the way to go, only it's my preferred method of play.
but the technical answer to your question above is no. why? because the real contention is that "you guys" keep saying that systems outperform QP's, and that's not true proof -wise, so i would be a fool to "settle out of court".
integrity about a position demands i stick with the truth about a matter, and "settling" is akin abandoning THAT truth"
Sure you don't want to settle out of court?
Many cases are settled out of court. Especially when it is a very weak case to begin with. The VERY BEST you have is that QP are equal to SP. You have absolutely no one stating that QPs are better than SPs. Also you have a lack of witnesses, you are carrying the torch all by yourself saying they have an equal chance. I don't see hordes of people thanking you for saving them the drudgery of self-picks.
I've gone so far as to say that not ALL players that choose their numbers will outdo QPs. Some will, some won't. How about if I switch that around and say sometimes QPs will outdo self-picks?
One might be drawn to the conclusion that someone is paying you to continue and pursue this. No normal, rational person would. Perhaps getting some kind of bribe? I am starting to question your integrities - all variations of them.
Kentucky United States
Member #32,651
February 14, 2006
10,320 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jarasan on Aug 10, 2010
Stack LTI, you can't teach someone how to fish, if they don't want to learn how to fish. The bait is probably ickey to someone that has very dumbness. It is so lazy it doesn't even want to learn where the CAPS key is.
Don't feed the troll. Waste of time.
I don't want to fish. I want free stuff. I don't like to work for stuff.
Patrick,
I was pretty sure he was fishing for a free look at the "Premium Members Only" abbreviated wheels. Thanks for the advice and the troll will now have to get a free lunch from somebody else.
Crested Butte, CO United States
Member #69,862
January 18, 2009
1,432 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by visiondude on Aug 10, 2010
work time.
later tonight, i will live up to my own integrity "test", and show you guys how strength of position works in life by backing up my claims that systems aren't any better than QP's.
i will do, what none of you are obviously willing to do.
(i am referring only to the ones that HAVE posted in this thread, and have REFUSED to)
i will stick my neck out as far as it CAN go, and put up something that will actually cost me.
this is an anonymous board, and yet none of you are even willing to anonymously put up your "system".
later tonight, you will see how pathetic that is .......in comparison to your own claims in here, because it literally costs you NOTHING
vision
Here is my powerball chart for 08/11/2010 drawing:
United States
Member #68,000
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
I don't remember anyone claiming that SP's are better than QP's or outperform them I have always maintained that they are both euqal as a method for playing the numbers but like I've said many times before SP's WORKED better for me than quick-picks so I don't see how you can say they aren't a valid way of playing or that you need proof they are capable of increasing a players chance I told you that's the only way I HAVE won and that's proof enough for me.
Crested Butte, CO United States
Member #69,862
January 18, 2009
1,432 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Aug 10, 2010
What do you do to covert numbers on that chart to playable combinations on a play slip?
You see the first 3 rows, this pattern repeats, where you have 12 columns of the same number, but column 10 has 3 unique numbers. In this example they are 27-59-38. Its highly likely that one of these numbers will hit. The more they repeat the more likely they will hit.