Welcome Guest
You last visited August 21, 2017, 12:35 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Statistically Speaking - QP's and PP's

Topic closed. 1161 replies. Last post 7 years ago by Todd.

 Page 42 of 78

United States
Member #68002
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 3, 2010, 5:01 pm - IP Logged

No one  has  too prove anything if  self-picks  are  working  better for a player  than quick-picks  then  that's all the proof  needed for  themselves  not   for  anyone  else

United States
Member #69169
January 5, 2009
2122 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 3, 2010, 5:06 pm - IP Logged

"Self Picks win a higher percent of the time than Quick Picks".

really ?

where is the proof of that statement located?

because in 40+ pages,  no one has provided substantial proof of anything but wishful thinking projection conjecture.

the whole reason we went down this 40 page plus road,  is so that "you guys"  could actually prove that statement once and for all.

your unwilling to do so,  and i understand why,  so maybe you can point us in the direction where that phenomenom actually occured.

where someone demonstrated over time -   that "self picks"  win more (percentage wise)  than QP's

click on my name and go down to my recent posts. look for "hardest states" and click on it and skim through. Done!

"Many Strategies|One Game"

Michigan
United States
Member #22395
September 24, 2005
1583 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 3, 2010, 6:27 pm - IP Logged

"Self Picks win a higher percent of the time than Quick Picks".

really ?

where is the proof of that statement located?

because in 40+ pages,  no one has provided substantial proof of anything but wishful thinking projection conjecture.

the whole reason we went down this 40 page plus road,  is so that "you guys"  could actually prove that statement once and for all.

your unwilling to do so,  and i understand why,  so maybe you can point us in the direction where that phenomenom actually occured.

where someone demonstrated over time -   that "self picks"  win more (percentage wise)  than QP's

Read the thread that RJ posted - only 7 pages!  That is one place where it is located.

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 3, 2010, 11:55 pm - IP Logged

No one  has  too prove anything if  self-picks  are  working  better for a player  than quick-picks  then  that's all the proof  needed for  themselves  not   for  anyone  else

of course not.

it's all good going thru life and stating this and that,  but not being at least willing to prove anything one says.

in fact,  why bother stating anything at all ?

reminds me of a guy trying to pick up chicks stating he drives a ferrari,  when he really has a yugo parked out back

to me,  when i observe someone saying something in the vein of factualism,  i immediately turn on the yeah yeah yeah button.

or better known as "that's just baloney,  until you can prove it to be true".

conjecture is only conjecture,  until "it"  is actually true.

BTW,  this is where i remind you guys,  that i am not the "bad guy" in here.

i am not the one making claims ---------->  you guys are

all i am seeking to do is facilitate YOUR  "truth"

not mine

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 12:15 am - IP Logged

Read the thread that RJ posted - only 7 pages!  That is one place where it is located.

ahhhhhhhhhhh no.

that is where an 'attempt'  (in RJ's link to another debate about systems & QP's relativism) to slide the real truth out from under non mathemagicians prying eyes took place.

that thread was mirred in numbers / equations,  but entirely fell miserably short of "proof"

but,  much like skipping to the back of the book,  to figure out how the story ends,  on the last page i found the very same challenge (as i have in here) to you guy's claim (in here as well)..........a heads up apples to apples true test.

it was on the last page of that linked thread,  made by KYfloyd.

and wouldn't you know it,  once KY "offered" that bit of info....

the collision of math and reality ceased

unless i missed something buried deep within the annals of super secret "math",  there was zero "proof"  there.

just some highfaluting hypothesizing wishful thinking i wanna believe it really really bad going on.  (that i can see)

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 12:40 am - IP Logged

click on my name and go down to my recent posts. look for "hardest states" and click on it and skim through. Done!

i did.

and while i am happy for you and your "hit",  that (in all due respect)  doesn't prove anything related to what we are talking about in this thread.

many people have hit....................  but at what cost,  and how often vs how much money played?

systems players love   to parade their "wins" around the room,  but scutinized alot closer,  and suddenly the hits vs plays ratio isn't so BLAM.

but the real conversation in here isn't one hit here or there "success",   it's whether or not it can be proven that they are actually better (as you guys claim) against QP's.

i don't mind asking you jordan,  would you like to do a little "apples to apples" test?

because that would be a true test

you know,  i guess i should have photocopied the ticket of my QP when i won \$60 on it one time,    and then i could boast that QP's reign supreme,   because my numbers came in that day

"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: August 4, 2010, 1:20 am - IP Logged

No one is in here making claims  that you are  forced too  believe they  are making claims  based on PERSONAL experience what you fail too realise is  that we  are not in here  trying too  sell  anything  or saying  that our  way is better than  any other method.Our way works  BEST  for us and that's all that matters if someone is trying too  SELL something then of course they need  too PROVE  that it works,increases your chances or is better than any other  method BUT no one is in here doing that so  your  accusations,attacks,comments,remarks,opinions,demands are UNWARRANTED no  one  needs  too prove  anything too you unless they want too  sell you there  system,want you too  try it or  say it's  better than quick-picks. I have said that my way is just as good as  a quick-pick BUT that my way works BETTER  for me than  quikc-picks your just trying too  pick a fight like a bully in the  school  yard calling people  out for no  reason NO one  and I repeat NO one is in  here trying too  sell  anything so what is with you and this  needing proof all  about?? why?? what is the  point?? no one  said self-picks are the  BEST method too use  no one  said it will work the  best so there is  no reason for  you too ask for any proof none whatsoever.No one is CHALLENGING you  on your preferred method quick-picks work for some players just like  self-picks do so no  need too prove anything.

United States
Member #68002
December 10, 2008
477 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 1:34 am - IP Logged

many people have hit.................... but at what cost, and how often vs how much money played?

(who cares??? no one is in here trying  too make a profit  or do this for  a living  it's called GAMBLING win  versus lost doesn't mean anything if it did no one would be playing)

you know, i guess i should have photocopied the ticket of my QP when i won \$60 on it one time, and then i could boast that QP's reign supreme, because my numbers came in that day

(no one  is in here claiming self-picks reign supreme in fact people  that selected there  own numbers probalby won more  times  then you did how long ago was that \$60 win?? and how long did it take you?? how much did you lose befoer you won?? just based on your admission  of your ONE hit your  track record with quick-picks is REALLY bad but yet you  keep using them,my track record with PERSONAL picks is much better  than yours with  QUICK-PICKS does that mean my way is  better  than  yours?? "NOPE"  your way WORKED for you and MINE for me.I've hit  5 times in  the past year how many  times have you hit in the past  year?? do  you  see me in here bragging that my way is better?? "NOPE" whatever  works  best for a player is all that  matters.  )

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7547 Posts
Online
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 2:00 am - IP Logged

It seems to me it would have been helpful if System Players would have mentioned (a long time ago) what criteria their claims were based on. I freely admit to being a big dummy though and I may have missed it.

It appears that they base their claims of PP's superiority over QP's on how many winning numbers are contained in their picks regardless of the effect those numbers have on winning cash prizes. They look for the cumulative tally of winning numbers in all their picks combined even if they are only 1 or 2 to a line and consider that a success if they have a few. Winning cash seems to be secondary and not as important as having a few of the numbers even if they're not positioned properly to win anything.

Whereas, Quick Pick Players base their success on how much money they win as opposed to how much they spend.

Is that about right?

I mentioned the 46 combo wheel and I've used it because it has superior coverage over purchasing 46 QPs. The MM site gives the odds of having the bonus ball at 1 in 75 so it's obvious the odds of purchasing 46 QPs and having all 46 bonus balls is much higher. The wheel uses all 56 wps and though I'd probably get all 56 wps purchasing QPs, it's no guarantee.

"It appears that they base their claims of PP's superiority over QP's on how many winning numbers are contained in their picks regardless of the effect those numbers have on winning cash prizes. "

Superior coverage is not the same as out performing and we can't test purchased QPs performance against the wheel without buying them. While RNG combos can give us good idea, RNGs picks have nothing to do with the topic you started. Nobody including me has claimed they had a system of picking the numbers or combos to out perform a like number of QPs; not on this thread.

"Winning cash seems to be secondary and not as important as having a few of the numbers even if they're not positioned properly to win anything."

I've played the wheel trying to match all 5 wps because it guarantees matching at least two of the numbers in one of the combos. By using all 56 wps with a two number match, the odds of matching 5 is 84885 to 1 and I cross my fingers hoping to have the 2 or 3 of the other numbers on the same line. The order the 56 numbers were entered into the wheel was done using the quick pick feature so there is no practical reason to compare performance of a QP 46 combos to another QP 46 combo.

"Is that about right?"

From the beginning I assumed by "QPs", you meant the QP tickets purchased from a lottery terminal. Was I wrong?

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7547 Posts
Online
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 2:22 am - IP Logged

I asked a simple question "Can anyone honestly say they learned one thing from VD that could help them win a jackpot?". only you answered, and you predictively go off on a tangent having nothing what so ever to do with the question.

Non English speaking people have much better reading comprehension than you.

I'll ask one more time, WHAT HAVE YOU TAUGHT ANYONE ON THIS THREAD THAT COULD HELP THEM WIN A JACKPOT?

"i needed to "purchase" my QP's in order to validate their validity"

You can't even comprehend what a purchased QP is.

"gotta go to work. i teach teenagers how to drive"

And you actually teach Drivers ED?

Thanks for your contributions as a teacher to the dummying down of America.

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 2:34 am - IP Logged

No one is in here making claims  that you are  forced too  believe they  are making claims  based on PERSONAL experience what you fail too realise is  that we  are not in here  trying too  sell  anything  or saying  that our  way is better than  any other method.Our way works  BEST  for us and that's all that matters if someone is trying too  SELL something then of course they need  too PROVE  that it works,increases your chances or is better than any other  method BUT no one is in here doing that so  your  accusations,attacks,comments,remarks,opinions,demands are UNWARRANTED no  one  needs  too prove  anything too you unless they want too  sell you there  system,want you too  try it or  say it's  better than quick-picks. I have said that my way is just as good as  a quick-pick BUT that my way works BETTER  for me than  quikc-picks your just trying too  pick a fight like a bully in the  school  yard calling people  out for no  reason NO one  and I repeat NO one is in  here trying too  sell  anything so what is with you and this  needing proof all  about?? why?? what is the  point?? no one  said self-picks are the  BEST method too use  no one  said it will work the  best so there is  no reason for  you too ask for any proof none whatsoever.No one is CHALLENGING you  on your preferred method quick-picks work for some players just like  self-picks do so no  need too prove anything.

"no  one  needs  too prove  anything too you unless they want too  sell you there  system,want you too  try it or  say it's  better than quick-picks.

exactly.    thanks for making my point for me.

on the outside chance you have only skimmed over this thread (which you haven't),  MOST of the entire thread was based around you guys claiming "systems" are better than quick picks.

and that was whole impetus for this "back and forth",   so that people like you could have a platform for which to prove it,  after making such "claims"

in fact,  you said it yourself, and not in the vein that "oh,  it's good for me,  because i happen to have better luck with them", etc.

you went on and on yourself that systems are better, and that QP's are a waste,  and you weren't just referring to "yourself".

do i need to copy and paste your own words,  or does your "memory" remember you making those claims personally ?

***************************************************************************************

"your just trying too  pick a fight like a bully in the  school  yard calling people  out for no  reason"

ahhhh no.      that's really pa-thetic.

look,  all i am doing is staying the course,  while "you guys"  keep coming up with smoke screen excuses after "you guys"  continue to make the claim.

so i am the only one that is willing to jump into the mix,  but also willing to see this thru to whenever it does end,  but no.....

if i was a "bully",  i would be calling "you guys" names like "you guys"  do to me when i keep "you guys"  on the hook for something "you guys" keep claiming.

"you guys" made the claim,  i didn't

in the fair world,  you should be able to withstand any heat with built in integrity melting proportions,  and still be standing, once the heat has been turned off,  with your integrity still intact,  should what you state be "true"

would you like me to reproduce all the posts in here where people "claimed"  they could create a statistical "edge" over QP's?

that would take me an additional 20pages or more

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 3:34 am - IP Logged

I mentioned the 46 combo wheel and I've used it because it has superior coverage over purchasing 46 QPs. The MM site gives the odds of having the bonus ball at 1 in 75 so it's obvious the odds of purchasing 46 QPs and having all 46 bonus balls is much higher. The wheel uses all 56 wps and though I'd probably get all 56 wps purchasing QPs, it's no guarantee.

"It appears that they base their claims of PP's superiority over QP's on how many winning numbers are contained in their picks regardless of the effect those numbers have on winning cash prizes. "

Superior coverage is not the same as out performing and we can't test purchased QPs performance against the wheel without buying them. While RNG combos can give us good idea, RNGs picks have nothing to do with the topic you started. Nobody including me has claimed they had a system of picking the numbers or combos to out perform a like number of QPs; not on this thread.

"Winning cash seems to be secondary and not as important as having a few of the numbers even if they're not positioned properly to win anything."

I've played the wheel trying to match all 5 wps because it guarantees matching at least two of the numbers in one of the combos. By using all 56 wps with a two number match, the odds of matching 5 is 84885 to 1 and I cross my fingers hoping to have the 2 or 3 of the other numbers on the same line. The order the 56 numbers were entered into the wheel was done using the quick pick feature so there is no practical reason to compare performance of a QP 46 combos to another QP 46 combo.

"Is that about right?"

From the beginning I assumed by "QPs", you meant the QP tickets purchased from a lottery terminal. Was I wrong?

"Nobody including me has claimed they had a system of picking the numbers or combos to out perform a like number of QPs; not on this thread'.

especially you.    ------> until now

is it just me,  or is my reading comprehesion askewed cuz it be late?

because what stack just stated above could have saved LP from 42 pages of "back and forth"............like about 38 pages ago (about when i threw my white cowboy hat into the ring).

i know stack can comphrehend what he reads,  so why would he turn coat all of a sudden and make that statement,  when he obviously knows that systems players have been making the claim for 42 pages "they"  can outperform  QP's with their "systems".

i knowz the "why's" of why people do these things

you do realize why people change their verbage on the fly,  don't you?

if you don't,  than maybe this "on the fly move"  will enlighten you a little bit more,  as to why people's "solid position" is in a constant state of flux.

"Superior coverage is not the same as out performing and we can't test purchased QPs performance against the wheel without buying them. While RNG combos can give us good idea, RNGs picks have nothing to do with the topic you started".

ok,  i MORE than concede the fact that i am NOT the sharpest knife in the drawer when it comes too all things matematical lottery related,  but even i know that there is zero difference in the RNG of any lottery terminal,   vs LP's RNG as being more than "random enough" technology - wise.

stack keeps changing his terminology on the fly,  in an attepmt to slide his non provable hypothesis under comprehensive eyes

gee,  what will stack do if i actually grow tired of his game,  and call his bluff by actually buying 46 QP's,  and then when he loses,  he can reimburse me my \$46?     making his netloss \$92

i know exactly what stack would say to that,  before i even asked him...

why?   because i know people

here's a tip from the world of common sense.......if a person has to constantly change things on the fly to "solidify"  their position........run the other direction as far as being able to trust what they say.

defensible positions are SOLID.    they do not move,  their is no "fluxuation".

especially on the fly

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 4:27 am - IP Logged

I asked a simple question "Can anyone honestly say they learned one thing from VD that could help them win a jackpot?". only you answered, and you predictively go off on a tangent having nothing what so ever to do with the question.

Non English speaking people have much better reading comprehension than you.

I'll ask one more time, WHAT HAVE YOU TAUGHT ANYONE ON THIS THREAD THAT COULD HELP THEM WIN A JACKPOT?

"i needed to "purchase" my QP's in order to validate their validity"

You can't even comprehend what a purchased QP is.

"gotta go to work. i teach teenagers how to drive"

And you actually teach Drivers ED?

Thanks for your contributions as a teacher to the dummying down of America.

"I asked a simple question "Can anyone honestly say they learned one thing from VD that could help them win a jackpot?". only you answered, and you predictively go off on a tangent having nothing what so ever to do with the question">

well,  that's documented lie #1 for you,  because i just went back to my post on aug 2nd @ 3:38pm where i made a statement that was perfectly in line with the question you asked me

when people are weak in their position,   the last resort is to purposefully lie about your opponent.

your not exactly gaining credibility points,  stack

************************************************************************************************

"I'll ask one more time, WHAT HAVE YOU TAUGHT ANYONE ON THIS THREAD THAT COULD HELP THEM WIN A JACKPOT?"

you bet YOUR LIFE i have,   for 8 years running.

everyday my sig is a reminder of what i am here to "teach"  per se

i may be reaching a small minority,  but my effort is well worth handing someone the ability to pursue this avenue of life with peace and strength,   instead of the emotional toll that accompanies someone who chases things in life that they probably aren't ever going to have happen to them

what i "do"  is called a "two-fer-one" deal.

(1) i provide common sense levity to this board,  square in the midst of emotionally drivin "wishful thinking",  so people don't have to expend more money / time than necessary.

within that framework,  i "teach" people how to be more efficient about their chasing of a jackpot.

what i do provide them is the knowledge that no one can gain themselves any "edge" more than the guy sitting next to them,  so they can relax about it.

(2)  and the most important part of what i do in here.........is ..........that if you are "meant to,  you will.  if you are not,  you won't",  and there isn't one thing on this planet you or anyone else can do to "make it happen".

that answer is emphatically YES

***********************************************************************************

as i have already proven,  there is no one in residence at LP that can "help"  anyone win a JP either.

not even a pick3 obviously.

and certainly you can't do it either,  as we have witnessed you "talking about it",   but ZIP in the "helping your fellow man" game.

************************************************************************************

"You can't even comprehend what a purchased QP is"

i know.

there is completly no comparison to purchasing a lottery terminal generated QP bought with \$1,  than a 1QP jacked off LP's RNG.

wishing something was true (that there is enough "differentiation"  to discount an apples to apples challenge) ,  is not going to make it true stack,   but oh now that you said it,  your stuck with that boat anchor

*************************************************************************************

"And you actually teach Drivers ED?

Thanks for your contributions as a teacher to the dummying down of America".

nice.   good comeback.  lol

ok,  so now that we are fully ensconced in the "apples to apples" methodology of what's true in here,  lets apply that to your statement about me,  which i don't mind,  because when you stick your neck out like i do,  people are going to resort to cheapshotting their "opponent",  when everything else fails.  par for the course

anyway,  lets apply the law of averages,  or we can apply who has done what,  in comparison to what you say.  either way

by now,  after 42 pages,  you have yet to do anything but babble about your 'abilities', etc.

sans proof

all you have done  is make excuses "why you can't",  when obviously you can,  because RJoh did it.

now me.

been teaching people how to drive for 5 1/2 years, and not one of my 3,000 plus "students" has ever ended up on the front page of the newspaper.

not only that,  i have changed countless lives by how i encourage kids who have no solid foundation at home, etc.

you can ask "them" if i am up for driving school instructor of the year in calif,  but ones things proveably sure between us "apples",  at least i do what i say i can

you obviously can't

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 4:37 am - IP Logged

i should have added....

you can go with me on one my "lessons" stack,   to see if i am what you think i am not.

but be aware,  in about 3 - 4 blocks you will be making sure your priorities in life are intact,  and you will be "less inclined" toward disingenuienly mis-representing yourself wherever you go.

especially with me paying "less attention"  to my brake while you are in the car

cheating death has a way of making a man more "honest"

at least for a couple of minutes afterward.

lol

come to think of it,  it would be a good way to make prisoners of war talk instead of waterboarding torturing them.

put them in the car with me and some of my students,  i could be privy to the toppest of top  secrets of our opposing countries.

real life grand theft auto.   not that video  game version you are used to

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

Michigan
United States
Member #22395
September 24, 2005
1583 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 4, 2010, 4:40 am - IP Logged

ahhhhhhhhhhh no.

that is where an 'attempt'  (in RJ's link to another debate about systems & QP's relativism) to slide the real truth out from under non mathemagicians prying eyes took place.

that thread was mirred in numbers / equations,  but entirely fell miserably short of "proof"

but,  much like skipping to the back of the book,  to figure out how the story ends,  on the last page i found the very same challenge (as i have in here) to you guy's claim (in here as well)..........a heads up apples to apples true test.

it was on the last page of that linked thread,  made by KYfloyd.

and wouldn't you know it,  once KY "offered" that bit of info....

the collision of math and reality ceased

unless i missed something buried deep within the annals of super secret "math",  there was zero "proof"  there.

just some highfaluting hypothesizing wishful thinking i wanna believe it really really bad going on.  (that i can see)

You will have to be more specific, KY went on to talk football - not lottery, so I don't know how you are interpreting whatever post you are referring to.  Post the permalink with a detailed explanation of your take on what he is saying.

You may be doing it "politely" but you are calling everyone a liar and refusing all explanations offered.  If the people in favor of self-picks are going to perform some kind of test, it is they that will define what "better" means - not you.  It is they that will setup the tests their way, not your way.  If Consumers Report compares washing machines and they say brand A is better than the others, they subject all to a fair test that they determine.  Not the reader.

Thus far you have no takers your way.  And I doubt you will get any.

One thing I would agree about is that you must buy tickets that say QP and post copies to show you bought them from a lottery terminal - assuming you find a taker.  No RNG from some other source.  Random from some other source would be a self-pick.  Why?  Because when any lottery says 70% of the tickets sold were QPs, they won't include your RNG tickets.

Definition: Better because of more winners.  If you buy 100 QPs and someone posts 100 SPs and your QPs have 5 winners (of any \$ amount) and SPs have 6 winners (of any \$ amount) - the SPs win.  6% SP winners vs 5% QP winners.  There are millions and millions of people that do not win a JP with QP.  You can't compare a JP win to a SP and say it is better than SP.  Same, there are millions and millions of SPs that do not win JPs.  So the test has to be whatever winners pay a \$ amount.  Regardless of profit.

There may be other rules imposed - I'll leave that up to anyone that wants to perform a test.

 Page 42 of 78