Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 17, 2017, 10:48 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 51 of 78
54
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #81843
October 31, 2009
856 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 10, 2010, 8:14 pm - IP Logged

Proof! It demands proof! It is not worthy of it!

I think the systems players need only to prove to themselves what works. After all, anyone can do a QP. I can see the distrust for a system by a player that bet the bank on one draw. I can see the laziness for buying a QP when a system does not hatch overnight or win every draw. I can understand the mistrust of systems by players who trusted a system, only to give up after a few events.

The guy that played the same numbers and won 150K on his numbers did not quit. He was not a quitter and is now a winner. He had a system. He played the same numbers faithfully in the same game. He had no ambition to prove anything but he did have resolve to win. He did! I would say that there are some systems that work that do not require large or small wheels to win. One set of numbers or digits is all it takes to win any draw. Don’t believe me? Want proof? Look at the results for your favorite game.

Nobody has to defend how they play to anyone. What seems to be defended here in this thread is QP play, while systematic play is on trial. Why are there no photos of QP winners (tickets) here at LP? The systems players are not shy to post. There are more people winning with a system here at LP than you will find anywhere. It costs nothing to be a member and play QP’s. Why would QP people come here and berate systems play? Demand proof of systems that work like anyone using a system has to defend themselves? This thread is really manic for proof when proof is not required. You can ask for proof, but don’t expect it. I have seen this kind of ego chumming before so some lazy person can shortcut their way to success while hitchhiking like a parasite, saying, ”give me more, more!”.

Nope, no one has to prove one little thing about systematic play, no matter who says it is a failure. People are people and when it comes to money they are tight lipped when they got a good thing going. (tip: I went Platinum ASAP) When you’re flush, there will always be those who demand what you have, like they are entitled to it. Same goes for proof. Nobody is entitled to proof but a court of law. Our law says we are innocent until proven guilty. Demanding proof of a system’s robustness is like saying, “you are guilty, prove your innocence”. That is an accusers charge. That manic leg-humping accusative toothless dog just don’t hunt!

A few  QP'rs here  are the biggest mouths. What do they have to defend by challenging systematic play? A BIG LAZY LOSER EGO with lots of time on their hands.

DD

    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
    mid-Ohio
    United States
    Member #9
    March 24, 2001
    19895 Posts
    Online
    Posted: August 10, 2010, 8:51 pm - IP Logged

    I don't remember anyone claiming  that SP's are better  than QP's or  outperform them I have always maintained  that they  are both  euqal as a method for playing the  numbers  but like I've said many times before SP's WORKED better  for me than  quick-picks so I don't see  how you can say they aren't a valid way of  playing or that  you need proof they  are capable of increasing a players chance I told you that's the only way I HAVE won and  that's proof enough for me.

    No one might have said it but I thought the point this thread to settle the question about whether combinations picked using a strategy would do better than combinations picked randomly with no strategy. 

    The point was made that websites figures on self picks and quick picks were confusing because many self picks were combinations gotten from all kinds of places which didn't involve a strategy, some might have even been old QP numbers replayed.

    The point was made that by picking one own numbers, better coverage of all the numbers could be gotten with fewer lines which made sense to me.

    Then you made the point why should anyone have to prove anything since everyone were just posting their ideas for pick numbers and selling a system to do it. 

    50 pages of debate and nothing proved or disproved .  I guess the real proof will be when a LP member wins a lottery jackpot and share with the rest of us how he did it.  Even then is might be he just got lucky.

    Mean while I'm still working on my system, I better go and play the 20 lines it picked for tonight's MM drawing before it's too late.

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

      visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
      light on my feet
      United States
      Member #356
      May 20, 2002
      2744 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 11, 2010, 1:26 am - IP Logged

      Proof! It demands proof! It is not worthy of it!

      I think the systems players need only to prove to themselves what works. After all, anyone can do a QP. I can see the distrust for a system by a player that bet the bank on one draw. I can see the laziness for buying a QP when a system does not hatch overnight or win every draw. I can understand the mistrust of systems by players who trusted a system, only to give up after a few events.

      The guy that played the same numbers and won 150K on his numbers did not quit. He was not a quitter and is now a winner. He had a system. He played the same numbers faithfully in the same game. He had no ambition to prove anything but he did have resolve to win. He did! I would say that there are some systems that work that do not require large or small wheels to win. One set of numbers or digits is all it takes to win any draw. Don’t believe me? Want proof? Look at the results for your favorite game.

      Nobody has to defend how they play to anyone. What seems to be defended here in this thread is QP play, while systematic play is on trial. Why are there no photos of QP winners (tickets) here at LP? The systems players are not shy to post. There are more people winning with a system here at LP than you will find anywhere. It costs nothing to be a member and play QP’s. Why would QP people come here and berate systems play? Demand proof of systems that work like anyone using a system has to defend themselves? This thread is really manic for proof when proof is not required. You can ask for proof, but don’t expect it. I have seen this kind of ego chumming before so some lazy person can shortcut their way to success while hitchhiking like a parasite, saying, ”give me more, more!”.

      Nope, no one has to prove one little thing about systematic play, no matter who says it is a failure. People are people and when it comes to money they are tight lipped when they got a good thing going. (tip: I went Platinum ASAP) When you’re flush, there will always be those who demand what you have, like they are entitled to it. Same goes for proof. Nobody is entitled to proof but a court of law. Our law says we are innocent until proven guilty. Demanding proof of a system’s robustness is like saying, “you are guilty, prove your innocence”. That is an accusers charge. That manic leg-humping accusative toothless dog just don’t hunt!

      A few  QP'rs here  are the biggest mouths. What do they have to defend by challenging systematic play? A BIG LAZY LOSER EGO with lots of time on their hands.

      DD

      "A few  QP'rs here  are the biggest mouths. What do they have to defend by challenging systematic play? A BIG LAZY LOSER EGO with lots of time on their hands"

       

       "we" are defending the real truth about the pursuit of the lottery,  and the integrity factor as to WHAT'S TRULY POSSIBLE......vs what's "claimed".

      and ......when guys like you state QP's are a waste of time,  and that "systems"  can grant a player a statistical edge,  then you (and whoever else makes that assertion)   gets the spotlight turned on about whether or not that statement is actually true,  or wishful thinking projection.

      QPer's aren't on the hook to prove anything,  because "we"  don't make the same hyped-up claims guys like you make. 

      your the ones that make claims that you can beat the odds over QP's,  and now your just 1 person in an ever growing line of people that can't prove that statement to be true.   big whoop.

      speaking of the "court of law",  if any of the people in this thread that stated they COULD gain a statistical edge over QP's,  and therefore "win more",  and would offer their claim up IN a court of law,  they would thrown out of the court while under cross examination for insufficient evidence in record time.

      under scrutiny in a court of law,  this "claim" of yours/others is a joke,  to be perfectly blunt about it

      i would love to witness this played out judge judy style,  and watch what she does when guys like you cry "we don't have to prove it". 

      you would end up on jerry springer,  fighting amongst yourselves .

       

      50 pages,  and still no proof that systems are better than QP's

                  "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 11, 2010, 2:04 am - IP Logged

        Original Post by visiondude

        anyone can get up on a witness stand and claim to be an "expert",  and unless it's the opposing attorney's first day on the job,  he would MAKE HIM --------> prove it

          you forgot about that part of it

        Sorry, that is incorrect.  If a person is designated an expert witness and accepted as such, he/she only explains procedures.  They are not required to prove they are expert witnesses.  They don't have to actually demonstrate with all kinds of lottery testing data for the Judge or jury.  Of course they could bore the court to tears with reams of paper data, if they wanted, but they don't have to.  Their word is accepted. 

         

        expert witness n. a person who is a specialist in a subject, often technical, who may present his/her expert opinion without having been a witness to any occurrence relating to the lawsuit or criminal case. It is an exception to the rule against giving an opinion in trial, provided that the expert is qualified by evidence of his/her expertise, training and special knowledge. If the expertise is challenged, the attorney for the party calling the "expert" must make a showing of the necessary background through questions in court, and the trial judge has discretion to qualify the witness or rule he/she is not an expert, or is an expert on limited subjects. Experts are usually paid handsomely for their services and may be asked by the opposition the amount they are receiving for their work on the case. In most jurisdictions, both sides must exchange the names and addresses of proposed experts to allow pre-trial depositions.

        you must be referring to "make believe court"  on TV,  for your replication of "how it works".

        you keep leaving out all the facts,  and are consistently used to including only the parts that favor your position.

        unfortunately,  i am good at "filling in the blanks"  ..........that people purposefully leave blank.

         

        you "forgot" what comes next....

        the systematic strip job that the opposing attorney puts on "mr claimed expert",   by ripping his "expertness"  out from under he/she.

        there isn't a whole lot of opposing attorneys on the planet that would sit there and go...."ok,  the guy says he is an expert.  how can i argue against that".     the attorney who allowed that without cross examination proof would be working at the .99 store in a about a week.

        actually,  it just came to me. 

        you know what the first qualifying strip job line of questioning  would be under cross examination?

        attorney fresh off the bar exam on his first trial......

        attorney ; "so sir,  you claim your a "lottery expert"

        lottery "expert".    "yes.  i am"

        attorney;  "ever win any money at it?"

        lottery "expert";   "yes sir"   (but instead of a resounding YES SIR,  the lottery "expert" answers yes sir, because he knows what question the attorney will ask next)

        attorney;  "win more than you spend, eh"

        lottery "expert";  "uhhhhhh, no".   not exactly".

        attorney:  "then what entitles you to call yourself an "expert",   just because you know alot about it?"

        attorney turns toward the jury,  and makes thier usual remarks .........

        "your an expert huh,   yet you cannot win more than you spend.   i think i will borrow a line from bill clinton,  when he said........"depends on what your definition of "expert" is, is.    without any proof,  the guy just claims he's an "expert".   i rest my case".

        for which the jury rightfully strikes the witness out as an "expert",   because in a court of law,  under cross examination....

        proof is required,  once someone crosses the threshold of claiming something.

        next time truecritic,  please tell the truth,  the WHOLE TRUTH,  so help you God...

                    "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 11, 2010, 2:10 am - IP Logged

          "A few  QP'rs here  are the biggest mouths. What do they have to defend by challenging systematic play? A BIG LAZY LOSER EGO with lots of time on their hands"

           

           "we" are defending the real truth about the pursuit of the lottery,  and the integrity factor as to WHAT'S TRULY POSSIBLE......vs what's "claimed".

          and ......when guys like you state QP's are a waste of time,  and that "systems"  can grant a player a statistical edge,  then you (and whoever else makes that assertion)   gets the spotlight turned on about whether or not that statement is actually true,  or wishful thinking projection.

          QPer's aren't on the hook to prove anything,  because "we"  don't make the same hyped-up claims guys like you make. 

          your the ones that make claims that you can beat the odds over QP's,  and now your just 1 person in an ever growing line of people that can't prove that statement to be true.   big whoop.

          speaking of the "court of law",  if any of the people in this thread that stated they COULD gain a statistical edge over QP's,  and therefore "win more",  and would offer their claim up IN a court of law,  they would thrown out of the court while under cross examination for insufficient evidence in record time.

          under scrutiny in a court of law,  this "claim" of yours/others is a joke,  to be perfectly blunt about it

          i would love to witness this played out judge judy style,  and watch what she does when guys like you cry "we don't have to prove it". 

          you would end up on jerry springer,  fighting amongst yourselves .

           

          50 pages,  and still no proof that systems are better than QP's

          So it's PROOF you want, eh?

          I am prepared to provide proof, at least computer backtest proof of the success or failure of 1 popular P-3 System, a variation of TTT.

          Go here to read a request I made to twedk about 24 hours ago.  It's too soon to speculate whether he or she is willing to cooperate; I will wait a few days before giving up.  twedk last posted on the 8th.  Not being familiar with notation you guys probably understand, I wasn't able to glean enough info to start writing the module.  This link will explain what I want to do.  It will be part of my process in the Fooled by Randomness Thread.

          http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/207517/1737462

          What do you think?

          --Jimmy4164

            visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
            light on my feet
            United States
            Member #356
            May 20, 2002
            2744 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 11, 2010, 2:22 am - IP Logged

            Original Post by visiondude

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

            "i have maintained for 8 years in here that they both have an equal chance

            never once did i say QP's are the way to go,  only it's my preferred method of play.

            but the technical answer to your question above is no.    why?    because the real contention is that "you guys"  keep saying that systems outperform QP's,  and that's not true proof -wise,  so i would be a fool to "settle out of court".

            integrity about a position demands i stick with the truth about a matter,  and "settling"  is akin abandoning THAT truth"

            Sure you don't want to settle out of court?

            Many cases are settled out of court.  Especially when it is a very weak case to begin with.  The VERY BEST you have is that QP are equal to SP.  You have absolutely no one stating that QPs are better than SPs.   Also you have a lack of witnesses, you are carrying the torch all by yourself saying they have an equal chance.  I don't see hordes of people thanking you for saving them the drudgery of self-picks.

            I've gone so far as to say that not ALL players that choose their numbers will outdo QPs.  Some will, some won't.  How about if I switch that around and say sometimes QPs will outdo self-picks? 

            One might be drawn to the conclusion that someone is paying you to continue and pursue this.  No normal, rational person would.  Perhaps getting some kind of bribe?  I am starting to question your integrities -  all variations of them.

            carrying a torch all by oneself could be a good indicator.      in this case,  it means i don't mind even "if"  i am all alone on this.

             

            anyone who bases "truth"  on the "amounts of people" involved,  sure doesn't have a handle on ambivalent universal truth

            "it"  is either true,  or it isn't. 

             "thousands"  of people believing it won't "make it true'

             

            my "case"  is airtight solid,   because i didn't ever state QP's are "better".    i stated they are equal to anything out there,  simply because the lottery is random.

            i merely defended against the claimed notion (by many in this thread)  that SP's are better than QP's.

            i only jumped into the fray after people started claiming that.

            you can't blame me,  for something someone else stated.

            you can only come after me on positions I hold.

             

            nope.   another in a long line of lame excuses (somebody must be paying you).

            trying to think what's  lamest on the lame scale.

            (1)  he can't spell

            (2)  dude can't CAP his letters.

            (3)  you teach teenagers how to drive?   (that was pertinent - lol)

            (4)  you play QP's only, what do you know?

            (5) my personal fav......"you HAVE to purchase the qp's in order for them to be valid"  (i die laughing everytime i read that one)

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

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

                     until further notice,  it's  france everyday

              Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
              Zeta Reticuli Star System
              United States
              Member #30470
              January 17, 2006
              10390 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 11, 2010, 2:35 am - IP Logged

              I guess this was one of those lazy loser quick picks:

              LITTLE LOTTO PRIZE PAYOUTS FOR TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2010

              WINNING NUMBERS: 02 - 22 - 35 - 37 - 39

              PLAYERS MATCHING 5 OF 5 NUMBERS
              INCLUDING SUBSCRIPTION WINNERS 1
              EACH PLAYER WILL RECEIVE $490,000.00

              WINNING TICKETS WERE SOLD AT

              107599 KWIK MART (QP)
              5500 W MONTROSE
              CHICAGO/60641

              ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

              The jackpot start point for this game is $100,000. When it gets pumped up it gets a lot of play. And with that, one solo winner, a QP.

              Your ball, self-pickers.

              The Pick 6 game has had 7 jackpots this year, 6 were QPs.

              Casey Stengel said something about going with the percentages.

              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.

                visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                light on my feet
                United States
                Member #356
                May 20, 2002
                2744 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 11, 2010, 2:38 am - IP Logged

                reading back thru the posts,  i forgot not only a lame excuse addition to the lame chart,  but an outright lie aimed at discrediting me,  because these three people lack charcater when coming at me,   and instead of attacking my position,  they go for the throat on my character

                the outright lie that what i am doing in here,  is for the purpose of jacking someones effort so i can profit off of them.

                that's an outright lie,  and the following people knew they were lying about me when they said it...

                jarasan

                DD

                truecritic

                if you 3 want to go toe to toe with me debate wise,  i stick my chin out enough,  so that's fair.

                but if you resort to lying about me again,   it's on.

                 

                purposefully lying about someone.   yeah that demonstrates "strength"  in a position  Puke

                            "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 11, 2010, 2:53 am - IP Logged

                  now that i needed to expend the energy it took to take the garbage cans to the front curb,  it's now time to do what i said i would do from earlier today,  because i do what i say i can do.

                  but first,  a disclaimer.....

                  i don't think picking numbers, playing "systems",  toodling around trying to figure out "if" it works,  is bad staright across the board.

                  if i did,  i would include the likes of RJoh, jimmy,  and all the otherpeople in this thread that have been respectful,  and offered up their "what if's" on my attention span theater "list".

                  i "target"  people who make psuedo arrogant claims,  to see if they can live up to it,  and all the other "peripheral comers"  who think they can talk smack to me,  just because i disagree with them.

                  all the rest of you,  i don't have a problem if we disagree on what happens in a lottery draw results wise.

                  i respect differeing opinions,  but i won't tolerate purposeful jerks just because we disagree.

                  you do that,  you attract my "attention". 

                  if you notice,  i have been respectful to all the others in here that acted respectfully,

                  now,  onto what i said i would do...

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

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

                           until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                    Lucky Loser's avatar - bucks
                    Texas
                    United States
                    Member #86154
                    January 30, 2010
                    1654 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 11, 2010, 3:20 am - IP Logged

                    I'd like to know the time frame  between the hits of the Quick Pickers. After a str8 or boxed hit, when does the next hit, of the exact same nature, take place? What will this tell us? It will let us know if the QP's are actually generating positive cash flow (PCF) aka true profit. So much ado about the QP's and that's fine until this is realized: What happens between the initial hit and the next hit of the exact same nature?

                    If all that profit is ultimately spent back with attempts to re-produce "that particular hit", or, "a hit" then by the time it actually happens the money recovered is comprised of only losses. Thus, there really is no win available...in the sense of making money that is. If they don't play it back, then how long is it before they get another hit? With this in mind, it's very possible that a "methodical player" produces smaller yet consistent profits equalling and/or surpassing the QP's "once in a..." type hits.

                    It's really about how much money is made by the individual in the end. Statistics mean nothing whatsoever. Please understand this, people. Just because a person hits once, even on a str8, for the month of August doesn't mean they're raising so much cain. How much money have they spent before it happened is what really matters here. This includes expenses on all the games like JP's, and scratch-offs as well. Are you really making money, still in the hole, or breaking even?

                    I'm still coming out of the hole, personally, whenever I hit. But, I'm still getting my money back consistently a little at a time. Less total expenses on these games also increases profits which is why I limit what I'll spend on any of the games in accordance to what I expect to make with the bread and butter games. Winning can also be just winning "some" of your money "back". However, true profit is above and beyond all of what one has invested in something...PERIOD.

                    To this end, I certainly believe that PP's will out perfom QP's because time is of the essence when it comes to recovering one's money. PP's produce better consistency within the equation at hand while QP's are hoping to "make the team" so to speak. Luck does happen, though. In general, unless and until a person can hit on a JP game or scratch-off for at least $10,000, they'll still be in "lotto debt" when a win takes place due to past expenses. A couple of heavy wins on Pick 4 can also dig one out of "lotto debt" which is what I'm currently working on doing.

                     I believe in looking at this with "open eyes" because only then can I focus on my goal which is ultimately to recover all of my money and actually generate pure true profit. I still have a little way to go but, I'm comfortable knowing I'm getting there slowly.

                    ------------------------------------------------------- 

                    DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed here are mine and solely mine. They are not intended or designed to impose on or persuade in way, shape form, or fashion. Furthermore, I assume absolutely no responsibility for personal interpretation by the said reader(s). 

                    L.L.

                     

                     

                      visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                      light on my feet
                      United States
                      Member #356
                      May 20, 2002
                      2744 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 11, 2010, 3:22 am - IP Logged

                      i am the one that brought up the (lack of)  integrity issue,  so now i will live up to my own "assertions".

                      since i made the claim that i am a doer,  instead of a "talker",  i decided that i needed to prove i was,  instead of being thrown on the rest of the pile of "talkers" in here vs their "claims".

                      you know,  being willing to actually demonstrate what I believe to be true about the lottery,  instead of "insisting"  it's only random,  like all these other people in here that keep insisting systems are better than QP's,  etc

                       something that will prove i have a position of strength,  by offering up something that will cost me.    something that will show that I am willing to put my proverbial money where my mouth is,   so that i can distance myself farther from the "non integrity"  crowd.     the ones that claim - but make up excuses,  and refuse.

                      so i came up with this...

                       i am offering a challenge to anyone  who is willing to do a side by side apples to apples comparison of their system,  vs QP's  off of the LP generator.

                      the caveats? 

                      (1)  you can pick whatever game you like,  that you are "proficient in".   it doesn't matter to me what game,  what state,  how many numbers per draw,  etc.     WHATEVER FAVORS YOU

                      (2)  we will do it for a month,  on every draw within that month.

                      (3)  the juiciest part......."if"  my random QP's lose against your PP's,  i will leave LP for good,  only to return once (to post my win,  should i be right about being "meant to",  and i have never been wrong about the knowing part beforehand).   

                       after said "loss",  i can never post again at LP.    ever

                      (4)  because i am unafraid of my position,  and realize the potential weakness (i think)  of yours,  as a stipulation of the challenge,  you can stay at LP after the results,   because it's my reputation / cyber life i am auctioning off - not yours.

                      (5)  we must agree to the terms before the challenge begins,  and no "on the fly"  changing of the rules once the challenge has begun.

                       

                      that's how you back up what you believe,  instead of talking about it telling people "it's true",  and being completely unwilling to show it actually is.

                      i just put up 8 years of memories and effort for the taking...

                      any takers?

                       

                       

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

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

                               until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                        truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                        Michigan
                        United States
                        Member #22395
                        September 24, 2005
                        1583 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 11, 2010, 6:55 am - IP Logged

                        i am the one that brought up the (lack of)  integrity issue,  so now i will live up to my own "assertions".

                        since i made the claim that i am a doer,  instead of a "talker",  i decided that i needed to prove i was,  instead of being thrown on the rest of the pile of "talkers" in here vs their "claims".

                        you know,  being willing to actually demonstrate what I believe to be true about the lottery,  instead of "insisting"  it's only random,  like all these other people in here that keep insisting systems are better than QP's,  etc

                         something that will prove i have a position of strength,  by offering up something that will cost me.    something that will show that I am willing to put my proverbial money where my mouth is,   so that i can distance myself farther from the "non integrity"  crowd.     the ones that claim - but make up excuses,  and refuse.

                        so i came up with this...

                         i am offering a challenge to anyone  who is willing to do a side by side apples to apples comparison of their system,  vs QP's  off of the LP generator.

                        the caveats? 

                        (1)  you can pick whatever game you like,  that you are "proficient in".   it doesn't matter to me what game,  what state,  how many numbers per draw,  etc.     WHATEVER FAVORS YOU

                        (2)  we will do it for a month,  on every draw within that month.

                        (3)  the juiciest part......."if"  my random QP's lose against your PP's,  i will leave LP for good,  only to return once (to post my win,  should i be right about being "meant to",  and i have never been wrong about the knowing part beforehand).   

                         after said "loss",  i can never post again at LP.    ever

                        (4)  because i am unafraid of my position,  and realize the potential weakness (i think)  of yours,  as a stipulation of the challenge,  you can stay at LP after the results,   because it's my reputation / cyber life i am auctioning off - not yours.

                        (5)  we must agree to the terms before the challenge begins,  and no "on the fly"  changing of the rules once the challenge has begun.

                         

                        that's how you back up what you believe,  instead of talking about it telling people "it's true",  and being completely unwilling to show it actually is.

                        i just put up 8 years of memories and effort for the taking...

                        any takers?

                         

                         

                        Big Whoop!

                          truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                          Michigan
                          United States
                          Member #22395
                          September 24, 2005
                          1583 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 11, 2010, 7:25 am - IP Logged

                          you must be referring to "make believe court"  on TV,  for your replication of "how it works".

                          you keep leaving out all the facts,  and are consistently used to including only the parts that favor your position.

                          unfortunately,  i am good at "filling in the blanks"  ..........that people purposefully leave blank.

                           

                          you "forgot" what comes next....

                          the systematic strip job that the opposing attorney puts on "mr claimed expert",   by ripping his "expertness"  out from under he/she.

                          there isn't a whole lot of opposing attorneys on the planet that would sit there and go...."ok,  the guy says he is an expert.  how can i argue against that".     the attorney who allowed that without cross examination proof would be working at the .99 store in a about a week.

                          actually,  it just came to me. 

                          you know what the first qualifying strip job line of questioning  would be under cross examination?

                          attorney fresh off the bar exam on his first trial......

                          attorney ; "so sir,  you claim your a "lottery expert"

                          lottery "expert".    "yes.  i am"

                          attorney;  "ever win any money at it?"

                          lottery "expert";   "yes sir"   (but instead of a resounding YES SIR,  the lottery "expert" answers yes sir, because he knows what question the attorney will ask next)

                          attorney;  "win more than you spend, eh"

                          lottery "expert";  "uhhhhhh, no".   not exactly".

                          attorney:  "then what entitles you to call yourself an "expert",   just because you know alot about it?"

                          attorney turns toward the jury,  and makes thier usual remarks .........

                          "your an expert huh,   yet you cannot win more than you spend.   i think i will borrow a line from bill clinton,  when he said........"depends on what your definition of "expert" is, is.    without any proof,  the guy just claims he's an "expert".   i rest my case".

                          for which the jury rightfully strikes the witness out as an "expert",   because in a court of law,  under cross examination....

                          proof is required,  once someone crosses the threshold of claiming something.

                          next time truecritic,  please tell the truth,  the WHOLE TRUTH,  so help you God...

                          Just go ahead and try your scenario in a real court and see where it gets you.  You live in a fantasy world where you pick and choose what people say to suit yourself.  You claim you aren't the smartest apple in the bushel and you prove it with every post.  Your lack of improving your grammar proves stupidity as well.

                          I thought you'd be able to use "reason" and quit.  You choose to be a dunce.  I accept who you are.  I don't care whether you leave LP or not - we're done.

                            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                            Michigan
                            United States
                            Member #22395
                            September 24, 2005
                            1583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 11, 2010, 7:57 am - IP Logged

                            So it's PROOF you want, eh?

                            I am prepared to provide proof, at least computer backtest proof of the success or failure of 1 popular P-3 System, a variation of TTT.

                            Go here to read a request I made to twedk about 24 hours ago.  It's too soon to speculate whether he or she is willing to cooperate; I will wait a few days before giving up.  twedk last posted on the 8th.  Not being familiar with notation you guys probably understand, I wasn't able to glean enough info to start writing the module.  This link will explain what I want to do.  It will be part of my process in the Fooled by Randomness Thread.

                            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/207517/1737462

                            What do you think?

                            --Jimmy4164

                            TTT rules can be found independently of twedk.  Either at this website or others.  There are MANY variations.  I understand you need to pick one particular set of rules to run your test.  Or you could test many, many variations. Wink

                            For the purposes of this thread, what is needed is a comparison.  Will the TTT system produce more winners over the same period of time or will the same number of QP bets produce more winners.  Profit is not involved.  Should your test produce a profit, that is OK but not part of the claims for personal picks.

                              Coin Toss's avatar - shape barbed.jpg
                              Zeta Reticuli Star System
                              United States
                              Member #30470
                              January 17, 2006
                              10390 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 11, 2010, 10:22 am - IP Logged

                              Lucky Loser

                              "I'd like to know the time frame  between the hits of the QuickPickers. After a str8 or boxed hit, when does the next hit, of theexact same nature, take place?"

                              I think we're all making assumptions in these QP /PP discussions about what game is being discussed, and people assume it's the game they themselves play the most.

                              I know I do it, but when I see these threads I figure the topic is jackpot games, and I think when most people hear "lottery" they're thinking jackpot games. Maybe in threads like these we should start our posts with "P3/ P4" or "JP"

                               



                              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.

                                 
                                Page 51 of 78