Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 18, 2017, 7:05 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 49 of 78
54
PrintE-mailLink
visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 9, 2010, 5:33 pm - IP Logged

"VISIONDUDE"

ok,  so the words "consistentcy"  and "profit" aren't included in a systems user's terminology,  but they should be,  "if" it worked in my mind,  and in the collective minds of skeptical people,  as "we" are attempting to establish truth about this.

("Consistency" and "Profit" applies if a player is  willing too spend the $$$$ and  that would require  money the average player doesn't  have too spend.Players that do  hit more than  chance  are spending anywhere  from $40-$50 but for POSSIBLE consistancy and profit you would probalby  need $100-$200 so  winning $500 in Pick-3 gives  you a profit of  $300.But based on the average  player that does it for  fun,entertainment  "consistancy and profit" DOES not apply and  why should  it be based on your interpretation?? who the heck are you?? you don't  even use systems,software or  strategies  your a quick-pick guy so stay in your corner and stop trying  to dicatate how things should be for us.What goes on in  your mind has nothing to do with us you don't need too establish anything  if  I hit more than you do with my method of play then obviously I'm doing something that has given me an edge over what you use too play  the numbers.)

ok,  so if it "only works"  when you throw "bigg(er) money at it,  and it's supposedly comes with a guarantee to hit more oftene,  then what kind of person plays it "small"?.

tha makes ZERO sense on the integrity addition scale.

if anything,  lottery players act voracious at times outsid common sense boundaries/emotion,  and so if they "sensed"  it only took a little more money in the trapping of a sure thing.......they would mortgage their house to make that happen.

the answer to the last part of your request is.........no

i have a job to do....

            "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
    7342 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 9, 2010, 5:49 pm - IP Logged

    "VISIONDUDE"

     

    i have lowered the bar so low,  that all someone  had to do is just prove that statement above.

    which is always followed by the sound of crickets,  or someone calling me names. 

    just show an "edge".    that's all...       if someone truly "can",   it sure doesn't get any easier than that.

     

    When are you gonna get if through that thick skull of  yours that no one has too prove anything too you?? they only have too prove it too themselves if a player has  used  quick-picks,lucky numbers etc... and NEVER won a dime but were able too hit  the numbers when they applied some form of strategic play then that's all the proof needed.No one plays too make a profit and  winning  consistantly is possible but it will cost a lot  more than most players can afford so your criteria for proof does not apply too  system,strategy players  we don't care what you think and we will continue using our methods just like you will continue LOSING  with your preferred  method.I personally know  players  some from this forum who have hit the numbers 1-2 times a week or every other week using some of Steve Players stuff so I know for sure you can  have an edge  on the  game when you apply the tools proplerly,just because YOUR  not capable of doing so doesn't mean it's not possible for  someone else.

    "they only have too prove it too themselves if a player has  used  quick-picks,lucky numbers etc... and NEVER won a dime but were able too hit  the numbers when they applied some form of strategic play then that's all the proof needed."

    Since you're talking to someone that only plays 1 QP, it's a waste of time even explaining why they would have twice as many chances playing 2 QPs or even a better chance by playing 5, 10, 100 QPs, or using a wheel covering all the wbs and all the bonus numbers. You and I might know by playing all the bonus balls gives us 100% coverage, understand because of mathematical probability it would take on average 75 purchased QPs to get the same coverage, and know spending $46 is better than spending $75 to get that same result.  And it's useless explaining that to someone who probably has no intentions of ever purchasing more than 1 PP or 1 QP.

    Even if you and I considered purchasing 46 or 50 PP tickets, I doubt you would and I know I wouldn't double the amount by purchasing a like number of QPs just for sake of comparing coverage when we already know the odds. Simply put, if you or I believe our PPs will outperform a like number of QPs, we'll purchase the PPs and if we believe the QPs will outperform a like number of PPs, we'll purchase the QPs.

    Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially someone lacking the mathematical background to understand overall coverage or common sense to understand the difference between any random numbers and the purchased QPs this topic is about?


      United States
      Member #68002
      December 10, 2008
      477 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 9, 2010, 5:58 pm - IP Logged

      ok,  so if it "only works"  when you throw "bigg(er) money at it,  and it's supposedly comes with a guarantee to hit more oftene,  then what kind of person plays it "small"?.

      (I never said that I said for "possible"  CONSISTANCY and PROFIT  you would need too spend MORE money  then  the average player is willing  too spend  and it  can  work whether you spend a lot of money or play  on a  budget  I've never spent over $10 whenever I won and  the kind of people that play it small "LIKE ME" play smart,on a budget,just for fun I MADE this VERY clear before  why is it so hard for you too understand or pay attention??

       

      tha makes ZERO sense on the integrity addition scale. (Do you take stupid  pills for breakfast in the morning?? who's integrity scale are you using?? NO one is playing your  game because it's not  necessary and pointless  your  in here making complaints about something you  DON'T even use)

       

      if anything,  lottery players act voracious at times outsid common sense boundaries/emotion,  and so if they "sensed"  it only took a little more money in the trapping of a sure thing.......they would mortgage their house to make that happen. (players that are voracious at times have a "gambling addiction"  the system players that spend more  money for possible  consistancy/profit use a strategic approach the  other ones that play more  money are  quick-pick players who feel the more you buy the  better  your chances  and  no  one would  mortgage there house you sillydude" at least no one on this post  because  anyone that does has a gambling problem and needs  help.)

      the answer to the last part of your request is.........noi have a job to do.... (GOOD then stick too that job and let us play the  way we want  your not giving any good,useful,helpful advice or info in fact all of the  8 yrs  you've  been on this  post I  have never read  anything useful from you)


        United States
        Member #68002
        December 10, 2008
        477 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 9, 2010, 6:02 pm - IP Logged

        "STACK47"

        Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially a $1 a drawing player?

        ("EXACTLY" my  point glad  you understand what I'm trying too get across too BLIND-DUDE for  some  odd reason he is  not able too grasp what I'm  saying I'm  beginning too think maybe  his brain "ISN'T" wired  properly)

          visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
          light on my feet
          United States
          Member #356
          May 20, 2002
          2744 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 10, 2010, 1:12 am - IP Logged

          "STACK47"

          Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially a $1 a drawing player?

          ("EXACTLY" my  point glad  you understand what I'm trying too get across too BLIND-DUDE for  some  odd reason he is  not able too grasp what I'm  saying I'm  beginning too think maybe  his brain "ISN'T" wired  properly)

          you two make me not only laugh,  but you inadvertantly make me look good.

          i "grasped"  fully what your saying,  allright.   you keep saying "you can",  "they can",  "we can",    followed by some excuse about "i/they/we don't have to".

          even my high school only edumacation can understand that. 

          calling people names after not qualifying your own claims,   only plays to the advantage of the board,  in the "who is really who",    and "what can do what"  quest.

            name calling and "i refuse" demonstrates a weak position.

                      "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 10, 2010, 1:38 am - IP Logged

            "they only have too prove it too themselves if a player has  used  quick-picks,lucky numbers etc... and NEVER won a dime but were able too hit  the numbers when they applied some form of strategic play then that's all the proof needed."

            Since you're talking to someone that only plays 1 QP, it's a waste of time even explaining why they would have twice as many chances playing 2 QPs or even a better chance by playing 5, 10, 100 QPs, or using a wheel covering all the wbs and all the bonus numbers. You and I might know by playing all the bonus balls gives us 100% coverage, understand because of mathematical probability it would take on average 75 purchased QPs to get the same coverage, and know spending $46 is better than spending $75 to get that same result.  And it's useless explaining that to someone who probably has no intentions of ever purchasing more than 1 PP or 1 QP.

            Even if you and I considered purchasing 46 or 50 PP tickets, I doubt you would and I know I wouldn't double the amount by purchasing a like number of QPs just for sake of comparing coverage when we already know the odds. Simply put, if you or I believe our PPs will outperform a like number of QPs, we'll purchase the PPs and if we believe the QPs will outperform a like number of PPs, we'll purchase the QPs.

            Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially someone lacking the mathematical background to understand overall coverage or common sense to understand the difference between any random numbers and the purchased QPs this topic is about?

            "Simply put, if you or I believe our PPs will outperform a like number of QPs, we'll purchase the PPs and if we believe the QPs will outperform a like number of PPs, we'll purchase the QPs".

             

            what?    did i just read that right,  that they both have an EQUAL CHANCE ????   

            here i thought i read "earlier"  in his post that a system is superior because of it's ability to cover all the WB's and bonus balls.

            he must not have much faith  Blue Angel      in his "system"  afterall. 

             

            these guys make stuff up so fast on the fly,    even they can't keep their "beliefs"  straight.

            or,   it took him a gazillion pages/posts  to accidently "admit".......there is no difference playing either way

             

            congradulations stack.........you told the truth

            (or will you put lipstick on your pig  now?)

                        "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 10, 2010, 2:12 am - IP Logged

              "they only have too prove it too themselves if a player has  used  quick-picks,lucky numbers etc... and NEVER won a dime but were able too hit  the numbers when they applied some form of strategic play then that's all the proof needed."

              Since you're talking to someone that only plays 1 QP, it's a waste of time even explaining why they would have twice as many chances playing 2 QPs or even a better chance by playing 5, 10, 100 QPs, or using a wheel covering all the wbs and all the bonus numbers. You and I might know by playing all the bonus balls gives us 100% coverage, understand because of mathematical probability it would take on average 75 purchased QPs to get the same coverage, and know spending $46 is better than spending $75 to get that same result.  And it's useless explaining that to someone who probably has no intentions of ever purchasing more than 1 PP or 1 QP.

              Even if you and I considered purchasing 46 or 50 PP tickets, I doubt you would and I know I wouldn't double the amount by purchasing a like number of QPs just for sake of comparing coverage when we already know the odds. Simply put, if you or I believe our PPs will outperform a like number of QPs, we'll purchase the PPs and if we believe the QPs will outperform a like number of PPs, we'll purchase the QPs.

              Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially someone lacking the mathematical background to understand overall coverage or common sense to understand the difference between any random numbers and the purchased QPs this topic is about?

              "Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone".

              it's called the universal code of integrity...

              ....  where if you make a qualifying veined statement about "ability",   in an "ability vs ability"  thread,  then the integrity code kicks in,  and implores you to answer your own claim.

              of course you don't "have to",    but then that automatically strips your claims as being valid,  and places in truth limbo land until you can "prove it".

              anyone can claim anything is "true",  and people do all the time.

              it only becomes true, when someone proves it.

              since you and tech have played the "we don't have to prove squat" card,  may i remind you guys that if you played that card in any other arena of life that you two were attempting to "qualify"  as being "true",  you would seek out unadulterated / non manipulated proof before you jumped the tracks on the belief end of things.

              i know tech a little more "personally",   and i know personally he demands "proof".

              it's an integrity joke to think you can say "it works",  and that someone asks you to prove it,  and you cry foul

              i wonder how you two would fare in a trial for your life,  where someone falsely accused you of a crime,  and your fate was dependant on whether or not opposing counsel could "prove their case"  against you (or inadvertantly FOR YOU for that matter).

              i can see you two walking out the back door of the courtroom screaming "foul,   no one has to prove anything"...  ROFL

               

              in your world,  "proof" is subjective.   it has an on/off switch for convience.   your proof button doesn't have an accountability function.    nope.  "proof"  is only applicable when it favors you.

              not in my world,   and certainly not in other peoples lives that know the intrinsic value proof does provide.

                because .........it devides the talkers from the doers.   the truth from fiction.   what i really should pursue,  and what i need to stay away from.   it's an effective guiding light in what's truly right,  ESPECIALLY where emotions are involved.   it devides the room quickly by showing what is true,  vs what is claimed to be "true"

              if my life was on trial,  because someone falsely accused me,  i sure wouldn't employ either of you two as my defense attorney(s)

              "your honor,  no need to go any further in the trial,  i think my client just didn't do it"

              Scared

                          "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 10, 2010, 2:52 am - IP Logged

                ok,  so if it "only works"  when you throw "bigg(er) money at it,  and it's supposedly comes with a guarantee to hit more oftene,  then what kind of person plays it "small"?.

                (I never said that I said for "possible"  CONSISTANCY and PROFIT  you would need too spend MORE money  then  the average player is willing  too spend  and it  can  work whether you spend a lot of money or play  on a  budget  I've never spent over $10 whenever I won and  the kind of people that play it small "LIKE ME" play smart,on a budget,just for fun I MADE this VERY clear before  why is it so hard for you too understand or pay attention??

                 

                tha makes ZERO sense on the integrity addition scale. (Do you take stupid  pills for breakfast in the morning?? who's integrity scale are you using?? NO one is playing your  game because it's not  necessary and pointless  your  in here making complaints about something you  DON'T even use)

                 

                if anything,  lottery players act voracious at times outsid common sense boundaries/emotion,  and so if they "sensed"  it only took a little more money in the trapping of a sure thing.......they would mortgage their house to make that happen. (players that are voracious at times have a "gambling addiction"  the system players that spend more  money for possible  consistancy/profit use a strategic approach the  other ones that play more  money are  quick-pick players who feel the more you buy the  better  your chances  and  no  one would  mortgage there house you sillydude" at least no one on this post  because  anyone that does has a gambling problem and needs  help.)

                the answer to the last part of your request is.........noi have a job to do.... (GOOD then stick too that job and let us play the  way we want  your not giving any good,useful,helpful advice or info in fact all of the  8 yrs  you've  been on this  post I  have never read  anything useful from you)

                "I never said that I said for "possible"  CONSISTANCY and PROFIT  you would need too spend MORE money"...

                exactly. 

                 which is why i stated that you are insinuating that it REALLY works,   when you throw bigger money at it,  and the fact that you don't,   proves your not convinced "it works" at all,   otherwise you would.     you don't,  and that says alot

                 

                "who's integrity scale are you using??"

                it's the universal one.    the one that's applicable in every corner of the world,  throughout every society / culture.   the one that isn't interchangeable depending upon circumstance or people involved.  the one that isn't remotely subjective.  the one where if you say something,  it better be true (if you present it as true,  vs a "maybe"),  otherwise the person that does it,   cannot be trusted.   

                i use that one.    anyone remotely interested in what IS true.......uses "that one"

                "your  in here making complaints about something you  DON'T even use

                gee,  i wonder why i don't use systems?     

                answer ______because as far as i can tell (sans proof),   they don't work outside of the occasional fate factor

                and no,  i am not "complaining"  about systems per se,   because if you actually read the things i wrote about them these last 40+ pages,    you would have noted i am not "anti-system" straight across the board,   just the notion they can give a person an "edge",   because that's not true (until someone proves it TO be true)

                "the system players that spend more  money for possible  consistancy/profit use a strategic approach"

                but you don't,   and it's evident why you don't.

                if it worked like you say it does,  you would follow suite,  and throw more money at it for "consistentcy and profit".

                the real reason you don't,  is because you really know it doesn't work "that good",   and that's just more money you would lose,  instead of "less".

                if you threw more money at it,  you create a larger payoff possibility. 

                but you still won't,  so that says you don't believe it either.

                that old bumper sticker saying ....."put your money where your mouth is"   .....evidently doesn't apply to your beliefs about "how"  you play.   

                in other words,  your wallet doesn't match your beliefs

                "your not giving any good,useful,helpful advice or info in fact all of the  8 yrs  you've  been on this  post I  have never read  anything useful from you"

                leave it to you to pick people / position over the truth...

                you might not have,  because emotionally controlled wishful thinking people aren't exactly receptive to "common sense".

                but yes,  i have helped a few gain a better perspective,   so that they don't get rediculous about this arena of life,  and end up chasing something that most likely won't happen to them.

                by "few",  i fully realize there isn't alot of people at LP that are on the fence,  the ones i try to reach. 

                 most are entrenched in believing they "can".       i know that.   boy do i know that

                but there are some that rest better,  switching from "it HAS to happen to me",  and trying to force the issue,  to "if it is supposed to happen to me,  it will"

                THAT is my legacy in here

                            "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
                  7342 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 10, 2010, 9:28 am - IP Logged

                  "Simply put, if you or I believe our PPs will outperform a like number of QPs, we'll purchase the PPs and if we believe the QPs will outperform a like number of PPs, we'll purchase the QPs".

                   

                  what?    did i just read that right,  that they both have an EQUAL CHANCE ????   

                  here i thought i read "earlier"  in his post that a system is superior because of it's ability to cover all the WB's and bonus balls.

                  he must not have much faith  Blue Angel      in his "system"  afterall. 

                   

                  these guys make stuff up so fast on the fly,    even they can't keep their "beliefs"  straight.

                  or,   it took him a gazillion pages/posts  to accidently "admit".......there is no difference playing either way

                   

                  congradulations stack.........you told the truth

                  (or will you put lipstick on your pig  now?)

                  "what?    did i just read that right,  that they both have an EQUAL CHANCE ????"

                  Are you stupid? 

                  In which language does "outperform" mean the same as "equal chance"?

                  Which part of "if we believe" or "we'll purchase" addressed to another member applies to you?

                    truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                    Michigan
                    United States
                    Member #22395
                    September 24, 2005
                    1583 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 10, 2010, 10:44 am - IP Logged

                    Original Post by visiondude

                    it's called the universal code of integrity...

                    Darn! You have more definitions for the word integrity than the unabridged Oxford Dictionary!

                    i wonder how you two would fare in a trial for your life,  where someone falsely accused you of a crime,  and your fate was dependant on whether or not opposing counsel could "prove their case"  against you (or inadvertantly FOR YOU for that matter).

                    Many a court case has been decided just on the basis of expert testimony.  The LP experts have weighed in and said self-picks are better.  I forgot...in your eyes, expert testimony is just plain ridiculousROFL

                     

                    I was just looking through this thread to see how many "on the fence" people you helped and how grateful they were that you saved them the drugery of doing self-picks vs QP.   Hmmm...listen people...if visiondud helped you, could you all please post a simple "thank you?"

                    Is there any chance that your integrity would allow a simple "case settled out of court?"  Let's just say you can lose with either QPs or SPs and it is your choice which method you use?


                      United States
                      Member #68002
                      December 10, 2008
                      477 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 10, 2010, 10:45 am - IP Logged

                      VISIONDUDE

                      you two make me not only laugh,  but you inadvertantly make me look good.

                      (I'm quite sure no one thinks you  look good in this forum)

                      i "grasped"  fully what your saying,  allright.   you keep saying "you can",  "they can",  "we can",    followed by some excuse about "i/they/we don't have to". ("I" can and have hit the numbers using a strategy,"You" can't hit the numbers using a strategy "They"  who is they?? "We" we who??? and  they are not excuses they are explanations I'm explaining too you that NO one has too prove anything too VISIONDUDE because you don't count what counts are the players that have won money using  a  strategy or  system)

                      even my high school only edumacation can understand that. (I seriously doubt that you are capable of getting anything other  than what you post based on your  personal opinion)

                       

                      calling people names after not qualifying your own claims,   only plays to the advantage of the board,  in the "who is really who",    and "what can do what"  quest. (Oh my goodness stop being such a baby if  you cannot take adult  sarcastic criticism then go too another  forum I don't  have too qualify my claims  based on your standards of acceptance I'm not playing the games for you I play for my enjoyment not for your  approval)

                       

                        name calling and "i refuse" demonstrates a weak position. (ACTUALLY it demonstrates how insignificant your postings,demands,accusations,opinions and attacks are YOU don't even use strategies too  play the games so what's the point in your demanding proof?? do you wanna  learn how too use your  brain too play  the  lottery games?? are you getting tired of LOSING with your $1 quick-pick?? the only weak point  is your criteria for proof that system play is a valid  method)


                        United States
                        Member #68002
                        December 10, 2008
                        477 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 10, 2010, 11:31 am - IP Logged

                        which is why i stated that you are insinuating that it REALLY works, when you throw bigger money at it, and the fact that you don't, proves your not convinced "it works" at all, otherwise you would. you don't, and that says alot

                        (WRONG I never insinuated anything I clearly made a point too your comments about "consistancy" in order too achieve a level of consistancy you would need too spend more money too cover more combinations instead of just focusing on specific trends,patterns etc.. you would focus on more patterns and trends to try and trap the winning numbers.And the reason why I do not THROW more money is because I don't play that way I'm not that kind of a player if I CAN win spending $10 or less then that's what I'M GONNA do it has nothing to do with whether it works or not you can win playing a LOT of money or a LITTLE bit of money players have won buying just one quick-pick while others have won buying 50-100 tickets so it doesn't matter how much you can still win either way,some players I know have won using strategies and spent over $50 while I have won spending $10 or less.DUDE youu are just FREAKING clueless and you do not pay attention too what I post you just try and find some weakness so you can attack you already made a fool of yourself my making comments about me supposedly saying my way is better that quick-picks then you went back and did a search and realised YOU screwed up well your doing it again making yourself look foolish)

                         



                        it's the universal one. the one that's applicable in every corner of the world, throughout every society / culture. the one that isn't interchangeable depending upon circumstance or people involved. the one that isn't remotely subjective. the one where if you say something, it better be true (if you present it as true, vs a "maybe"), otherwise the person that does it, cannot be trusted.

                        (OH MY GOD!!! there is no universal code this is not religion this is gambling you need too leave your christian values at the door they don't apply in here)

                         

                        i use that one.

                         

                        (NOT if it's based on your views and opinons we don't because it's obviously FLAWED)

                         

                        gee, i wonder why i don't use systems? answer ______because as far as i can tell (sans proof), they don't work outside of the occasional fate factor

                        (WRONG you don't use them because you don't know how,don't have the skill,patience and prefer the easy route let the machine do all the work system play worked for me I've hit enough in the past year that I'm convinced that they helped improve my chances because quick-picks never did and in your case you probably shouldn't play anymore you haven't won anything since your last hit how long ago was that?? I've won 5 times in the past year and how many times have you won in the past year?? this PROVES too me that what I'm doing works it's not about profit or consitancy unless that's your goal well that's not my goal I do this for fun)

                         

                        and no, i am not "complaining" about systems per se, because if you actually read the things i wrote about them these last 40+ pages, you would have noted i am not "anti-system" straight across the board, just the notion they can give a person an "edge", because that's not true (until someone proves it TO be true) 

                         

                        (WRONG you are anti-system you claim they DO NOT work or they are a waste of time so now your telling lies you said your here too show how systems have no affect on the game because of randomness and that's it's a waste of time too use that method becuase the games cannot be handicapped in that manner)



                         

                         



                        but you don't, and it's evident why you don't.

                        (WHAT?? I explained why I don't bet a lot of money when I play)

                         

                        if it worked like you say it does, you would follow suite, and throw more money at it for "consistentcy and profit".

                         

                        (WHAT????? are you smoking holy weed?? why should I follow what other players do?? you don't you buy quick-picks so why can't I DECIDE what way too bet?? I TOLD you I'm not playing for profit or consistancy you can't read properly can you?? I play on a budget I have made this perfectly clear in my previous post this enables me too play as much as I want I PREFER this way just like you PREFER $1 quick-picks this in no way shows that I DON'T think systems work it shows how I choose too place my bets,HOW come you don't spend a lot of money on quick-picks?? is it because your afraid it WON'T work?? see 2 can play this game I can say the same thing about you)

                         

                        the real reason you don't, is because you really know it doesn't work "that good", and that's just more money you would lose, instead of "less".

                         

                        (WRONG now your trying too hi-jack my thoughts and views on the subject I never said that at any time and I JUST explained in my above posts why I do not spend big bucks if it didn't work that good I wouldn't be playing using systems at all.I've hit the numbers spending less than $10 that too me is more of a challenge plus why spend BIG bucks if you can achieve the same results spending less money? ever thought about that? no you didn't because your close-minded and cannot think outside the box I never said you would be GUARANTEED a win by spending more money I just said you could POSSIBLY achieve a level of consistancy that way compared with spending less money "YOU DO NOT PAY ATTENTION you just post without thinking things out clearly)

                         

                        if you threw more money at it, you create a larger payoff possibility. but you still won't, so that says you don't believe it either.

                         

                        (WRONG I'm not trying too pay off a mortgage or my car I do this FOR FUN!!! I bet you got your butt kicked a lot in school didn't you?? I can tell I remember kids like you in middle school and junior high not liked very much because they always thought they knew it all or rubbed other kids the wrong way or just needing a butt whipping cause they were so ANNOYING )

                         

                        that old bumper sticker saying ....."put your money where your mouth is" .....evidently doesn't apply to your beliefs about "how" you play. in other words, your wallet doesn't match your beliefs

                         

                        (MY beliefs are not like yours my beliefs make sense are rational yours are not I'm not in here opening my mouth about my way being better than anyone elses if I was then that would apply dude you need too seriously comprehend what I'm saying you continue too make yourself look really foolish in here)


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:19 pm - IP Logged

                          "what?    did i just read that right,  that they both have an EQUAL CHANCE ????"

                          Are you stupid? 

                          In which language does "outperform" mean the same as "equal chance"?

                          Which part of "if we believe" or "we'll purchase" addressed to another member applies to you?

                          Stack47,

                          You are absolutely right when you assert that carefully selected PPs will produce more winning tickets than QPs.  However, if you stick with me at Fooled By Randomness, I hope to convince you eventually that over long periods of time, both approaches will result in the same TOTAL of Winnings($)  minus  Costs($).

                          The only caveat here, of course, is if you Hit the Jackpot.  Since most of us don't live beyond 100 years, and Jackpot cycles are measured in thousands of years, if you are lucky enough to experience this, you won't be concerned much about the facts in the 1st paragraph above!  And this why we're all here, isn't it?  Smiley

                          --Jimmy

                          P.S. So, from my perspective, both you and VisionDude are correct.

                          P.S.S.  VisionDude, please take note!

                            Lucky Loser's avatar - bucks
                            Texas
                            United States
                            Member #86154
                            January 30, 2010
                            1654 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:20 pm - IP Logged

                            which is why i stated that you are insinuating that it REALLY works, when you throw bigger money at it, and the fact that you don't, proves your not convinced "it works" at all, otherwise you would. you don't, and that says alot

                            (WRONG I never insinuated anything I clearly made a point too your comments about "consistancy" in order too achieve a level of consistancy you would need too spend more money too cover more combinations instead of just focusing on specific trends,patterns etc.. you would focus on more patterns and trends to try and trap the winning numbers.And the reason why I do not THROW more money is because I don't play that way I'm not that kind of a player if I CAN win spending $10 or less then that's what I'M GONNA do it has nothing to do with whether it works or not you can win playing a LOT of money or a LITTLE bit of money players have won buying just one quick-pick while others have won buying 50-100 tickets so it doesn't matter how much you can still win either way,some players I know have won using strategies and spent over $50 while I have won spending $10 or less.DUDE youu are just FREAKING clueless and you do not pay attention too what I post you just try and find some weakness so you can attack you already made a fool of yourself my making comments about me supposedly saying my way is better that quick-picks then you went back and did a search and realised YOU screwed up well your doing it again making yourself look foolish)

                             



                            it's the universal one. the one that's applicable in every corner of the world, throughout every society / culture. the one that isn't interchangeable depending upon circumstance or people involved. the one that isn't remotely subjective. the one where if you say something, it better be true (if you present it as true, vs a "maybe"), otherwise the person that does it, cannot be trusted.

                            (OH MY GOD!!! there is no universal code this is not religion this is gambling you need too leave your christian values at the door they don't apply in here)

                             

                            i use that one.

                             

                            (NOT if it's based on your views and opinons we don't because it's obviously FLAWED)

                             

                            gee, i wonder why i don't use systems? answer ______because as far as i can tell (sans proof), they don't work outside of the occasional fate factor

                            (WRONG you don't use them because you don't know how,don't have the skill,patience and prefer the easy route let the machine do all the work system play worked for me I've hit enough in the past year that I'm convinced that they helped improve my chances because quick-picks never did and in your case you probably shouldn't play anymore you haven't won anything since your last hit how long ago was that?? I've won 5 times in the past year and how many times have you won in the past year?? this PROVES too me that what I'm doing works it's not about profit or consitancy unless that's your goal well that's not my goal I do this for fun)

                             

                            and no, i am not "complaining" about systems per se, because if you actually read the things i wrote about them these last 40+ pages, you would have noted i am not "anti-system" straight across the board, just the notion they can give a person an "edge", because that's not true (until someone proves it TO be true) 

                             

                            (WRONG you are anti-system you claim they DO NOT work or they are a waste of time so now your telling lies you said your here too show how systems have no affect on the game because of randomness and that's it's a waste of time too use that method becuase the games cannot be handicapped in that manner)



                             

                             



                            but you don't, and it's evident why you don't.

                            (WHAT?? I explained why I don't bet a lot of money when I play)

                             

                            if it worked like you say it does, you would follow suite, and throw more money at it for "consistentcy and profit".

                             

                            (WHAT????? are you smoking holy weed?? why should I follow what other players do?? you don't you buy quick-picks so why can't I DECIDE what way too bet?? I TOLD you I'm not playing for profit or consistancy you can't read properly can you?? I play on a budget I have made this perfectly clear in my previous post this enables me too play as much as I want I PREFER this way just like you PREFER $1 quick-picks this in no way shows that I DON'T think systems work it shows how I choose too place my bets,HOW come you don't spend a lot of money on quick-picks?? is it because your afraid it WON'T work?? see 2 can play this game I can say the same thing about you)

                             

                            the real reason you don't, is because you really know it doesn't work "that good", and that's just more money you would lose, instead of "less".

                             

                            (WRONG now your trying too hi-jack my thoughts and views on the subject I never said that at any time and I JUST explained in my above posts why I do not spend big bucks if it didn't work that good I wouldn't be playing using systems at all.I've hit the numbers spending less than $10 that too me is more of a challenge plus why spend BIG bucks if you can achieve the same results spending less money? ever thought about that? no you didn't because your close-minded and cannot think outside the box I never said you would be GUARANTEED a win by spending more money I just said you could POSSIBLY achieve a level of consistancy that way compared with spending less money "YOU DO NOT PAY ATTENTION you just post without thinking things out clearly)

                             

                            if you threw more money at it, you create a larger payoff possibility. but you still won't, so that says you don't believe it either.

                             

                            (WRONG I'm not trying too pay off a mortgage or my car I do this FOR FUN!!! I bet you got your butt kicked a lot in school didn't you?? I can tell I remember kids like you in middle school and junior high not liked very much because they always thought they knew it all or rubbed other kids the wrong way or just needing a butt whipping cause they were so ANNOYING )

                             

                            that old bumper sticker saying ....."put your money where your mouth is" .....evidently doesn't apply to your beliefs about "how" you play. in other words, your wallet doesn't match your beliefs

                             

                            (MY beliefs are not like yours my beliefs make sense are rational yours are not I'm not in here opening my mouth about my way being better than anyone elses if I was then that would apply dude you need too seriously comprehend what I'm saying you continue too make yourself look really foolish in here)

                            (WRONG I never insinuated anything I clearly made a point too your comments about "consistancy" in order too achieve a level of consistancy you would need too spend more money too cover more combinations instead of just focusing on specific trends,patterns etc.. you would focus on more patterns and trends to try and trap the winning numbers.

                            >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

                            LTI, you're right on point here with this particular resolve. With more correct combinations based on what's currently going on, more consistency is definitely realized at the expense of a smaller profit. This is especially true when only playing around certain draws and the consistency is actually increased. However, there is a "teeter-totter" where spending more costs too much when a loss is finally absorbed and this can be a draw back if it causes the profit and the player's money to be lost altogether.

                            I've played this way a lot and it works well but, I got tired of losing most of what I had worked for when that loss finally caught up...and it will catch up eventually. No matter how well the system (approach) is and how many numbers are played. Ideally, a good system will allow more gross profit to be made in one hit when it takes place and costs 1/3 of what the payout is to realize anything worthwhile. A good balance of cost (numbers) along with a skillful approach will produce some good money even at the expense of losses here and there. We must lose in order to win and so long as the losses are less than the wins, profit-wise, the player will remain ahead. Still gotta spend a little to have a reasonable chance no matter what. Just my .02 based on your very informative excerpt above. Good post!!!

                             

                            L.L.

                             

                              Avatar
                              Kentucky
                              United States
                              Member #32652
                              February 14, 2006
                              7342 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 10, 2010, 12:42 pm - IP Logged

                              "Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone".

                              it's called the universal code of integrity...

                              ....  where if you make a qualifying veined statement about "ability",   in an "ability vs ability"  thread,  then the integrity code kicks in,  and implores you to answer your own claim.

                              of course you don't "have to",    but then that automatically strips your claims as being valid,  and places in truth limbo land until you can "prove it".

                              anyone can claim anything is "true",  and people do all the time.

                              it only becomes true, when someone proves it.

                              since you and tech have played the "we don't have to prove squat" card,  may i remind you guys that if you played that card in any other arena of life that you two were attempting to "qualify"  as being "true",  you would seek out unadulterated / non manipulated proof before you jumped the tracks on the belief end of things.

                              i know tech a little more "personally",   and i know personally he demands "proof".

                              it's an integrity joke to think you can say "it works",  and that someone asks you to prove it,  and you cry foul

                              i wonder how you two would fare in a trial for your life,  where someone falsely accused you of a crime,  and your fate was dependant on whether or not opposing counsel could "prove their case"  against you (or inadvertantly FOR YOU for that matter).

                              i can see you two walking out the back door of the courtroom screaming "foul,   no one has to prove anything"...  ROFL

                               

                              in your world,  "proof" is subjective.   it has an on/off switch for convience.   your proof button doesn't have an accountability function.    nope.  "proof"  is only applicable when it favors you.

                              not in my world,   and certainly not in other peoples lives that know the intrinsic value proof does provide.

                                because .........it devides the talkers from the doers.   the truth from fiction.   what i really should pursue,  and what i need to stay away from.   it's an effective guiding light in what's truly right,  ESPECIALLY where emotions are involved.   it devides the room quickly by showing what is true,  vs what is claimed to be "true"

                              if my life was on trial,  because someone falsely accused me,  i sure wouldn't employ either of you two as my defense attorney(s)

                              "your honor,  no need to go any further in the trial,  i think my client just didn't do it"

                              Scared

                              You quoted me saying "Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone". but I said, "Where is written that we have to PROVE  our playing strategy to anyone; especially someone lacking the mathematical background to understand overall coverage or common sense to understand the difference between any random numbers and the purchased QPs this topic is about?"

                              "it's called the universal code of integrity... "

                              Now I'm getting a lecture about about integrity from someone who can play their IQ as a bonus number in MegaMillions. Just because you can't grasp common English punctuation or are choosing to act like an idiot, doesn't give you the right to misquote me by deleting the rest of my sentence. I don't need to ask for proof of your imaginary "universal code of integrity" because we can add "integrity" to the growing list words you don't understand the meaning of.

                              "where if you make a qualifying veined statement about "ability",   in an "ability vs ability"  thread,  then the integrity code kicks in,  and implores you to answer your own claim."

                              While it might take every ounce of your ability to purchase a QP, the majority of players just ask lottery clerks for QPs in amounts of $1 or higher. Since it's common knowledge filling out even one playslip correctly takes a little more time, most people will conclude filling playslips, making the tickets PPs, takes slightly more ability. But that's not with this thread is about.

                              This thread is about about the fact more than twice as many purchased QPs are sold than PPs and the fact QPs win more than twice as many prizes as PPs; the actual figures are 70% to 80%. Questions were asked "If one method of play is better, wouldn't it's winning percentage fare better than it's sales percentage?" and "If neither method  beats the odds of winning percentage vs. sales percentage, how is one better than the other?". A qualifying question asking if both those questions pertained to purchased QPs and PPs because a pest with very little lottery knowledge kept suggesting any RNG combos were the same purchased QPs.

                              I mentioned a 46 combination abbreviated wheel found right here on LP that can be used with all 46 MM bonus has better coverage than 46 purchased QPs. If you're disputing the fact wheel guarantees a two number match, check the wheel against all the MM drawings after the latest matrix change. Hopefully even you can understand how a 46 combo wheel can include all 46 bonus numbers.

                              There was no mention of performance just a statement about the mathematical facts from the "odds and payoff" page found in all state lotteries offering MM and thousands of other websites. They list the odds of matching the bonus number at 75 to 1 so common sense should tell anyone, including you, it should take 75 tickets (purchased QPs or RNG PPs) to match the coverage anyone can get by using the 46 combo wheel. If anyone can get the same coverage for $46 as for $75, I'm pretty sure most players will chose the former.

                              It's not my wheel so if you're disputing the ability of the wheel to perform as advertised, take that question of integrity up the author of the wheel or the owner of this Website. If you're disputing the fact 46 purchased QPs will probably not cover all the bonus balls, spend the $46 dollars and show us. But since I know for a fact what the wheel does, I don't need to spend $46 on QPs on the slight chance those tickets might match the same coverage. Why anybody would want to waste their time checking the wheel's coverage against any RNG's coverage defies all logic when at best they only have a slight chance of finding a set of 46 combos with equal coverage.

                              If it's my opinion over time the wheel could show a profit and choose to spend MY money purchases tickets, it's none of your business and I never asked for your opinion on how to spend MY money. You may be an instructor at a driving school giving you some authority to give orders to pimple faced kids, but this ain't no driving school and your orders are meaningless.

                              As for your demands of proof, I can only quote something you probably heard many times.

                              "Go, I say go away boy, you bother me"

                                 
                                Page 49 of 78