Welcome Guest
You last visited February 25, 2018, 10:54 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# How much are you willing to wager on your system?

Topic closed. 4 replies. Last post 8 years ago by jimmy4164.

 Page 1 of 1
Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7659 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 16, 2010, 12:36 am - IP Logged

Since there has been much debate on system play vs quick picks and I mentioned given the choice when playing MM, I would choose playing the 2 if 5 of 56 number abbreviated wheel over playing 46 QPs because of the coverage, I was wondering how much system players are willing to risk on each drawing.

Pumpi and I are discussing pick-4 systems and I suggested one with a minimum play of \$12.50. Many members participate in Maddog's challenges and I'm assuming some of them play their numbers in PB and MM. There is a 3 if 4 of 12 number abbreviated wheel with very nice coverage on LP that can be played for \$12.

Pick-3, pick-4, pick-5, lotto, and any other type of online games system player's input is welcomed as well as QP players who may spend a like amount.

Oh and by the way, it's not about "how much would you spend buying a system".

Texas
United States
Member #55889
October 23, 2007
7011 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 16, 2010, 9:02 am - IP Logged

As little as possible, LOL.

A few years ago I stumbled onto BobP's Lotto Logix and I read in there about the beauty of a 2 line wheel. In other words, in a pick 6 game, if you play 12 numbers all different in 2 lines, and capture just 5 of the numbers, you are guaranteed to have at least 3 numbers on 1 line. Compare that to playing 9 numbers on a 3 line wheel, and you are spending an extra dollar, and playing 3 fewer numbers. Granted the coverage is a little better, but to me not enough to spend the extra buck. I think in the jackpot games, cost control is very important, because of how hard it is to hit anything.

CAN'T WIN IF YOU'RE NOT IN

A DOLLAR AND A DREAM (OR \$2)

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 16, 2010, 11:59 am - IP Logged

Since there has been much debate on system play vs quick picks and I mentioned given the choice when playing MM, I would choose playing the 2 if 5 of 56 number abbreviated wheel over playing 46 QPs because of the coverage, I was wondering how much system players are willing to risk on each drawing.

Pumpi and I are discussing pick-4 systems and I suggested one with a minimum play of \$12.50. Many members participate in Maddog's challenges and I'm assuming some of them play their numbers in PB and MM. There is a 3 if 4 of 12 number abbreviated wheel with very nice coverage on LP that can be played for \$12.

Pick-3, pick-4, pick-5, lotto, and any other type of online games system player's input is welcomed as well as QP players who may spend a like amount.

Oh and by the way, it's not about "how much would you spend buying a system".

My recommendation to poor people -- unemployed, on welfare, etc -- has always been:

Limit your weekly Lottery spending to no more than what you can earn (or used to earn) in ½ Hour.

For those with money left over at the end of the week, I up the amount to one(1) hour!

This applies to either PPs or QPs.

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7659 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 16, 2010, 1:14 pm - IP Logged

As little as possible, LOL.

A few years ago I stumbled onto BobP's Lotto Logix and I read in there about the beauty of a 2 line wheel. In other words, in a pick 6 game, if you play 12 numbers all different in 2 lines, and capture just 5 of the numbers, you are guaranteed to have at least 3 numbers on 1 line. Compare that to playing 9 numbers on a 3 line wheel, and you are spending an extra dollar, and playing 3 fewer numbers. Granted the coverage is a little better, but to me not enough to spend the extra buck. I think in the jackpot games, cost control is very important, because of how hard it is to hit anything.

Had I read BobP's opinions on wheels before playing a 3 if 5 of 15 number 13 combo abbreviated wheel, I'd known I'd probably still lose \$3 even if I matched all 5 numbers which I did. It was less than a week later when I read it in Lotto Logix so I entered the same 15 numbers using the same order into five other 15 number abbreviated wheels to compare results. None of them showed a 5 number match but the 4 if 5 wheel preformed as expected and the 3 if 4 wheel and Lucky's 2 if 2 wheel also had 4 numbers matches.

Because the system required me to use 15 numbers, I had a choice of 6 abbreviated wheels with playing costs of \$13 and \$15 for the 2 if 2s, \$13 for the 3 if 5, \$24 for the 3 if 4, \$57 for the 3 if 3, \$95 for the 4 if 5, or a 7th choice of a full wheel with a way over my head cost of \$3003. Another option was playing just 3 lines but if only 3 numbers matched, I'd probably get one 2 number match at a loss too.

For that particular drawing the results showed the minimum cost at \$15 as the best option, but for overall play when the system consistently matched 3 numbers with an occasional 4 number match, 3 number match payoffs are needed to offset the cost waiting for the rare all 5 numbers match. When I found I could get almost the same results using 14 numbers, I settled on the 3 if 4 wheel costing \$19.

My game of choice was the 5/39 Ohio Rolling Cash 5 where a 2 number matches pays \$1, 3 numbers pay \$10, and 4 pays \$300. I played the system every day for 6 weeks at a profit helped by two 4 number matches before I noticed the system was failing to consistently match 3 numbers numbers so I  took my small profit and ran.

"Compare that to playing 9 numbers on a 3 line wheel, and you are spending an extra dollar, and playing 3 fewer numbers."

By getting more coverage for \$1 less it's the obvious choice providing the payoffs are offsetting  the cost of play until you get the 6 number match.

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: August 16, 2010, 1:51 pm - IP Logged

Had I read BobP's opinions on wheels before playing a 3 if 5 of 15 number 13 combo abbreviated wheel, I'd known I'd probably still lose \$3 even if I matched all 5 numbers which I did. It was less than a week later when I read it in Lotto Logix so I entered the same 15 numbers using the same order into five other 15 number abbreviated wheels to compare results. None of them showed a 5 number match but the 4 if 5 wheel preformed as expected and the 3 if 4 wheel and Lucky's 2 if 2 wheel also had 4 numbers matches.

Because the system required me to use 15 numbers, I had a choice of 6 abbreviated wheels with playing costs of \$13 and \$15 for the 2 if 2s, \$13 for the 3 if 5, \$24 for the 3 if 4, \$57 for the 3 if 3, \$95 for the 4 if 5, or a 7th choice of a full wheel with a way over my head cost of \$3003. Another option was playing just 3 lines but if only 3 numbers matched, I'd probably get one 2 number match at a loss too.

For that particular drawing the results showed the minimum cost at \$15 as the best option, but for overall play when the system consistently matched 3 numbers with an occasional 4 number match, 3 number match payoffs are needed to offset the cost waiting for the rare all 5 numbers match. When I found I could get almost the same results using 14 numbers, I settled on the 3 if 4 wheel costing \$19.

My game of choice was the 5/39 Ohio Rolling Cash 5 where a 2 number matches pays \$1, 3 numbers pay \$10, and 4 pays \$300. I played the system every day for 6 weeks at a profit helped by two 4 number matches before I noticed the system was failing to consistently match 3 numbers numbers so I  took my small profit and ran.

"Compare that to playing 9 numbers on a 3 line wheel, and you are spending an extra dollar, and playing 3 fewer numbers."

By getting more coverage for \$1 less it's the obvious choice providing the payoffs are offsetting  the cost of play until you get the 6 number match.

Stack47,

"My game of choice was the 5/39 Ohio Rolling Cash 5 where a 2 number matches pays \$1, 3 numbers pay \$10, and 4 pays \$300. I played the system every day for 6 weeks at a profit helped by two 4 number matches before I noticed the system was failing to consistently match 3 numbers numbers  so I  took my small profit and ran."

Now, this is an intelligent approach to playing the lottery!

(Minimizing losses while you wait and hope for the Big Win!)

 Page 1 of 1