Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 8, 2016, 1:03 pm
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 47 of 78
54
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar
Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7314 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 6, 2010, 3:42 pm - IP Logged

Stack47,

I'd really like to see you head over to my Poll in the Lottery Systems Thread named PA Daily Number (Evening).  I hate to reveal the correct answer with only 4 entries.  It's asking for the result of a Backtest of a simple Pick-3 System.  Along with the answer, I will be documenting each HIT with the date and winning number.  The next step will be to Backtest a more sophisticated system, and post the results.  If you hang in there long enough, you may get the answer to the questions you were trying to extract from VisionDude above.

--Jimmy

I'm on my way over there.

    Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
    Zeta Reticuli Star System
    United States
    Member #30470
    January 17, 2006
    10351 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 6, 2010, 7:07 pm - IP Logged

    jimmy4164 previously,

    There are 962,598 unique results in a Pick(5,43) game.  Buying 5 PPs per day, you have a high likelihoodof winning at least one jackpot every 527 years.  If you can onlyafford 1 ticket per day, you might have to wait until the year 4647! See you at the Pick-3 Poll!

    I don't play a lot of Pick 3 or Pick 4 but when I do I'm going to play 527 and 4647!

    Wink

    Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

    Lep

    There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

      rcbbuckeye's avatar - Lottery-043.jpg
      Texas
      United States
      Member #55889
      October 23, 2007
      5603 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 6, 2010, 11:08 pm - IP Logged

      rcbbuckeye,

      "Why would that sentence be troubling?"

      This is the nitty-gritty!

      First of all, you are surely aware that 186 draws is a tiny number in light of the typical Pick-5 which has between 500,000 and a million possibilities.  Believe it or not, what we are discussing here is the FUNDAMENTAL question that needs to be answered to understand completely everything that is being debated in this Forum [and others!]

      You apparently have written computer programs (as I have) or have access to databases that allow you to answer queries like yours above which allowed you to conclude that 4 draws contained 3 successive numbers over 186 draws.  I will assume your methods are reliable and I'll accept your findings for now. 

      You apparently have a belief that sets of five numbers containing 3 successive numbers, [N,N+1,N+2] are LESS likely to occur than 3 successive numbers like, say,  [M,M+3,M+7].  Correct?  The set [7-15-23-26-30] contains the M sequence (M==23), and many people probably view this set as more "random" than one containing 33-34-35.  To test your belief, I would like you to use the data analysis methods you alluded to above to test this Hypothesis: Sets of 5 numbers containing the sequence [N,N+1,N+2] are LESS LIKELY to occur in Pick-5s than sets containing the sequence [M,M+3,M+7].  I have 33.4 years of PA's Pick-3 data, and soon I hope to have a file with every draw made in the PA Cash 5 since its inception.  Until then, I'll be curious about your results.  Can you access more than 186 draws?  Given the huge number of possibilities, 186 is really not enough to have confidence in the results.  Regardless, give it a try with whatever you've got.  I will soon have a program to test it over many years of PA Cash-5 data.

      Have fun searching for the TRUTH among these numbers.  I do!

      --Jimmy

      p.s.  See the Poll at Lottery Systems / The PA Daily Number...

      Well, no I don't write programs, and all those formulas you wrote don't mean anything to me. I only checked the results for this year because that's all I had time to do this morning before work. 4 draws out of 186 draws is about 2%. It's a simple matter (but time consuming) to just go back through the past draws and count. If I have time I'll go back farther, but I can safely say that 3 successive numbers in a draw in Tx Cash 5 does not happen frequently...certainly not frequent enough that I would want to play that way. Cash 5 is a daily game, 313 draws a year, 435,897 to 1 odds. Another example is Texas Lotto, combinations with 4 decades plays more often that combinations with 5 decades, or 3 decades, or 2 decades. It's just a matter of going back through the draws and counting.

      RJOH used to have a sig that said something like "what happens most is most likely to happen again", (probably don't have it exactly correct, but close enough). I agree with that line of thinking.

      CAN'T WIN IF YOU'RE NOT IN

      A DOLLAR AND A DREAM (OR $2)

        visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
        light on my feet
        United States
        Member #356
        May 20, 2002
        2744 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 7, 2010, 12:20 am - IP Logged

         you didn't mean "potray",   did you?

        You mean "Portray"...right?

        Anyways, one word wrong because I was up for 18 hours working yesterday, and my brain wasn't exactly working properly, as opposed to you with an error in every sentence.

        Apples and oranges bro....

        ha ha.

        i actually DID mean "portray",  but typed it so fast,  and didn't spell checkem it with my own 2 good eyes.

        at least i self depricate,  and own my "less thans"  in life.

        transparency is a great tool toward integrity

        i is what i is

         

        but no,  we are still concerned only with the 'apples to apples' thingy,  and working as hard as i can to go 1,000 miles in the opposite direction of "apples to oranges"

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

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

                 until further notice,  it's  france everyday

          visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
          light on my feet
          United States
          Member #356
          May 20, 2002
          2744 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 7, 2010, 1:00 am - IP Logged

          You're bouncing around this topic more than the numbered ping pong balls used for the drawings. By taking out your non-topic and non-lottery related responses, there isn't much to respond to.

          "all i stated was my example of "levity"  provides some people a better perspective on the chasing aspect of the lottery."

          What is so funny about buying 10 QPs and after seeing the results, finding out they didn't even match 1 number?

            The same can be said about systems players who spend hours, days, or years researching past drawings and getting the same results. Players accept the fact the odds of winning are greatly stacked against them but know when they buy a ticket they can dream of spending the winnings and continue buying tickets in future drawings. The are many threads with many responses and thousands of views dealing with subjects of "hitting the jackpot"

          They don't need you to tell them what they already know and certainly don't want you poking fun at their dreams.

          "am i "worried"  that the majority at LP don't believe what i do about randomness aspects.  no."

          Considering the fact you can't comprehend why LP's RNG combos if played would be classified PPs thus making them useless for any comparison on this topic, why would the majority of LP care what you believe?

          "no,  actually you "stopped responding to me",  when you didn't have anything in the bag,  after i demonstrated how lame your excuse was about QP's having to be "purchased".    truth is,  that's where your integrity left your back pocket.  it's going downhill fast from there..."

          You could be told why LPs or any other RNG picks if played would become PPs 195 million times and still not get it.  It's Ridge's topic and he clarified it: "No, you weren't wrong. I was basing the stats of PP's vs. those of QP's purchased from lottery terminals."

          Had you stayed focused during 8th grade math, you would easily understand why a 2 if 5 wheel covering all 56 wbs and using all 46 bonus numbers does exactly what its suppose to do; match 2 numbers in one combo and have the winning bonus ball.

          "my math stinks,  no question,  but what i lack in math skills,  i am completely talented in the "that's a lame excuse/smokecreen/i refuse to do it"  parts of life.   unlucky for you,  i graduated summa cum laude baloney detector,"

          It's not your math that stinks, it's your inability to use common sense. Which part of "a 2 if 5 wheel covering all 56 wbs and using all 46 bonus numbers does exactly what its suppose to do; match 2 numbers in one combo and have the winning bonus ball" don't you understand?

          A link to the wheel was posted so any disbelievers in mathematical facts could test it against any of the MM results since the last matrix change. Anyone clicking the link saw all 56 wbs arranged into 46 combo so all 46 bonus could be added. I said the odds of against hitting the jackpot are exactly the same using the wheel, filling out playslips (PPs) and purchasing 46 QPs and given the choice, I would choose the wheel because mathematically it has better coverage. I even added I believe the wheel has over time a slight advantage over a like number of QPs and "your mileage may vary".

          "and now you can explain to the board,  that while during your above "pontifications"  about how it works -  you completely chickened out of showing it actually doing it."

          There is nothing for me to show when you can look for yourself. It's really simple to use so even you could do it. Click on the "systems", scroll down and click "Pick 5 Wheels" and near the bottom of the page (the last wheel) you will find an abbreviated 2 if 5 of 56 number wheel with 46 combos. There are detail instructions that even you should be able to follow.

          If you don't understand how it works, click on the Red "X" button on the upper right hand corner of your screen.

          "Considering the fact you can't comprehend why LP's RNG combos if played would be classified PPs thus making them useless for any comparison on this topic, why would the majority of LP care what you believe?"

          i comprende just fine amigo.   despite your high falutin use of the english language,  vs just my high school edumacation,  i still understand just fine.........that's it's a lame excuse.

          your "scenario" is only true if i were to take those numbers,  and play a real lottery draw,  by transferring my "LP picks"  to a payslip.     then and only then would it become a "PP".

          in here,  mano a mano,  it has zero bearing in a heads up showcase of what out performs what.

          it's really a pathetic show to watch as you "insist"  you "can't do it",  because in a real lottery they would be classified a "PP".

          education doesn't guarantee intelligence or integrity.     obviously

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

          "It's not your math that stinks, it's your inability to use common sense. Which part of "a 2 if 5 wheel covering all 56 wbs and using all 46 bonus numbers does exactly what its suppose to do; match 2 numbers in one combo and have the winning bonus ball" don't you understand?

           being a 1QP PLAYER,   it's all greek to me sir.   

          i don't waste time on superlatives and pie charts,  but to answer your above question, the one thing i do "understand",   is that you personally are too schicken to flesh out prebabble,  evidenced by your continous loop excuse(s)

          you are a talker,  not a doer.  i have known/witnessed quite a few "talkers" in my life,  much more intelligent than me.   but,  while the "talkers"  pontificate on how "good they are",  the "doers"  have enough common sense to surpass "intelligence" by actually doing,  instead of talking.

          your wasting precious thread space by doing nothing,  BUT "talking".

          me,  i jacked 46 LP combos just as soon as i was asked.

          i am a doer 

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

           "There is nothing for me to show when you can look for yourself"

          ahhhhh nope.

          see,  the thing is stack,  you don't want to do it personally,  because if you do it "personally",  you would be held in a public forum for personally failing in relation to your claims.

          oh stack will stick his neck out,  but when the time comes for the powerpoint presentation on the big screen at LP of what he "says",  stack becomes a turtle that just reminded himself he had a shell for which to retreat to

          it has to be uber frustrating for an edumacated guy like you,  and a barely graduated high school "graduate" like me,  to completely seperate your from your words / claims,  to demonstrate your an excuse maker "talker"

          do you witness the fact that i don't come at RJoh, buckeye or jimmy,  etc,   the way i make sure you "can't"?

          it's because although i differ from another persons position,  i give them respect. 

          that is until they purposefully lie (your constant "insistence" about it having to be "purchased"),  to play me for a fool before the board.  that changes things,  and that's why you and truecritic were my BFF's  there for a page or three.

           

          do what you say you can do,  or step aside.

          there are people in here now that have honesty built into thier position/explanation

            visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
            light on my feet
            United States
            Member #356
            May 20, 2002
            2744 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 7, 2010, 1:15 am - IP Logged

            47 pages later,  what i still don't get,  and would love to if it were true,  is how anyone thinks that any number (or groups of numbers) are likely to "come in"?

            sure,  odds are SOMEDAY a number will show it's lonely face,  but given the randomness of the lottery ball draws,  and every number having the exact same odds of showing up on every drawing,  how can one afford to think it's a matter of "more likely",  rather than "whatever happens,  happens"?

            just be honest, i am astonished on how people think somethings "due",  and devote wild amounts of time at it as if it is.

            will a number eventually come?   yes.

            will a succesion of numbers strung together eventually show up?   less likely in "succession" the more numbers involved,  but technically YES.

            the problem is,   is the notion that it's "predictable",  rather than an unpredictable random occurance.

            if one could send an invitation to the number they are looking for,  maybe bribe it with something,  i can see where a certain number would muscle it's way to the front of the starting gate,  but no,  to me nothings predictably "due".

            to me,  if every ball has an equal chance at every draw,  that's where common sense wins over wishful thinking.

            i have read so many "explanations" of how "due" works. 

            i have yet to SEE it work

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

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

                     until further notice,  it's  france everyday

              Avatar
              Kentucky
              United States
              Member #32652
              February 14, 2006
              7314 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 7, 2010, 1:53 am - IP Logged

              "Considering the fact you can't comprehend why LP's RNG combos if played would be classified PPs thus making them useless for any comparison on this topic, why would the majority of LP care what you believe?"

              i comprende just fine amigo.   despite your high falutin use of the english language,  vs just my high school edumacation,  i still understand just fine.........that's it's a lame excuse.

              your "scenario" is only true if i were to take those numbers,  and play a real lottery draw,  by transferring my "LP picks"  to a payslip.     then and only then would it become a "PP".

              in here,  mano a mano,  it has zero bearing in a heads up showcase of what out performs what.

              it's really a pathetic show to watch as you "insist"  you "can't do it",  because in a real lottery they would be classified a "PP".

              education doesn't guarantee intelligence or integrity.     obviously

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

              "It's not your math that stinks, it's your inability to use common sense. Which part of "a 2 if 5 wheel covering all 56 wbs and using all 46 bonus numbers does exactly what its suppose to do; match 2 numbers in one combo and have the winning bonus ball" don't you understand?

               being a 1QP PLAYER,   it's all greek to me sir.   

              i don't waste time on superlatives and pie charts,  but to answer your above question, the one thing i do "understand",   is that you personally are too schicken to flesh out prebabble,  evidenced by your continous loop excuse(s)

              you are a talker,  not a doer.  i have known/witnessed quite a few "talkers" in my life,  much more intelligent than me.   but,  while the "talkers"  pontificate on how "good they are",  the "doers"  have enough common sense to surpass "intelligence" by actually doing,  instead of talking.

              your wasting precious thread space by doing nothing,  BUT "talking".

              me,  i jacked 46 LP combos just as soon as i was asked.

              i am a doer 

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

               "There is nothing for me to show when you can look for yourself"

              ahhhhh nope.

              see,  the thing is stack,  you don't want to do it personally,  because if you do it "personally",  you would be held in a public forum for personally failing in relation to your claims.

              oh stack will stick his neck out,  but when the time comes for the powerpoint presentation on the big screen at LP of what he "says",  stack becomes a turtle that just reminded himself he had a shell for which to retreat to

              it has to be uber frustrating for an edumacated guy like you,  and a barely graduated high school "graduate" like me,  to completely seperate your from your words / claims,  to demonstrate your an excuse maker "talker"

              do you witness the fact that i don't come at RJoh, buckeye or jimmy,  etc,   the way i make sure you "can't"?

              it's because although i differ from another persons position,  i give them respect. 

              that is until they purposefully lie (your constant "insistence" about it having to be "purchased"),  to play me for a fool before the board.  that changes things,  and that's why you and truecritic were my BFF's  there for a page or three.

               

              do what you say you can do,  or step aside.

              there are people in here now that have honesty built into thier position/explanation

              "being a 1QP PLAYER,   it's all greek to me sir."

              Do you buy a ticket at a lottery terminal or do play "make believe"?

              "i am a doer "

              More like a pest pretending they actually know something about the lottery.

              "to play me for a fool before the board."

              You are what you are.

                visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                light on my feet
                United States
                Member #356
                May 20, 2002
                2744 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 7, 2010, 3:09 am - IP Logged

                "being a 1QP PLAYER,   it's all greek to me sir."

                Do you buy a ticket at a lottery terminal or do play "make believe"?

                "i am a doer "

                More like a pest pretending they actually know something about the lottery.

                "to play me for a fool before the board."

                You are what you are.

                judging by my willingness to put my QP's where my "mouth" is,   and your still schiken after how many invitations?

                so yeah,  by default,   i know more about the lottery than u du at least,  and measured by how much effort you put into it,  vs  how much "effort"  it takes me to buy my 1QP,  that has to psychologically hurt

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

                "to play me for a fool before the board."

                You are what you are"

                don't you just wish you could blame your integrity spillages on me?

                people who blame others for their integrity spillages often end up on the jerry springer show or judge judy

                 

                    Puke  and the "board"  will recognize your latest refusal to demonstrate your wheeling dirvish over my LP qp picks

                            "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 #93947
                  July 10, 2010
                  2180 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 7, 2010, 3:18 am - IP Logged

                  47 pages later,  what i still don't get,  and would love to if it were true,  is how anyone thinks that any number (or groups of numbers) are likely to "come in"?

                  sure,  odds are SOMEDAY a number will show it's lonely face,  but given the randomness of the lottery ball draws,  and every number having the exact same odds of showing up on every drawing,  how can one afford to think it's a matter of "more likely",  rather than "whatever happens,  happens"?

                  just be honest, i am astonished on how people think somethings "due",  and devote wild amounts of time at it as if it is.

                  will a number eventually come?   yes.

                  will a succesion of numbers strung together eventually show up?   less likely in "succession" the more numbers involved,  but technically YES.

                  the problem is,   is the notion that it's "predictable",  rather than an unpredictable random occurance.

                  if one could send an invitation to the number they are looking for,  maybe bribe it with something,  i can see where a certain number would muscle it's way to the front of the starting gate,  but no,  to me nothings predictably "due".

                  to me,  if every ball has an equal chance at every draw,  that's where common sense wins over wishful thinking.

                  i have read so many "explanations" of how "due" works. 

                  i have yet to SEE it work

                  VisionDude,

                  You are not alone!  I agree with every combination of words you assembled in the quoted Post. Smile

                  I too have been trying to get someone, anyone to provide compelling Backtests of their systems, to no avail.  What little that's offered is very vague.  I've read multiple postings by people complaining that they only tend to win back half of what they spend buying tickets.  They just don't seem to understand that most of the state lotteries KEEP about half of the take for government programs, so they shouldn't be surprised over their losses.  So, I decided to do it myself.  I've built a simple Backtesting "engine" which I'm using to scan the 33+ years of the PA Daily Number Game (000-999).  Hopefully, I'll have time to expand it to deal with some of the more well defined, simple, and popular Pick-3 Systems.  If the Pick-3 results still don't open people's eyes to Randomness, I guess I'll have to build another more complex program for the PA Cash-5(,43).  Stay tuned at the Fooled by Randomness Thread in Lottery Systems to follow my progress.

                  Something that troubles me here is the anger expressed by some of the posters.  If they really believe my methods or conclusions are wrong, you'd think they would present evidence to PROVE me wrong.  Instead, they get angry and send private messages that get "snipped."

                  If you haven't yet answered my Poll, it's at Lottery Systems / PA Daily Number...

                  --Jimmy

                    truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                    Michigan
                    United States
                    Member #22395
                    September 24, 2005
                    1583 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 7, 2010, 7:33 am - IP Logged

                    jimmy4164

                    It would be easier for others to click a link to any other LP thread - rather than trying to look up "PA Daily Number." 

                    The PA Lottery Daily Number (Evening) (Poll) - Lottery Post Forums:
                    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218425

                    Also for the benefit of everyone...Todd has put in permalinks to each individual post.   Start at your member name and go to the right of any of your posts, that is the permalink.  You only need to right click and copy the shortcut and paste it into your reply.  That is the link, when clicked, that will take you to a particular individual post.

                    Looks like this:  Permalink 

                    Another item - possibly the BEST feature of Lottery Post is the restore auto-save.  When you are typing a reply and click to post and something goes wrong - you think you have lost everything -  click the little red and white lifesaver ring.  First icon in the editor tools, on the left.  May not always work, depends on the nature of the error that caused you to lose your post.   The feeling you get when it does work, just makes your day (or nite)!

                    Looks like this: Auto-Save

                    jimmy, after reading several of your posts, don't understand why people are getting angry.  Looking forward to seeing systems tested with actual win percentages for each system and profit/loss reports.

                      truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                      Michigan
                      United States
                      Member #22395
                      September 24, 2005
                      1583 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 7, 2010, 7:54 am - IP Logged
                        visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                        light on my feet
                        United States
                        Member #356
                        May 20, 2002
                        2744 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 7, 2010, 5:47 pm - IP Logged

                        VisionDude,

                        You are not alone!  I agree with every combination of words you assembled in the quoted Post. Smile

                        I too have been trying to get someone, anyone to provide compelling Backtests of their systems, to no avail.  What little that's offered is very vague.  I've read multiple postings by people complaining that they only tend to win back half of what they spend buying tickets.  They just don't seem to understand that most of the state lotteries KEEP about half of the take for government programs, so they shouldn't be surprised over their losses.  So, I decided to do it myself.  I've built a simple Backtesting "engine" which I'm using to scan the 33+ years of the PA Daily Number Game (000-999).  Hopefully, I'll have time to expand it to deal with some of the more well defined, simple, and popular Pick-3 Systems.  If the Pick-3 results still don't open people's eyes to Randomness, I guess I'll have to build another more complex program for the PA Cash-5(,43).  Stay tuned at the Fooled by Randomness Thread in Lottery Systems to follow my progress.

                        Something that troubles me here is the anger expressed by some of the posters.  If they really believe my methods or conclusions are wrong, you'd think they would present evidence to PROVE me wrong.  Instead, they get angry and send private messages that get "snipped."

                        If you haven't yet answered my Poll, it's at Lottery Systems / PA Daily Number...

                        --Jimmy

                        now see,  i like this guys approach,  and not because he says he "agree's"  with me.

                        why?    because you can tell that he is a man that is not "offended"  at the challenge of something he thinks is possible.

                        i don't have a problem with people like that, or their residual belief that crackalackin the lottery is possible, even though at this current time,  i don't believe that it is

                         

                        it's just that when someone thinks they are going to play me,  and punk me out by calling me names, etc,   just because i happen to be good at bringing the truth to the surface about what someone believes,  and just because we "disagree",  doesn't mean i am not going to take the time to give you what you come a callin for. 

                         i don't like "wrasslin" with people,  but unfortunately you get these game players who think they can throw their smoke screen lame excuses of "i don't wanna's"  out as if they are not accountable for doing so,  so they don't "have to" show what they claim is "true", and then,   go off and twist things around to blame me for their integrity failures.

                        that will not happen,  which is why you see me "wrasslin",  etc

                        fine.  if someone doesn't "want to",  don't stick your neck out,  and say "you can",  or "it's a fact"

                        truly,  all i am trying to do in here is to facillitate truth about this debate,  so that both sides can reach an aribtrary conclusion as to whether or not anyone is wasting their time, money and efforts.

                        i currently don't believe it is,  but only a fool rejects proof over emotion, opinion, people, etc.

                        if i were to actually see proof,  and that proof wasn't subjective to wishful thinking interpretation,  then not only would i accept it,  i would sing it's PRAISES.

                        the difference between me and "them",   is that the "them(s)"  have no flexability for truth or proof outside thier own sphere of "this is what i WANT to believe".

                        whereas i know the value that integrity demands i switch my thinking / position on a matter,   IF it is right.

                        i am not here to "bust chops and make enemies".

                        i am in here to facillitate truth about this.

                        i love to be challenged on my positions in life,  because that means i get the chance to demonstrate the strength of that position.

                        if someone gets offended when someone challenges them,  it's only because they really have nothing for which to defend,  then they switch to smokescreens,  if that doesn't work,  they call you names,   and their last resort......they attempt to blame you for what they do.

                        it's called integritynongiantdisintagrationism

                        jimmy,  the reason you experienced "opposition"  to your questions is simple...."they don't have anything".

                        if "they" did..........they could demonstrate it enough so they don't have to be insecure about "giving it away",  or whatever on the fly excuse "they make".

                        looking forward to seeing what you can come up with,  and the board (or at least i do) APPRECIATES your effort  (enough to highlight it)

                        VISION  Thumbs Up

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

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

                                 until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                          rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                          Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                          United States
                          Member #73904
                          April 28, 2009
                          14903 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 8, 2010, 7:36 pm - IP Logged

                          So after 31 days, 47 pages and over 700 responses does anyone see any semblance of a consensus?

                          Has anyone been convinced to change their position on the issue?

                          Would anyone admit to it?


                                                                       
                                               
                                                                   

                           

                           

                           

                           

                                                                                                                             

                          "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                      --Edmund Burke

                           

                           

                            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                            Michigan
                            United States
                            Member #22395
                            September 24, 2005
                            1583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 8, 2010, 8:33 pm - IP Logged

                            So after 31 days, 47 pages and over 700 responses does anyone see any semblance of a consensus?

                            Has anyone been convinced to change their position on the issue?

                            Would anyone admit to it?

                            This thread just about has me drinking Jack and pulling my hair out!

                            I wonder what the consensus would have been if this had been a poll?

                              visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                              light on my feet
                              United States
                              Member #356
                              May 20, 2002
                              2744 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 8, 2010, 9:58 pm - IP Logged

                              why?

                              it's pretty simple...

                              either it works,  and it's provable over time,  or it isn't

                              .....and in this thread here,   after 8+  years of watching and waiting ---------is in the "isn't" category (or, until somebody removes it from there).

                               

                              these three facts bear repeating...

                              (1)  the lottery has been around for ions (relatively speaking),  and yet no one can definitively crack it on an ongoing - repeating basis.    not even the pick3     everyone is still searching for the "magic bullet",  ever tweaking their gunsmithing skills

                              (2)  and most "helLO there of all,   is the fact that not one person in the amount of time and posts this thread has born an invitation to,  has someone ever demonstrated more than an "oh yeah, i can",  or "i know someone who does".

                              (3)  given my "comittment"  to this debate,  if there was such a person,  "they"  would have stepped forward a long time ago......to prove me wrong, and no one has

                               

                              the only "mystery" this thread has resolved,  is reaching that person on the fence,  who expends far too much money and time toward something that is UNpredictable.

                              "they"  .........will now re-assess reality,  and adjust accordingly.

                                whether that's fleshed out in saving some time and money,  and more importantly - some actual "peace"  about the matter (vs chasing something they can't make happen anyway)........THEN,  it was all worth it.

                              people that are bound and determined to believe something,  no matter what reality presents,  will not change their mind at that moment.

                              i have witnessed brilliant minds exchange common sense for wishful thinking,  and that demonstrates the power of false hope over a rational mind

                               

                              but hey,  i will be around,  and if anyone comes up with something actually "provable",   then hit me up,   because i sure am not opposed to "changing my mind"

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

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

                                       until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                                 
                                Page 47 of 78