Welcome Guest
You last visited December 10, 2016, 9:32 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Statistically Speaking - QP's and PP's

Topic closed. 1161 replies. Last post 6 years ago by Todd.

 Page 39 of 78
light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 30, 2010, 9:53 pm - IP Logged

which means it's completely random no matter HOW you pick your numbers.

I have to disagree with you on that one. Surely, no matter what method one chooses, at the end it's still a random event during a draw, but the selection process allows the individual to have a tad better edge over QPs. I'm not saying this because I'm smarter than you, but because of past experience in trends and patterns.

Let's take the P-3 as an easy example. Last night's Florida evening winning number was 139. 139 has an equal chance of coming out tonight again, but I'll bet you 100 bucks that it won't.  How can I possibly make such a bold claim?....It's called trends, patterns, and probability. Based on past experience, I know very well that the possibility of 139 repeaing tonight is extremely rare. It has happen many times in the past, but it's something like a 1% chance, maybe 2%, not sure.

That was a simple example, but there are many many more examples of insights you can gain after studying numbers like I have for the past 22 years. On top of the insight, I bought a book years ago by an author named Koycerin, titled 'The Koycerin Method". He basically blew the contemporary theory out of the water taught in universities who teach randomness and chaos. What he basically wrote was that in a basic 50/50 game, when one side is weighted, with every succession, the other side is more and more itching to balance itself out.

As an example he gives, a roulette game where red and black are played. Suppose red comes in 10 times in a row. Surely red can come in during the 11th spin, but here's what Koycerin stresses. What would you bet on? Black or red? Black of course.

I agree with you that there are no guarantees no matter how great one's analysis of a game is, but it does prevent one from avoiding obvious pitfalls that are a no brainer to a learned person. And again, like I've written before, the reason QP winners have a strong presence is not because QPs are effective, but because more people play QPs.

Whenever I play Florida Fantasy Five QPs, I notice the machine seems to pick 3 numbers from last night's draw a lot of the time, and that's why I stopped playing QPs.

A little over a year ago, I won \$720.00 in the Fantasy Five with one ticket. I picked the numbers myself.

i provided 38 pages of "opportunity" to bear that theory out,  and as you can see,  no "author" of random/probability in sight proving it to be true.

after 38 pages (and being more than a willing to change my mind),  i still recognize common sense over wishful thinking, and therefore am still holding fast to the position of it being unpredictable randomness.

shoot,  "we" haven't witnessed somebody actually demonstrating "patterns/trends" even in a pick3 draw,  by actually TRACKING draws with THEIR "picks"

you would think if that were remotely possible,  someone would have done it by now.

.......at least 35 pages ago

FYI/BTW/ALL HANDS ON DECK..........it's not that i refuse to believe it (as i always need to leave room for truth over "feelings"),   it's just that i am reasonable about it,  in that "if"  it were true......it should be fairly easily proven.

the only "truth" still standing after 38 pages is randomness

"i am .........."meant to"

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

United States
Member #75358
June 1, 2009
5345 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 30, 2010, 10:25 pm - IP Logged

i provided 38 pages of "opportunity" to bear that theory out,  and as you can see,  no "author" of random/probability in sight proving it to be true.

after 38 pages (and being more than a willing to change my mind),  i still recognize common sense over wishful thinking, and therefore am still holding fast to the position of it being unpredictable randomness.

shoot,  "we" haven't witnessed somebody actually demonstrating "patterns/trends" even in a pick3 draw,  by actually TRACKING draws with THEIR "picks"

you would think if that were remotely possible,  someone would have done it by now.

.......at least 35 pages ago

FYI/BTW/ALL HANDS ON DECK..........it's not that i refuse to believe it (as i always need to leave room for truth over "feelings"),   it's just that i am reasonable about it,  in that "if"  it were true......it should be fairly easily proven.

the only "truth" still standing after 38 pages is randomness

The truth is that it's more of a learning curve than a black and white situation of right and wrong. It's too complex to be proven, but you and I can agree that any insight is better than none. This can be applied to anything in life, not just the lottery.

There's a reason why you see animals dead on the side of the highway. Their brains aren't large enough to know the golden rule. Look before you cross the road. See how a simple rule can make or break a life?

United States
Member #91313
May 15, 2010
141 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 31, 2010, 6:46 am - IP Logged

The truth is that it's more of a learning curve than a black and white situation of right and wrong. It's too complex to be proven, but you and I can agree that any insight is better than none. This can be applied to anything in life, not just the lottery.

There's a reason why you see animals dead on the side of the highway. Their brains aren't large enough to know the golden rule. Look before you cross the road. See how a simple rule can make or break a life?

There's a reason why you see animals dead on the side of the highway. Their brains aren't large enough to know the golden rule. Look before you cross the road. See how a simple rule can make or break a life?

I looked both ways got that str hit, I was waiting for and crossed safely my picks survived too, remember this lol.....

 239 289 339 389 439 489 539 589 639 689 739

If you want God to laugh, tell him your plans!

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19831 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 31, 2010, 3:11 pm - IP Logged

The truth is that it's more of a learning curve than a black and white situation of right and wrong. It's too complex to be proven, but you and I can agree that any insight is better than none. This can be applied to anything in life, not just the lottery.

There's a reason why you see animals dead on the side of the highway. Their brains aren't large enough to know the golden rule. Look before you cross the road. See how a simple rule can make or break a life?

There's a reason the overall average lottery prize is 1/10 the overall odds of winning.  A player may some times beat the odds of winning but the lottery isn't going to lose any money if he does.

Truth is most lottery players don't care about systems or strategies to beat the odds.  Systems and strategies are the tools of players who's hobby is playing lotteries.

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

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 31, 2010, 3:21 pm - IP Logged

The truth is that it's more of a learning curve than a black and white situation of right and wrong. It's too complex to be proven, but you and I can agree that any insight is better than none. This can be applied to anything in life, not just the lottery.

There's a reason why you see animals dead on the side of the highway. Their brains aren't large enough to know the golden rule. Look before you cross the road. See how a simple rule can make or break a life?

"It's too complex to be proven"

actually,  using the rational part of my brain,  vs the emotional decision making aspect, i realize that the lottery is a fixed game with fixed odds and matrixes.

given those facts, it should actually be easily solvable,  once somebody actually "discovers"  something that makes it crackable.

once that threshold is crossed,  then it should be easily repeatable,  by incorporating the same methodology every time.

it's math and odds,  and once those are in play by someone who knows how to wield that tool,  that person would be off to the races if it were true

the fact that it can't be "repeated",  and that it is a constant state of flux,  because systems players that use the same methodology either still lose,  or they are constantly "tweaking".

plus,  factoring in how long the lotteries have been around to begin with,  and still no one "can"

those facts lend itself  to randomness,  and so far........not to any other "possibility"

hey,  i am all for someone cracking this.

it's not like i am against someone "cracking it",  it's just that my rational mind knows it's random,  and uncrackable.........so long as ball drawings with security/integrity measures are in play.

despite my "negativety"  about the lottery only being random,  i AM one of those people that does think outside the box.

tell me i can't do something, and i'm the kinda guy that will do it just to prove you wrong.

i root for people in life with the odds greatly stacked against them,  for whom people say "there is no chance".

for situations that haven't yet been discovered,  for whom people say "that's a waste of time pursuing that".     i root for the "discoverers"  TO succeed.

but i attempt to rule my life thru being "rational",  rather than an "emotional"  wishful thinking response.

and that's why i am pro random concerning the lottery

and joker,  you are correct ta mundo,  that any insight is better than none.

so far though,  i have witnessed  none...

"i am .........."meant to"

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

United States
Member #68002
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 31, 2010, 6:10 pm - IP Logged

Truth is most lottery players don't care about systems or strategies to beat the odds.  Systems and strategies are the tools of players who's hobby is playing lotteries.

RJOH

(I totally agree with  you it doesn't matter  what the naysayers or  skeptics think if a person has won money using a system,software or  strategy  then it WORKED for them.Especially if  they tried many other methods like quick-picks,lucky numbers or  selecting numbers randomly on a playslip if you NEVER won that way but finally are able too hit using some form of strategic play then it's quite OBVIOUS you  increased,enhanced,handicapped etcc... which enabled  you too hit the numbers.Doesn't matter if you didn't  make a profit or hit every week,we aren't  playing too make a living out of it or hit consistantly you  can't even do that with quick-picks or lucky numbers.But if you notice your  able too hit more often using strategic play versus other methods then that's proof enough no matter what anyone else has too say.All this time  wasted too try and DISPROVE strategic forms of play is just plain RIDICULOUS it works for me sorry if it don't work for anyone else)

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: July 31, 2010, 6:51 pm - IP Logged

Truth is most lottery players don't care about systems or strategies to beat the odds.  Systems and strategies are the tools of players who's hobby is playing lotteries.

RJOH

(I totally agree with  you it doesn't matter  what the naysayers or  skeptics think if a person has won money using a system,software or  strategy  then it WORKED for them.Especially if  they tried many other methods like quick-picks,lucky numbers or  selecting numbers randomly on a playslip if you NEVER won that way but finally are able too hit using some form of strategic play then it's quite OBVIOUS you  increased,enhanced,handicapped etcc... which enabled  you too hit the numbers.Doesn't matter if you didn't  make a profit or hit every week,we aren't  playing too make a living out of it or hit consistantly you  can't even do that with quick-picks or lucky numbers.But if you notice your  able too hit more often using strategic play versus other methods then that's proof enough no matter what anyone else has too say.All this time  wasted too try and DISPROVE strategic forms of play is just plain RIDICULOUS it works for me sorry if it don't work for anyone else)

"All this time  wasted too try and DISPROVE strategic forms of play is just plain RIDICULOUS it works for me sorry if it don't work for anyone else)".

actually,  if you had read my last post before this one,  i wasn't trying to "disprove" something,  as much as i was creating a platform for "you guys"  to prove "it"  worketh

but as you can read......no one has

12,000 plus views,  and not one person can demonstrate even making  a consistent profit.

you are right about one aspect of it,  in that "my participation"  was aimed at not wasting ones time,  which is why i attempted to facillitate both sides of the debate.

but hey,  i don't mind if someone insists on wasting their time.

this wasn't a waste of my time,  because i wasn't "working" to change the minds of those who are "committed" to systems,   but moreso to that person that rides the fence on this issue,  so they can have a non emotional, non wishful thinking approach to it,  so they don't waste their time / money

in that,  i wasn't a waste of time.

39 pages of staying the course worth...

"i am .........."meant to"

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7322 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 11:35 am - IP Logged

WOW!  You DID post your accomplishment and declared yourself a victorious winner.  Here you go,  in your own blather:

VD wrote:

"well,  at least I was willing to go the distance.

i find it also telling that all the systems players are walking away from this,  and handing me the "victory".

because,  unless you are willing to extract it out over time yourselfyou can't truthfullly make the claim it was only a fluke that i won.

so,  by default (unless someone actually steps up)........i was right,

......it's purely random

READ THIS CAREFULLY:  YOU SPEAK FOR NOBODY ON THIS BOARD!  Except for yourself.

You are not a (whatever you are) of your written word. You just spun more than a magarita blender at Sloppy Joes in Key West on a Friday afternoon.  Remember the posts don't disappear,  people can go back and read all about the "force" and your "accomplishments".  You spoke way too soon,  left the starting gate way too early,  and don't know when to shut up.

The three "contenders" on this thread did horribly on this PB draw,   even on the challenge it was a massacre.   This 7/28/10 PBall draw was for the birthday players.  All 6 numbers were lower than the days of the month and no one won the jackpot,  it rolled.

"You are not a (whatever you are) of your written word. You just spun more than a margarita blender at Sloppy Joes in Key West on a Friday afternoon."

We allowed VD to spin our remarks by responding. If all of our future remarks are going to be spun by the likes of VD, fewer people will post. The topic is about purchased PPs vs QPs and had all those combos used in that three way contest been purchased tickets, they all would be classified as PP. Without any purchased QPs, the contest proved nothing to support or disprove the topic at hand.

The latest off topic spin:  "12,000 plus views,  and not one person can demonstrate even making  a consistent profit."

You said it best Pat, when you said "Go play with yourself"!

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 1:49 pm - IP Logged

"You are not a (whatever you are) of your written word. You just spun more than a margarita blender at Sloppy Joes in Key West on a Friday afternoon."

We allowed VD to spin our remarks by responding. If all of our future remarks are going to be spun by the likes of VD, fewer people will post. The topic is about purchased PPs vs QPs and had all those combos used in that three way contest been purchased tickets, they all would be classified as PP. Without any purchased QPs, the contest proved nothing to support or disprove the topic at hand.

The latest off topic spin:  "12,000 plus views,  and not one person can demonstrate even making  a consistent profit."

You said it best Pat, when you said "Go play with yourself"!

laughing.

stack,  even your fellow systems constituents were telling you how rediculous it was that the QP's  had to be "purchased"  before they could be "valid" in the easily provable test.

even they told you they didn't have to be purchased.

you are the only one that made that lame excuse up on the fly,   so you could sell it to the board that you didn't "have to"

i provided 46 random generated numbers,  just like i was supposed to.

maybe you can whine to todd they weren't "randomly generated"  enough.

and yes,  what i stated was 100% accurate.......that out of all those people watching this thread,  not one person stepped forward to prove what i said was wrong.

you certainly had plenty of opportunity.

tell you what,  so you can't accuse me of "spin"  on any level,  we can wipe the slate clean,  and start anew.

you can finally come forward and showcase your "skills".

because in the end,  proving you actually have something has NOTHING to do with me,  it wouldn't matter stitch what i said or "spun".

the facts are - you don't.

otherwise,  despite me,  you would have displayed your "talents" a long time ago

you can't blame others,  for what you refuse to do,  or more to the point - what you can't do

"i am .........."meant to"

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19831 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 2:15 pm - IP Logged

"12,000 plus views,  and not one person can demonstrate even making  a consistent profit."

Throwing that condition into the mix changed the thread.  A check of jackpot games would reveal that even combinations that eventually win a jackpot have only returned 10% of what it cost to play up to that point.  Even pick5 games with better odds and payouts for smaller matches aren't much better with their winning combinations returning 20% of what it cost to play before winning the top prize.

There's simple isn't any profit in playing these games until a top prize is won.  The only thing a player might prove is that he loses less with his PP's than with QP's.  A player may be ahead for a short while but if he is a consistent player, he will eventually show a lost unless he wins a top prize.

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

MD
United States
Member #1701
June 18, 2003
8364 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 2:15 pm - IP Logged
I know I've read people won the lottery using self picks and quick picks, i have never heard or read that a jackpot was won using a random number generator they used on the home computer they have or on the Internet.

Quick picks are numbers that are purchased at a lottery retailer which are generated by the terminal at that store.

Self picks are any picks you have to fill out a play slip for.

You's can argue till the cows come home but no matter what if you used a random number generator to select your numbers and placed those numbers on a play slip and those numbers won the lottery jackpot the lottery will report that person won buying self picks.

One more time!

Any numbers you put on a play slip are self picks.
Any numbers you purchase at the store known as quick picks are quick picks.

Big John says. You don't hit the number. The number hits you!!!!

I'm not Big John, I'm Four4me, Big John's a friend.

United States
Member #68002
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 2:22 pm - IP Logged

VISIONDUDE

United States
Member #68002
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 2:26 pm - IP Logged

It's  NOT about making  a PROFIT that's not why people play lottery games you need too get over it already

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7322 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 2:49 pm - IP Logged
I know I've read people won the lottery using self picks and quick picks, i have never heard or read that a jackpot was won using a random number generator they used on the home computer they have or on the Internet.

Quick picks are numbers that are purchased at a lottery retailer which are generated by the terminal at that store.

Self picks are any picks you have to fill out a play slip for.

You's can argue till the cows come home but no matter what if you used a random number generator to select your numbers and placed those numbers on a play slip and those numbers won the lottery jackpot the lottery will report that person won buying self picks.

One more time!

Any numbers you put on a play slip are self picks.
Any numbers you purchase at the store known as quick picks are quick picks.

"You's can argue till the cows come home but no matter what if you used a random number generator to select your numbers and placed those numbers on a play slip and those numbers won the lottery jackpot the lottery will report that person won buying self picks."

That fact was known to Ridge when he first asked his questions, VD ignored it, and continues to spin the responses. Can anyone honestly say they learned one thing from VD that could help them a jackpot?

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 2, 2010, 3:17 pm - IP Logged

"12,000 plus views,  and not one person can demonstrate even making  a consistent profit."

Throwing that condition into the mix changed the thread".

i made that statement to demonstrate that to this day,  no one has even proven they can even gain an "edge" while using systems instead of just QP''s.

my intent in here was to see if that were remotely true,  and so far,  no "truth"  about that has stepped forward.

shoot,  the random believers crowd is willing to lower the stakes some more,  and not "require"  that one can have to prove they can make a profit thru consistentcy

now,  all any systems players must do,  is demonstrate one can create a visable / provable  "edge"  OVER QP's,   which is what this thread was about

i provided an avenue to either prove,  or dispell,   the belief that systems players can create an edge,  by creating an easily witnessed,  fair across the board,  apples to apples challenge.

sure,  if i played the LP generated numbers at any lottery terminal,  it would be recognized as a "PP".    that is true,  but it's also an excuse

unless one can prove the lottery terminals spit out "pre-determined"  numbers on their QP generators  (instead of it being truly random),  then no one can use that excuse that the numbers i provided from the LP generator didn't meet the QP criteria for a fair challenge,  so that we could evenly match up,   to see over time who did what performance wise.

it was a hypothetical for kicks and giggles fair way to actually see for everyone watching,  what does what

"we"  (the random crowd) keep lowering the stakes / requirements for you guys to demonstrate that systems work ------>   AT ALL.

how much longer do "we" have to wait,  before someone can demonstrate over time,  they actually have the distinct advantage over just buying QP's ?

i can appreciate a person saying they enjoy pursuing the lottery,  even playing "numbers".

i can appreciate an honest response from someone stating they know they are only hoping to hit,  and thereby making a "profit"  over effort.

but when a person steps up on a platform and declares "we can gain an edge over QP's"......

that is what changes the stakes in here.

all i wanted to do,  was create the platform for people to prove they can actually do that.

now,  we have  lowered the stakes once more.

anyone wanna demonstrate that you can even gain an "edge" over QP's over time?

no one will even do that,  and that is but another feather in the it's just random cap

in life,  if "it" is true,  it's provable over time, and you certainly don't have to fight for the truth so it can come to the surface.

you just have to repeat it over and over and over

the truth is always excitable and ready to make an appearance.

unfortuntely in here,  it keeps getting pre-empted by excuses.

truth is,  if I had something like that,  and someone challenged me to do it,  i would have done it in the 1st few pages.

i would display it,  and if they refused to believe it after that,  then at some juncture,  i would move on, knowing i backed up what i claimed

VISION

"i am .........."meant to"

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

 Page 39 of 78