Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 10, 2016, 2:50 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Fooled by Randomness

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

Page 4 of 20
42
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 11, 2010, 9:23 pm - IP Logged

when random is clean,you will see scenarios in which a given position is 1 more than a recent Play4..example..it was no mystery to me the middle digit in NC last night had to be an 8..notice how it cleanly is one more than the recent P4

 

Drawing DatePick 3Pick 4
MiddayEveningMiddayEvening
Tue, Aug 10, 20101-8-54-8-56-8-4-8
Mon, Aug 9, 20107-2-18-0-10-0-3-4
Sun, Aug 8, 2010xxxx5-0-1
Sat, Aug 7, 20107-7-35-3-03-8-3-1
Fri, Aug 6, 20107-7-43-0-62-2-2-4
Thu, Aug 5, 20100-6-52-5-12-9-9-7

JonnyBgood07,

when random is clean,you will see scenarios in which a given position is 1 more than a recent Play4..example..it was no mystery to me the middle digit in NC last night had to be an 8..notice how it cleanly is one more than the recent P4

It just "had to be an 8" eh?

And how many times have you observed this to be true over, say, the last five years' draws?

--Jimmy4164

    truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
    Michigan
    United States
    Member #22395
    September 24, 2005
    1583 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 11, 2010, 9:33 pm - IP Logged

    when random is clean,you will see scenarios in which a given position is 1 more than a recent Play4..example..it was no mystery to me the middle digit in NC last night had to be an 8..notice how it cleanly is one more than the recent P4

     

    Drawing DatePick 3Pick 4
    MiddayEveningMiddayEvening
    Tue, Aug 10, 20101-8-54-8-56-8-4-8
    Mon, Aug 9, 20107-2-18-0-10-0-3-4
    Sun, Aug 8, 2010xxxx5-0-1
    Sat, Aug 7, 20107-7-35-3-03-8-3-1
    Fri, Aug 6, 20107-7-43-0-62-2-2-4
    Thu, Aug 5, 20100-6-52-5-12-9-9-7

    Could you explain exactly how you calculated that?

    You are saying that the number 485 had to be an 8 for the 2nd digit.  Why the 2nd digit?  What recent pick 4 did you use to figure that?  And how did you figure it from the pick 4? 

    I don't understand the significance of the digits in yellow?


      United States
      Member #93947
      July 10, 2010
      2180 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 11, 2010, 10:00 pm - IP Logged

      "I see says the blind man"

      "It definitely does NOT support the assertion of any sort of cause and effect relationship among any of the things we're discussing here!"

      Because the same probability applies had the poll asked how many times should 811 or any other three digit number be drawn in the last 33 years and based on some of the replies, I wrong assumed you were going in that direction.  And I should have known better because of what I was talking about in the other thread.

      How many three digit numbers repeated within the next three drawings?

      How many three digit numbers repeated within the next three drawings?

      I Thought you'd never ask!  Smile

      Tomorrow.  Must generalize the program.  No time tonight.


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 11, 2010, 11:28 pm - IP Logged

        RL,

        "If I begin with odds of 1 in 64  or if I play two patterns that gives 1 in 32 odds..."

        You don't "begin" with odds of 1:64 when you throw out 936 possibilities; the odds are still 1:1000.

        Your fallacy in asserting 1:64 odds is based on the erroneous assumption that the probability is 1.0

        that the winning number is NOT in the discarded set.     Get it?

         

        "...then I think that my odds have improved."

        I don't think so.


        --Jimmy4164


        Correction:

        In the above post I tried to convince you of your error mostly with words, and I screwed it up!

        It's not totally wrong, but misleading.  "the odds are still 1:1000" is referring to ONE(1) ticket!

        Let's do it now by the numbers.

        You have used your proprietary methods to select a subset of the 1000 possibilites, 64 numbers.

        Assuming you will buy 64 tickets with unique 3 digit numbers, the probability you will win is either:

        a) 64 /1000, which is the #tickets divided by the total possibilities, OR...

        b) Since 0.936 is the probability the winner is one of the discarded 936...

            1.000 - 0.936, is the probability the winning number is NOT in the discarded set.

        As you can see, both ways of looking at it result in 0.064, which is 64 times 1:1000.

        Sorry for the screw up!

        --Jimmy4164

        P.S.  Of course, you may not agree since you believe your proprietary methods are discarding numbers

        which are less likely to be drawn, a theory which I feel is not supported by a short term "pattern" in

        the draws which can be easily explained with probability.  As Nicholas Taleb says, humans are often

        "Fooled by Randomness!"

          Avatar
          Houston
          United States
          Member #62319
          June 24, 2008
          242 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 12, 2010, 2:56 am - IP Logged

          Nicholas Taleb may be right (by his title) regarding 99% of professional lottery players ----- not me, though.  I have been saying all along, the key is understanding the patterns and the overlapping of it in a "tricky cycle" quite difficult to decipher to the untrained eyes. The way to begin, you first have to get it out of your thick head that statistical analysis and the "conscienceous" of probablities is the first "hook" the lottery uses to lead the mind to captivity. Once you're cement into that thinking, it supports the popular saying: "Stupid is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."

          Now, I'm not going to sit here and talk this stuff all over again. The last time I tried, the board crucify me real good. To tell you the truth, I haven't won a major jackpot yet ( so you can take further solace in me suffering), however, I have been enjoying the game and what I know. To put an analogy on it......

           

          It's like courting the most beautiful girl in the world; in all her sexiness, all her womanness but the fact she's playing hard-to-get prompts you to step up your game. You study her, learn her likes and dislikes. You look into her, learn her power and weakness. You admire her, learn her soul and heart. With that knowledge, it just a matter of time. A matter of time. And I'm still waiting; having learned all I needed to know.

            dr65's avatar - black panther.jpg
            Pennsylvania
            United States
            Member #74096
            May 2, 2009
            22968 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 12, 2010, 7:09 am - IP Logged

            Could you explain exactly how you calculated that?

            You are saying that the number 485 had to be an 8 for the 2nd digit.  Why the 2nd digit?  What recent pick 4 did you use to figure that?  And how did you figure it from the pick 4? 

            I don't understand the significance of the digits in yellow?

            +1111


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 12, 2010, 10:57 am - IP Logged

              Nicholas Taleb may be right (by his title) regarding 99% of professional lottery players ----- not me, though.  I have been saying all along, the key is understanding the patterns and the overlapping of it in a "tricky cycle" quite difficult to decipher to the untrained eyes. The way to begin, you first have to get it out of your thick head that statistical analysis and the "conscienceous" of probablities is the first "hook" the lottery uses to lead the mind to captivity. Once you're cement into that thinking, it supports the popular saying: "Stupid is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."

              Now, I'm not going to sit here and talk this stuff all over again. The last time I tried, the board crucify me real good. To tell you the truth, I haven't won a major jackpot yet ( so you can take further solace in me suffering), however, I have been enjoying the game and what I know. To put an analogy on it......

               

              It's like courting the most beautiful girl in the world; in all her sexiness, all her womanness but the fact she's playing hard-to-get prompts you to step up your game. You study her, learn her likes and dislikes. You look into her, learn her power and weakness. You admire her, learn her soul and heart. With that knowledge, it just a matter of time. A matter of time. And I'm still waiting; having learned all I needed to know.

              Mega-ThinkTank,

              Assuming you have kept a running total of your equity while observing and acting on these "tricky cycle"s, where does your ROI (Return On Investment) stand today, and over what period of time?

              --Jimmy4164

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                United States
                Member #59354
                March 13, 2008
                3985 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 12, 2010, 11:14 am - IP Logged

                Correction:

                In the above post I tried to convince you of your error mostly with words, and I screwed it up!

                It's not totally wrong, but misleading.  "the odds are still 1:1000" is referring to ONE(1) ticket!

                Let's do it now by the numbers.

                You have used your proprietary methods to select a subset of the 1000 possibilites, 64 numbers.

                Assuming you will buy 64 tickets with unique 3 digit numbers, the probability you will win is either:

                a) 64 /1000, which is the #tickets divided by the total possibilities, OR...

                b) Since 0.936 is the probability the winner is one of the discarded 936...

                    1.000 - 0.936, is the probability the winning number is NOT in the discarded set.

                As you can see, both ways of looking at it result in 0.064, which is 64 times 1:1000.

                Sorry for the screw up!

                --Jimmy4164

                P.S.  Of course, you may not agree since you believe your proprietary methods are discarding numbers

                which are less likely to be drawn, a theory which I feel is not supported by a short term "pattern" in

                the draws which can be easily explained with probability.  As Nicholas Taleb says, humans are often

                "Fooled by Randomness!"

                Jimmy

                 

                Fact.  One of the 64 patterns will be drawn, This I am 100% certain

                Fact   If one selects the correct pattern then the winning set is produced, 100% certain.

                Fact.  The greatest odds for any one pattern being drawn is 1 in 64, 100% certain.

                          Remember I only have 64 choices to begin with.

                 

                The only way to remove this 100% certainty is to go back to the 1 in 1000 odds way of

                looking at the game and ignore the method.  I can reverse what you have said using this

                method and we are right back to a 1 in 64 odds.

                 

                I am not fooled by random, Now if the next drawing produced the set "-75-687.495-324.55869-.07-33"

                then I would say "WOW, now thats what I call a random drawing",  but I will say with near 100%

                certainty that this will never happen.  The lottery drawing is simply picking one set from a number of

                sets that the players try to match.  The system player tries to find clues from the past drawings that

                will help them in the next draw.   The QP's players let a RNG do the work for them.  I always find

                it funny that many who hate RNG's and also don't believe in systems buy QP's which are RNG's which

                are also systems and then they swear by them as being the most effective.   

                 

                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 12, 2010, 12:27 pm - IP Logged

                  Jimmy

                   

                  Fact.  One of the 64 patterns will be drawn, This I am 100% certain

                  Fact   If one selects the correct pattern then the winning set is produced, 100% certain.

                  Fact.  The greatest odds for any one pattern being drawn is 1 in 64, 100% certain.

                            Remember I only have 64 choices to begin with.

                   

                  The only way to remove this 100% certainty is to go back to the 1 in 1000 odds way of

                  looking at the game and ignore the method.  I can reverse what you have said using this

                  method and we are right back to a 1 in 64 odds.

                   

                  I am not fooled by random, Now if the next drawing produced the set "-75-687.495-324.55869-.07-33"

                  then I would say "WOW, now thats what I call a random drawing",  but I will say with near 100%

                  certainty that this will never happen.  The lottery drawing is simply picking one set from a number of

                  sets that the players try to match.  The system player tries to find clues from the past drawings that

                  will help them in the next draw.   The QP's players let a RNG do the work for them.  I always find

                  it funny that many who hate RNG's and also don't believe in systems buy QP's which are RNG's which

                  are also systems and then they swear by them as being the most effective.   

                   

                  RL

                  RL,

                  I thought we were talking about a Pick-3 lottery, so I will continue to assume that here.  I will also assume that when you say a "pattern being drawn" what you mean is a number which is a member of a "SET" of numbers DERIVED from a "pattern."

                  1000 / 64 equals 15.625, which I will round up to 16.

                  It's easy to construct 64 sets of 3 digit numbers. I don't really care how you do it.  If you want or need exactly 64 sets, they will not all contain 16 members, but that is of no consequence.

                  Now we have 64 sets of potential numbers to play, and since every member of the universe [000-999] can be found in at least one of these 64 sets, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT,  >>IF<< one selects the correct set, it's a certainty that you will hold a winning ticket!

                  But what does this revelation and $3 get you in Starbucks?

                  I claim, about $2920 in losses over a year!  This is based on the assumption that you buy an average of sixteen $1 Straight tickets per day at a cost of $5840 and that you get 5.84 hits over the year netting you $500 each, or about $2920.

                  Unless you can demonstrate with transparent backtests that you can choose the correct pattern, or set, more than one time out of 64 with any consistency, this will be your fate.  If you are lucky, and do better, you had best quit while you are ahead.  If you come out ahead after one year and feel confident to continue, it is VERY likely that in the 2nd or 3rd subsequent years the Lottery Commission will reclaim it's losses to you because it has a very strong supporter, Probability Theory!

                  Those here who dismiss what I've been saying should at least take this advice from me:

                  Don't ever admit your beliefs during a job interview for any position dealing with the management of game odds and profitability at a Las Vegas Casino!  They are NOT Fooled by Randomness!

                   

                  --Jimmy4164

                    truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                    Michigan
                    United States
                    Member #22395
                    September 24, 2005
                    1583 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 12, 2010, 1:11 pm - IP Logged

                    +1111

                    Thanks dr...not sure how that guarantees an 8 for the 2nd digit?

                      Avatar
                      Houston
                      United States
                      Member #62319
                      June 24, 2008
                      242 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 12, 2010, 2:44 pm - IP Logged

                      Mega-ThinkTank,

                      Assuming you have kept a running total of your equity while observing and acting on these "tricky cycle"s, where does your ROI (Return On Investment) stand today, and over what period of time?

                      --Jimmy4164

                      ......and assuming Nicolos Taleb (and you for that matter) have kept a total of his equity while observing and acting on his expertise, where does his ROI stands today? If he can claim lottery players are fooled by randomness; was he ever a fool, initially, before he penned his Great Big Bang Theory? That knowledge had to come from somewhere, otherwise, how does he know what he's talking about?

                       

                      How do you know what you're talking about to stand as you're Holier Than Thou and telling players their "errors" and that patterns doesn't exist? Was you a bonehead Fool before you became an intellectual genius? Please explain yourself.


                        United States
                        Member #93947
                        July 10, 2010
                        2180 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 12, 2010, 3:30 pm - IP Logged

                        ......and assuming Nicolos Taleb (and you for that matter) have kept a total of his equity while observing and acting on his expertise, where does his ROI stands today? If he can claim lottery players are fooled by randomness; was he ever a fool, initially, before he penned his Great Big Bang Theory? That knowledge had to come from somewhere, otherwise, how does he know what he's talking about?

                         

                        How do you know what you're talking about to stand as you're Holier Than Thou and telling players their "errors" and that patterns doesn't exist? Was you a bonehead Fool before you became an intellectual genius? Please explain yourself.

                        Mega-ThinkTank,

                        Often, when people find themselves unable to defend their position, rather than either admit it, or keep quiet, they strike out with personal attacks or claims of prejudice.  You shouldn't take this so personally.  You are not alone.  I have a friend with a college degree who got so confused over this issue that he actually agreed to exchange 10 Pick-3 tickets numbered [000-111-222-333-444-555-666-777-888-999] for seven of his specification that he thought were more random and more likely to hit.  He gulped and laughed when I reminded him that he was paying $10 for seven tickets that he could buy at the store himself for $7, but he still insisted that a ticket like, say, 327, was more likely to win than 222.  All you needed to say in response to my question was, "I haven't kept track, and anyway, I don't care.  I'm here to Hit The Jackpot, and I'm willing to pay for the chance."

                        It's been quite a while since I read Taleb's FBR and I can't remember if he even mentioned lotteries.  Actually, you might get more out of another book of his, The Black Swan.

                        Don't beat up on yourself, and...

                        Don't worry, be happy!

                        --Jimmy4164


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 12, 2010, 3:40 pm - IP Logged

                          ......and assuming Nicolos Taleb (and you for that matter) have kept a total of his equity while observing and acting on his expertise, where does his ROI stands today? If he can claim lottery players are fooled by randomness; was he ever a fool, initially, before he penned his Great Big Bang Theory? That knowledge had to come from somewhere, otherwise, how does he know what he's talking about?

                           

                          How do you know what you're talking about to stand as you're Holier Than Thou and telling players their "errors" and that patterns doesn't exist? Was you a bonehead Fool before you became an intellectual genius? Please explain yourself.

                          P.S.  I just went to Nicholas Taleb's Home Page and found it's been updated and talks a lot about the Black Swan.  I think you will benefit from at least reading the first screenful.  I hope you'll read further.  His website address is the name of this Thread, without the spaces, and with the USUAL prefix and suffix.

                            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                            United States
                            Member #59354
                            March 13, 2008
                            3985 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 12, 2010, 3:55 pm - IP Logged

                            RL,

                            I thought we were talking about a Pick-3 lottery, so I will continue to assume that here.  I will also assume that when you say a "pattern being drawn" what you mean is a number which is a member of a "SET" of numbers DERIVED from a "pattern."

                            1000 / 64 equals 15.625, which I will round up to 16.

                            It's easy to construct 64 sets of 3 digit numbers. I don't really care how you do it.  If you want or need exactly 64 sets, they will not all contain 16 members, but that is of no consequence.

                            Now we have 64 sets of potential numbers to play, and since every member of the universe [000-999] can be found in at least one of these 64 sets, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT,  >>IF<< one selects the correct set, it's a certainty that you will hold a winning ticket!

                            But what does this revelation and $3 get you in Starbucks?

                            I claim, about $2920 in losses over a year!  This is based on the assumption that you buy an average of sixteen $1 Straight tickets per day at a cost of $5840 and that you get 5.84 hits over the year netting you $500 each, or about $2920.

                            Unless you can demonstrate with transparent backtests that you can choose the correct pattern, or set, more than one time out of 64 with any consistency, this will be your fate.  If you are lucky, and do better, you had best quit while you are ahead.  If you come out ahead after one year and feel confident to continue, it is VERY likely that in the 2nd or 3rd subsequent years the Lottery Commission will reclaim it's losses to you because it has a very strong supporter, Probability Theory!

                            Those here who dismiss what I've been saying should at least take this advice from me:

                            Don't ever admit your beliefs during a job interview for any position dealing with the management of game odds and profitability at a Las Vegas Casino!  They are NOT Fooled by Randomness!

                             

                            --Jimmy4164

                            Jimmy

                             

                            I claim, about $2920 in losses over a year!  This is based on the assumption that you buy an average of sixteen $1 Straight tickets per day at a cost of $5840 and that you get 5.84 hits over the year netting you $500 each, or about $2920.

                             

                            First your assumption is wrong.  I would never play any set or pattern 365 days a year,  Maybe 5 or 6

                            at most.  You cannot get it through your head that any advantage can be gained.  Second I am talking

                            about carefully constructed sets not just random sets of 16.  Some have a few as 8 sets.  I would never

                            pay $1.00 for any single ticket / chance on a P-3 game.  And I will say that I have spent less then $20.00

                            on P-3 in my whole lifetime.  

                             

                            You admittted in another post to spending $6.00 per week on the lottery.  If Playing powerball  and if you

                            talk your children into using your method and they pass this same method to there children and continue

                            this for many many generations then I would assume that in 10,000 years your families losses would 

                            be in the range of around $3,100,000.00 and in this time frame they would have purchased only 1.5% 

                            of the 195,249,054 tickets and anything you would have won would have gone right back into the pot.

                             

                            You might win a jackpot in the next game but the odds against it are so great that if you really believed

                            in your logic you would quit playing.  At least I believe in what I am doing and it has paid off so far.

                             

                            I don't think that you have or will convince anyone that has a had winning system in the past that it

                            cannot be done.  And most systems don't last forever so why test them against all the draws.  I don't

                            need 33 years of data as I could have predicted everything you posted here without a single draw ever

                            having been drawn.  I had a member pass me some information that allows for a 50% reduction of sets

                            with a 70% hit rate using only one value.  I have tested it on several lotteries and found the same

                            results.  This is another tool that is going in my tool box for sure. 

                             

                            I pitty you if you think that you have researched every possible method of play that can reduce sets

                            and beat the odds.  I have been doing this for many years and have overlooked many things.   There

                            are many people working with me and some are finding many good ideas that can be tested.  The best

                            will be kept and some will be discarded.  Some look good at first and then prove later to fade in thier

                            effectiveness but often they lead to another discovery.   I have to retune and adjust at least once a

                            month on average.  Most days When I play I wait until I have a very high level of certainty before

                            buying tickets.  I have played no more than 5 times since May and won on three of those attemps.

                            I missed MO Lotto a week ago by a couple of mouse clicks.  I had every digit and number trapped

                            and all but 1 or 2 filters correct.  I would have won 2.8 mil. on 6 sets that cost .50  each or $3.00

                            total.  I have hit 3 5of6 on MO. lotto and play it no more than 10 times a year.  You can say all you

                            want about Probability Theory and it is correct in general but can't explain everything.

                            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 12, 2010, 4:06 pm - IP Logged

                              Jimmy

                               

                              I claim, about $2920 in losses over a year!  This is based on the assumption that you buy an average of sixteen $1 Straight tickets per day at a cost of $5840 and that you get 5.84 hits over the year netting you $500 each, or about $2920.

                               

                              First your assumption is wrong.  I would never play any set or pattern 365 days a year,  Maybe 5 or 6

                              at most.  You cannot get it through your head that any advantage can be gained.  Second I am talking

                              about carefully constructed sets not just random sets of 16.  Some have a few as 8 sets.  I would never

                              pay $1.00 for any single ticket / chance on a P-3 game.  And I will say that I have spent less then $20.00

                              on P-3 in my whole lifetime.  

                               

                              You admittted in another post to spending $6.00 per week on the lottery.  If Playing powerball  and if you

                              talk your children into using your method and they pass this same method to there children and continue

                              this for many many generations then I would assume that in 10,000 years your families losses would 

                              be in the range of around $3,100,000.00 and in this time frame they would have purchased only 1.5% 

                              of the 195,249,054 tickets and anything you would have won would have gone right back into the pot.

                               

                              You might win a jackpot in the next game but the odds against it are so great that if you really believed

                              in your logic you would quit playing.  At least I believe in what I am doing and it has paid off so far.

                               

                              I don't think that you have or will convince anyone that has a had winning system in the past that it

                              cannot be done.  And most systems don't last forever so why test them against all the draws.  I don't

                              need 33 years of data as I could have predicted everything you posted here without a single draw ever

                              having been drawn.  I had a member pass me some information that allows for a 50% reduction of sets

                              with a 70% hit rate using only one value.  I have tested it on several lotteries and found the same

                              results.  This is another tool that is going in my tool box for sure. 

                               

                              I pitty you if you think that you have researched every possible method of play that can reduce sets

                              and beat the odds.  I have been doing this for many years and have overlooked many things.   There

                              are many people working with me and some are finding many good ideas that can be tested.  The best

                              will be kept and some will be discarded.  Some look good at first and then prove later to fade in thier

                              effectiveness but often they lead to another discovery.   I have to retune and adjust at least once a

                              month on average.  Most days When I play I wait until I have a very high level of certainty before

                              buying tickets.  I have played no more than 5 times since May and won on three of those attemps.

                              I missed MO Lotto a week ago by a couple of mouse clicks.  I had every digit and number trapped

                              and all but 1 or 2 filters correct.  I would have won 2.8 mil. on 6 sets that cost .50  each or $3.00

                              total.  I have hit 3 5of6 on MO. lotto and play it no more than 10 times a year.  You can say all you

                              want about Probability Theory and it is correct in general but can't explain everything.

                              RL

                              I am getting weary of this.  I only read your first paragraph.  I stopped as soon as I read "I would never play any set or pattern 365 days a year," when nowhere in my post did I suggest this.  I clearly stated that the number of members in the 64 sets would vary, and that I didn't even care how you calculated them.

                               

                              www.FooledByRandomness.com

                                 
                                Page 4 of 20