Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 7, 2016, 10:55 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Fooled by Randomness

Topic closed. 297 replies. Last post 6 years ago by jimmy4164.

Page 13 of 20
42
PrintE-mailLink
RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3972 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 23, 2010, 9:57 am - IP Logged

P.S.  RL, I forgot to commend you on finally [indirectly] admitting that the Gambler's Fallacy really is a fallacy by insisting that you don't make those kinds of mistakes in your thinking!  Congrats!!

Jimmy

It's not that the fallacy does not exist as I know it does and have known it for at least 20 years. 

I just don't believe it describes me or my methods.  Most psychology introduction cources include

this.  Just as I don't believe that odds rule over me in that  I cannot do anything to give myself a

better then the odds chance.  You mentioned card counters as a legit method to improve the play

and increase the return on a bet, the person who does not know how to do it correctly will gain

nothing over regular play and may even loose more.   You could ask anyone that has my software

if it is an effective tool in reducing sets while keeping a very large number of prize paying tickets.

I don't underestimate the odds in any way. 

RL

Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

  US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


    United States
    Member #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 23, 2010, 1:27 pm - IP Logged

    Jimmy

    Still can't do anything but make childish remarks that have nothing to do with the post.  Where did

    you get the idea that I base my predictions on one previous days results.  Why don't you post the

    odds of selecting 1 number at random for the next drawing, or 5 numbers for that matter.  This is

    what I am talking about, You sidestep the main question.  While all the numbers have the same odds

    of being drawn only 5 of the 39 will be.  

      I think your reply  is a joke!

     

    RL

    RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

    You don't seem to be able to make up your mind RL.  Above, you asked,

    "Where did you get the idea that I base my predictions on one previous days results."

    Where? I got it from many of your very own postings.  Here's an example:

    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1750353

    You said, "As I have stated I don't use numbers in my system and never look at them except when filling in the playslips."

    The reason I've been accusing of you of being a victim of the Gambler's Fallacy is because I never believed your claim made in this quote from the beginning.  And now you're finally denying it.  (?)

    I once saw a wooden plaque in a novelty shop with the following inscription:

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

    IF YOU CAN'T DAZZLE THEM WITH BRILLIANCE,

    BAFFLE THEM WITH BULL___T !!

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

    I have to give you credit -- You're making a valiant effort to extract yourself from your current predicament.

    Above, you said, "While all the numbers have the same odds of being drawn only 5 of the 39 will be."

    Now, THAT is a BRILLIANT deduction!

    Sorry RL, but I'm about ready to give up on you.  The best I have to offer you now is to keep trying,

    and be willing to legitimately BACKTEST your results. 

    I say this because you quite often use the word "IF" in your postings, as in "...IF my system succeeds..."

    FOR THE PEOPLE HELPING TO BETA TEST RL'S SYSTEM:

    If you REALLY want to know the TRUTH in this debate, follow the instructions I gave to RedToad in this post.  All you need to do is substitute RL'S system to get your picks into steps 2) and 3).

    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/215821/1751417

     

    --Jimmy4164

    P.S. Oh, I almost forgot..

    Above you asked, "Why don't you post the odds of selecting 1 number at random for the next drawing, or 5 numbers for that matter."

    Do you really need me to make calculations, the results of which are readily available?

    http://www.justlottery.com/missouri/missouri-games.html

      RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

      United States
      Member #59354
      March 13, 2008
      3972 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 23, 2010, 9:49 pm - IP Logged

      Jimmy

       

      Don't give up on me, please.  I just read the post and can't find where that I use one day results

      to make my predictions.  I don't use numbers and just used this for an example for you to calculate

      what the odds would be of selecting 1 correct number from a group of 39 as this coud also be used

      to predict what the odds would be of getting one incorrect.  The only time I used one day that I can

      remember was to say that with a system that needs to be adjusted for each drawing, it would need

      to be backtested each day using the settings used by each user.  

      I think that most understood what I was saying but sorry to anyone who did not.   There is also no

      beta testing going on as there is nothing to test you don't seem to be able to get this in your head. 

      The system is complete and functions 100% as designed.  If one inputs the correct data then the

      winning set is produced.  I do add a few more tools from time and make a few changes as members

      make suggestions.  What does the Redtoad's post have to do with me, I see nothing there that

      has any thing to do with my software.  As I have stated my software that has been given away is

      nothing more than a numerical filtered set generator that has many different options the user can

      use to filter down sets.  Anyone with average programming skills could build the system on their

      own.    I don't need you to calculate any odds for me I just wanted you to see that if one wanted

      to improve the odds for any one play that removing one number will do this without much worrie

      about removing a number that will hit.   I am just stating that somethings can be done that will

      give one a better chance of winning then a random QP.  If this very simple process of removing

      one number can decrease the sets by 73,815 then what else might be done.  My claims are true

      and I stick by them.  My system will never be for sale and the only thing keeping me from releasing it

      for anyone is that I can't give the time needed for support.  Many are using this along with other 

      software.  I don't look at the numbers but if I remove one digit that I think will not hit  then

      as many as 13 numbers will be removed.  I very often can remove or block 3 digits from hitting on 

      any one day,  Somethimes I miss all three and don't  win anything.  But on the days I do I have 

      removed many numbers from the drawing and all this without looking at a single number.  The

      whole system is based on digits and what I call lexicons.  The bayesian part of my system does

      not look at the numbers and is used to predict the best range for each setting, It has not been 

      released but is really not needed as one can do this without it.  It is just a Lazy button so to speak.

      My whole reason for Posting here is to give real world examples of how sets can be reduced so

      that one has a better chance of winning.  I don't claim that mistakes and wrong choices will not

      be made.   And I sure hope that most of the LP members understand this. 

       

      RL

      Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

      I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

      they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

      USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

        US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

        United States
        Member #59354
        March 13, 2008
        3972 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 24, 2010, 3:45 pm - IP Logged

        PS.

        I have to give you credit -- You're making a valiant effort to extract yourself from your current predicament.

        Above, you said, "While all the numbers have the same odds of being drawn only 5 of the 39 will be."

        Now, THAT is a BRILLIANT deduction!

         

        Thank you very much and hope it helps you make better predictions.  I can't take all the credit because

        I really think that most people already knew this,  but always Glad to help you out.

        RL

        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 26, 2010, 2:25 am - IP Logged

          Time To Move Forward In Our System Quest

          Summarizing our earlier counting of how many times certain betting systems(patterns) matched the results of the PA Daily Number over the past 33+ years of play has revealed, so far, the following:

          Type of Betting Pattern                       # Hits

          Yesterday's Winner                                 14

          Winner of 2 Days Ago                             16

          Winner of 3 Days Ago                             12

          Reverse of Yesterday's Winner               13

          The above results can be viewed here:

          http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1744224

           

          Now, lets look at what happens if you bet every day on the reversal of what hit 2 days ago.

          (I.E., if 1-2-3 hit 2 days ago, bet on 3-2-1 today.) 

          Remember, these systems are NOT CLAIMED to be any better than QPs.

          1982/04/26   0 - 1 - 2 
          1982/04/27   4 - 4 - 7 
          1982/04/28   2 - 1 - 0 ( 1 )
           
          1985/06/07   3 - 5 - 0 
          1985/06/08   6 - 9 - 8 
          1985/06/10   0 - 5 - 3 ( 2 )
           
          1986/02/06   2 - 0 - 1 
          1986/02/07   5 - 1 - 6 
          1986/02/08   1 - 0 - 2 ( 3 )
           
          1990/01/09   3 - 5 - 6 
          1990/01/10   5 - 5 - 4 
          1990/01/11   6 - 5 - 3 ( 4 )
           
          1997/01/31   7 - 7 - 3 
          1997/02/01   7 - 9 - 3 
          1997/02/02   3 - 7 - 7 ( 5 )
           
          1997/08/23   8 - 6 - 6 
          1997/08/24   4 - 7 - 1 
          1997/08/25   6 - 6 - 8 ( 6 )
           
          2004/04/03   3 - 8 - 2 
          2004/04/04   5 - 2 - 3 
          2004/04/05   2 - 8 - 3 ( 7 )
           

          Ooooh, that was a stinky one!  Only 7 hits.

          But then, remember that we also found when we checked all 1000 numbers from 000 to 999 that there were a handful that only hit 3 times, and 1 (#308) that hit 23 times.

          Lets check out betting on the reverse of 3 days ago...

          1978/08/30   6 - 4 - 5 
          1978/08/31   5 - 7 - 1 
          1978/09/01   0 - 9 - 4 
          1978/09/02   5 - 4 - 6 ( 1 )
           
          1983/01/17   1 - 5 - 1 
          1983/01/18   0 - 3 - 1 
          1983/01/19   1 - 8 - 0 
          1983/01/20   1 - 5 - 1 ( 2 )
           
          1983/08/04   8 - 4 - 0 
          1983/08/05   0 - 3 - 8 
          1983/08/06   3 - 4 - 2 
          1983/08/08   0 - 4 - 8 ( 3 )
           
          1984/01/11   5 - 4 - 4 
          1984/01/12   9 - 9 - 4 
          1984/01/13   6 - 7 - 1 
          1984/01/14   4 - 4 - 5 ( 4 )
           
          1985/05/07   7 - 2 - 6 
          1985/05/08   6 - 7 - 6 
          1985/05/09   6 - 1 - 4 
          1985/05/10   6 - 2 - 7 ( 5 )
           
          1987/07/24   0 - 6 - 3 
          1987/07/25   7 - 8 - 4 
          1987/07/27   4 - 8 - 5 
          1987/07/28   3 - 6 - 0 ( 6 )
           
          1988/07/01   8 - 9 - 6 
          1988/07/02   3 - 6 - 6 
          1988/07/04   6 - 6 - 2 
          1988/07/05   6 - 9 - 8 ( 7 )
           
          1988/07/08   5 - 0 - 3 
          1988/07/09   4 - 9 - 6 
          1988/07/11   2 - 2 - 9 
          1988/07/12   3 - 0 - 5 ( 8 )
           
          1989/02/09   8 - 7 - 3 
          1989/02/10   4 - 8 - 7 
          1989/02/11   9 - 6 - 9 
          1989/02/13   3 - 7 - 8 ( 9 )
           
          1990/08/21   1 - 7 - 1 
          1990/08/22   7 - 2 - 7 
          1990/08/23   8 - 0 - 8 
          1990/08/24   1 - 7 - 1 ( 10 )
           
          1995/04/06   3 - 0 - 3 
          1995/04/07   4 - 6 - 6 
          1995/04/08   8 - 1 - 5 
          1995/04/09   3 - 0 - 3 ( 11 )
           
          2006/07/05   7 - 7 - 4 
          2006/07/06   4 - 0 - 5 
          2006/07/07   3 - 1 - 6 
          2006/07/08   4 - 7 - 7 ( 12 )
           
          2008/01/03   4 - 4 - 6 
          2008/01/04   8 - 6 - 6 
          2008/01/05   9 - 0 - 9 
          2008/01/06   6 - 4 - 4 ( 13 )
           
          Aaaah, that's better!

          You might also remember that the average times each of the numbers [000-999] hit was 11.6.

          Are you getting any ideas from these results so far?

           

            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

            United States
            Member #59354
            March 13, 2008
            3972 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 26, 2010, 9:52 am - IP Logged

            jimmy

            Time To Move Forward In Our System Quest

            I wish you would.  I don't see how that any of the backtest that have been run

            so far could have produced anything better then what has been found.  Really,

            the testing so far mimics a random selection at best.  I could drive around and

            get numbers from license plates from randomly selected cars as they pass and

            get better results then the so called methods / systems tested here.  I think

            I will look at the P-3 game and take a shot at this.   Be ready to do some hard

            core programming as you won't be able to test using your current methods and

            we will use randomly generated sets to test.  It may be awhile as I don't have

            much time to devote to this sort of thing and I will have to start from scratch as

            I don't play P-3 games but I will see what I can do.   

             

            RL

            Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

            I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

            they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

            USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

              US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 26, 2010, 10:56 am - IP Logged

              jimmy

              Time To Move Forward In Our System Quest

              I wish you would.  I don't see how that any of the backtest that have been run

              so far could have produced anything better then what has been found.  Really,

              the testing so far mimics a random selection at best.  I could drive around and

              get numbers from license plates from randomly selected cars as they pass and

              get better results then the so called methods / systems tested here.  I think

              I will look at the P-3 game and take a shot at this.   Be ready to do some hard

              core programming as you won't be able to test using your current methods and

              we will use randomly generated sets to test.  It may be awhile as I don't have

              much time to devote to this sort of thing and I will have to start from scratch as

              I don't play P-3 games but I will see what I can do.   

               

              RL

              RL - You said, Really,the testing so far mimics a random selection at best.

              That's the point.  How long will it take for you to get it?

              Since you obviously don't like my style, read some of jwhou's recent posts on this subject, and think about it.  You're allowing your belief that previous flips of a fair coin can have some effect on the next flip to cloud your thinking.

              Why not use your programming skills to help maintain vigilance over the Drawing process.  Search for Taleb's "Black Swans," and if you find one, trace its ancestry.

              --Jimmy4164

                pick4hawk's avatar - Trek HAND3.gif

                United States
                Member #19982
                August 9, 2005
                226 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 26, 2010, 11:39 am - IP Logged

                We all know there is 55 pairs in pick 4 or pick 3 ---if you have a method that produces 21 or 15 sets of pairs and you know that at least you'll have one pair correct. Have you not lowered the odds from 55 pairs.

                Things then are not a fallacy but better odds.

                Psychology or attitude of the digits or numbers I do not know how this helps to play.

                IF one does not have an edge why play??

                HAWK

                *We may see something that isn’t there because of what we expect to see

                Or conversely, we may not see something because we don’t expect to see it.*

                  RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                  United States
                  Member #59354
                  March 13, 2008
                  3972 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 26, 2010, 3:47 pm - IP Logged

                  RL - You said, Really,the testing so far mimics a random selection at best.

                  That's the point.  How long will it take for you to get it?

                  Since you obviously don't like my style, read some of jwhou's recent posts on this subject, and think about it.  You're allowing your belief that previous flips of a fair coin can have some effect on the next flip to cloud your thinking.

                  Why not use your programming skills to help maintain vigilance over the Drawing process.  Search for Taleb's "Black Swans," and if you find one, trace its ancestry.

                  --Jimmy4164

                  Jimmy

                  I am talking about the sets being tested.  I see no real attemp at a system to pick any

                  thing other than just selecting a previous drawing from the history or other similar method

                  and then checking it aginst the past drawings.  If this is what you are working to prove

                  than I guess I was wrong.   Seems we were talking about two different things.  I also Noticed

                  you added "fair" to your reply what if it is not.       

                  RL

                  Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                  I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                  they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                  USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                    US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 26, 2010, 9:50 pm - IP Logged

                    We all know there is 55 pairs in pick 4 or pick 3 ---if you have a method that produces 21 or 15 sets of pairs and you know that at least you'll have one pair correct. Have you not lowered the odds from 55 pairs.

                    Things then are not a fallacy but better odds.

                    Psychology or attitude of the digits or numbers I do not know how this helps to play.

                    IF one does not have an edge why play??

                    HAWK

                    HAWK,

                    "IF one does not have an edge why play??"

                    Because what you're really playing for is to Hit The Jackpot!  The subsidiary prizes are nothing more than consolation prizes, consolation to us because our chances of ever hitting the jackpot are remote.  So, even though over time the lottery is costing you money, that money is your price for that chance at the pot of gold!  The consolation prizes keep you interested, busy, and [hopefully] walking, biking, or jogging to cash them in to buy new ones. Smiley

                    For these reasons I don't play Pick-3 or Pick-4 games.

                    --Jimmy4164


                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 26, 2010, 10:52 pm - IP Logged

                      Jimmy

                      I am talking about the sets being tested.  I see no real attemp at a system to pick any

                      thing other than just selecting a previous drawing from the history or other similar method

                      and then checking it aginst the past drawings.  If this is what you are working to prove

                      than I guess I was wrong.   Seems we were talking about two different things.  I also Noticed

                      you added "fair" to your reply what if it is not.       

                      RL

                      RL,

                      "I also Noticed you added "fair" to your reply what if it is not."

                      Let's say the coin was VERY UNfair, coming up heads 60% of the time under extensive testing at the trial of the crooks who introduced it to the game.  Since this coin tends to come up heads more often than expected, it will very likely come up heads 6 times in a row more often than a "fair" coin.  However, even after 6 heads flips, the odds that it will come up tails on the next flip are still 4:10.  Wink

                      Your methods might easily exploit an unfair coin like this, if was used long enough, but you're not trying to predict such a simple game.  The complexities and nuances of the type of anomolies you might very well uncover in Pick-5 and Pick-6 Lottos will most likely be fleeting occurences, and even if they persist, IMHO, will be virtually impossible to exploit. This is why myself and others have pushed you for Backtest results.  I believe you probably have developed a clever and useful interface to assist in choosing betting sets that maximize the # of consolation prizes the user hits, and that's all.  But that's OK!

                      jwhou gives a more technical analysis of the issue here:

                      http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/219392/1753113

                      I hope you'll take the time to really understand what he's saying, and be sure to digest his last sentence.

                      --Jimmy4164


                        United States
                        Member #93947
                        July 10, 2010
                        2180 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 28, 2010, 12:59 am - IP Logged

                        Now Let's Take A Look At A Test

                        Of A System You Might Recognize

                        Summarizing our earlier counting of how many times certain betting systems(patterns) matched the results of the PA Daily Number over the past 33+ years of play has revealed, so far, the following:

                        Type of Betting Pattern                       # Hits

                        Yesterday's Winner                                 14

                        Winner of 2 Days Ago                             16

                        Winner of 3 Days Ago                             12

                        Reverse of Yesterday's Winner               13

                        Reverse of Winner of 2 Days Ago             7

                        Reverse of Winner of 3 Days Ago           13

                        The above results can be viewed here:

                        http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1754446

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

                        I've been trying to get twedk in another thread to define a TTT system being touted as a winner there.  I have been able to glean the basics, but not sufficient information to allow me to backtest it.  But what we CAN do is test how well at least ONE(1) of the picks it will surely bet on will do on its own.  The incomplete description is here:

                        http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/207517/1529691

                        Now, what I am going to do here is clearly a deviation from twedk's system, in more ways than one.  First, his system only computes new betting sets on the last day of each month; we use his formula to compute one(1) new number to bet on every day.  Obviously, I can't claim this is a test of the TTT system presented in that thread, but it does use the basic formula to generate a number that WILL be chosen SOME of the time in the FULL system, which I have not been able to get anyone to completely specify.

                        Using Lottery Math (mod[10] addition)  011 and 110 are added to the current winner, and that result is then added back to the current winner.  For example:

                        456      Original Winner

                        011      Lotto add

                        110      Lotto add

                        577

                        456      Now add the original back

                        923     What we will bet on the next day.

                        OK, so for 33 years we bet on this Basic TTT calculation applied to Yesterday's Winner.

                        Here's what happened:

                        1977/07/05   6 - 7 - 6 
                        1977/07/06   3 - 6 - 3 ( 1 )       Remember, 363 is 676 + 011 + 110 + 676 (Lotto Math)
                         
                        1978/12/21   9 - 3 - 1 
                        1978/12/22   9 - 8 - 3 ( 2 )

                        1978/12/21   9 - 3 - 1 
                        1978/12/22   9 - 8 - 3 ( 2 )
                         
                        1980/03/06   1 - 9 - 1 
                        1980/03/07   3 - 0 - 3 ( 3 )
                         
                        1985/05/17   9 - 8 - 7 
                        1985/05/18   9 - 8 - 5 ( 4 )
                         
                        1993/12/02   8 - 3 - 6 
                        1993/12/03   7 - 8 - 3 ( 5 )
                         
                        1996/07/26   2 - 5 - 0 
                        1996/07/27   5 - 2 - 1 ( 6 )
                         
                        1997/03/28   3 - 8 - 8 
                        1997/03/29   7 - 8 - 7 ( 7 )
                         
                        2000/07/03   8 - 3 - 1 
                        2000/07/04   7 - 8 - 3 ( 8 )
                         
                        2000/07/10   3 - 5 - 3 
                        2000/07/11   7 - 2 - 7 ( 9 )
                         
                        2002/02/22   5 - 5 - 7 
                        2002/02/23   1 - 2 - 5 ( 10 )
                         
                        2005/11/10   6 - 0 - 1 
                        2005/11/11   3 - 2 - 3 ( 11 )
                         
                        2006/06/18   7 - 5 - 5 
                        2006/06/19   5 - 2 - 1 ( 12 )
                         
                        2010/02/14   8 - 3 - 1 
                        2010/02/15   7 - 8 - 3 ( 13 )
                         
                        2010/07/03   7 - 4 - 0 
                        2010/07/04   5 - 0 - 1 ( 14 )

                        So, there were 14 different times that this bet was a winner!

                        Are you starting to get a picture of what's going on here?

                        I'm open for comments.  If all you want to say is that this system is not a good one and ask me why I posted it, please save the space on the thread!  I already know 14 hits over 33 years on a Pick-3 does not bring home the bacon.  If you don't see a pattern forming here, please read some of the earlier posts in this thread.

                        Just for the heck of it, let's sneak in the results of using the same calculation to pick the bets as above, but looking back TWO(2) days instead.

                        1977/10/05   7 - 4 - 3 
                        1977/10/06   0 - 8 - 8 
                        1977/10/07   5 - 0 - 7 ( 1 )   Remember, 507 is 743 + 011 + 110 + 743  (Lotto Math)
                         
                        1978/02/20   2 - 7 - 0 
                        1978/02/21   3 - 8 - 4 
                        1978/02/22   5 - 6 - 1 ( 2 )
                         
                        1978/08/23   9 - 0 - 2 
                        1978/08/24   8 - 1 - 1 
                        1978/08/25   9 - 2 - 5 ( 3 )
                         
                        1980/12/15   5 - 3 - 1 
                        1980/12/16   1 - 7 - 8 
                        1980/12/17   1 - 8 - 3 ( 4 )
                         
                        1984/01/18   6 - 7 - 8 
                        1984/01/19   9 - 5 - 5 
                        1984/01/20   3 - 6 - 7 ( 5 )
                         
                        1985/04/20   1 - 1 - 6 
                        1985/04/22   4 - 8 - 0 
                        1985/04/23   3 - 4 - 3 ( 6 )
                         
                        1986/12/30   3 - 5 - 5 
                        1986/12/31   5 - 4 - 4 
                        1987/01/01   7 - 2 - 1 ( 7 )
                         
                        1987/07/21   5 - 3 - 4 
                        1987/07/22   6 - 6 - 3 
                        1987/07/23   1 - 8 - 9 ( 8 )
                         
                        1990/11/14   1 - 8 - 4 
                        1990/11/15   5 - 1 - 0 
                        1990/11/16   3 - 8 - 9 ( 9 )
                         
                        1998/12/15   8 - 6 - 3 
                        1998/12/16   8 - 6 - 7 
                        1998/12/17   7 - 4 - 7 ( 10 )
                         
                        2000/05/27   2 - 7 - 2 
                        2000/05/28   2 - 2 - 6 
                        2000/05/29   5 - 6 - 5 ( 11 )
                         
                        2001/01/12   1 - 1 - 8 
                        2001/01/13   4 - 3 - 1 
                        2001/01/14   3 - 4 - 7 ( 12 )
                         
                        2006/04/23   3 - 2 - 8 
                        2006/04/24   8 - 5 - 4 
                        2006/04/25   7 - 6 - 7 ( 13 )


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 28, 2010, 1:08 am - IP Logged

                          Sorry Folks!!

                          I thought I had made the links clickable here using Firefox settings, but apparently NOT!  They light up in my browser, but when clicked they dead end.  What you see are the correct links, but you must cut and paste them.

                          Anyone know how to fix this?

                            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                            Michigan
                            United States
                            Member #22395
                            September 24, 2005
                            1583 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 28, 2010, 1:47 am - IP Logged

                            Sorry Folks!!

                            I thought I had made the links clickable here using Firefox settings, but apparently NOT!  They light up in my browser, but when clicked they dead end.  What you see are the correct links, but you must cut and paste them.

                            Anyone know how to fix this?

                            #1 this is what shows in the HTML code. 

                            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/thread/218174/1754446

                            It should show:

                            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1754446

                             

                            #2 this is what shows in the HTML code. 

                            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/thread/207517/1529691

                            It should show:

                            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/207517/1529691

                             
                            Maybe you can figure out what to do based on that information.  I don't use FF and am not familiar with details to ensure the links are correct.

                            Worst case scenario, you can click the HTML tool on the editor and manually remove the extra code.

                              Avatar
                              Kentucky
                              United States
                              Member #32652
                              February 14, 2006
                              7313 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 28, 2010, 4:08 pm - IP Logged

                              Stack47,

                              I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying.  There were more or less single digits in a particular collumn NOT because some other collumn was making it impossible for them to appear, but because they just happened to emerge from the machine when they did.  Your comment seems to imply there is some sort of communication among the balls in different machines.  I put a lot of effort into the posts above, the ones displaying the 33+ year results.  I thought what I posted would dispel some of the myths like numbers that are "due," etc.

                              "Simply put, any digit in any position must be drawn at least 100 times before all 100 numbers using that digit can be drawn."

                              This is what is called a Truism, but it doesn't tell us a thing!  During the course of the drawings, there was nothing impossible about ANY ball emerging from ANY machine at ANY time, as long as the balls/machines were fair.  Once it's all over, the results just ARE!

                              I've said this before here, and I'm not being sarcastic.  If there is concern that particular ball sets or machines are being rigged, high frame/second recordings of the drawings from an HD TV signal can expose them easily.

                                --Jimmy

                              "I see no Cause & Effect relationships here at all, at least the kind you're implying.  There were more or less single digits in a particular collumn NOT because some other collumn was making it impossible for them to appear, but because they just happened to emerge from the machine when they did."

                              You're right in saying one position doesn't affect what digit is drawn in another position, but each digit position does have an effect on the three digit outcomes you're tracking. A three digit number cannot repeat or skip one to two drawings unless all three digit positions do exactly the same. From your data we learned yesterday's winner was drawn 14 times, one skip 16, and two skips 12 times and while they did outperform the average, they didn't outperform the cost of play. 

                              A possible way to overcome the cost of play deficit is to consider playing each of the 3 digit positions together within repeat, skip 1, and skip two. The odds against any three digits being drawn in any one position is 2.33 to 1 and 12.7 to 1 in all three positions and the payoff odds are 17.5 to 1 in each drawing. I'd probably look for other methods for choosing which 3 digits to use in each position because of the cause and effect each digit has on the other digits within each position.

                                 
                                Page 13 of 20