Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 5, 2016, 9:46 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

tiggs95 vs Luminus - NY - September 6, 2010

Topic closed. 84 replies. Last post 6 years ago by Luminus.

Page 6 of 6
PrintE-mailLink
Luminus's avatar - ouskuu

United States
Member #51269
April 3, 2007
529 Posts
Offline
Posted: September 14, 2010, 12:17 pm - IP Logged

1. yes (Look at the predictions board, I just won another $50 on 9/11/10 using QP)

2. no (It's run it's course.  My post history is a testament to that.)

3. no

Although it's true that another challenge could produce different results (i.e., the last challenge I engaged in), it's been demonstrated here and elsewhere that systems fair no better than QP.  Go check the predictions board and back-check the losses against the wins and you'll understand.  Adapting a smaller game is pointless, because in the long run, the house wins.

It's a delusion.  One that easily fools people in the small wins that you wrack up, using your systems.  You get so excited to see wins that you apparently generated with your own intelligence, that you forget to include the overall losses.  That's the problem.  Free Replays play into this as well.  You say, "Hez, yeah.  I won 57 Free Replays."  Meanwhile, you've spent $100.  Is that really a win?  Not unless this is your version of Coney Island.

It's no different from a psychic claiming to see the future, whenever 1 or 2 of their "predictions" happen to come true.  All the while, the history of their success with the field shows that they've made bad "predictions" the vast majority of the time.  We highlight the wins and downplay the losses.

If any of you think your systems can do better, I encourage you to demonstrate.  1 week.Thumbs Up  If it works, it works.  If it doesn't, it doesn't.  A system should outdo the QP or Personal Random Play 99% of the time.  Period.  No excuses.

Card counting is a true system
Using short-cuts to beat a time challenge in the game Mirror's Edge is a true system
Analyzing and sorting through "hot" and "cold" numbers to maybe, possibly, handicap the lottery is NOT a true system.

    bobby623's avatar - abstract
    San Angelo, Texas
    United States
    Member #1097
    January 31, 2003
    1394 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: September 14, 2010, 12:40 pm - IP Logged

    Luminus

    I Agree!

    Gambling is gambling - you win some, you lose a lot!

    It's a shame that, given the membership of this forum, less than 5 people commented on your effort.
    I'm sure you spent lot of time putting together the posts. The law of averages indicates there should
    have been at least one person interested in your number generating scheme.

    So, unless you got a ton of private messages, it seems the 'vast silent majority' did what they always do.

    I think the challenge proves that folks tend to resist change. We all have a way of playing and we are supremely
    confident we will hit a big one, if not today then tomorrow or the next day, or the day after .........

    I intend to keep plugging along with my workouts. I have the time, the interest and the money. It's
    just entertainment, in lieu of drinking, smoking, movies, expensive restaurant food, and, whatever.

    Good luck in your future activities

      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
      mid-Ohio
      United States
      Member #9
      March 24, 2001
      19825 Posts
      Online
      Posted: September 14, 2010, 3:18 pm - IP Logged

      There is no one system that can represent all systems, Luminus test results speaks for his system which I don't recall was ever explained how it worked.  Most players systems are not static but are changed to adjust for what happens during the drawings. 

      I doubt if any system players will abandon their systems based on Luminus test results.  I check my system after every drawing and while it has never won big I think it has more potential of doing it with the changes I make than the same amount of quick picks.

      At least when I pick my own combinations, I don't have to worry about duplication, number distribution and other conditions I often hear QP players complaining about.

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

        tiggs95's avatar - Lottery-036.jpg

        United States
        Member #47420
        November 4, 2006
        3930 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: September 14, 2010, 5:05 pm - IP Logged

        Luminus

        I Agree!

        Gambling is gambling - you win some, you lose a lot!

        It's a shame that, given the membership of this forum, less than 5 people commented on your effort.
        I'm sure you spent lot of time putting together the posts. The law of averages indicates there should
        have been at least one person interested in your number generating scheme.

        So, unless you got a ton of private messages, it seems the 'vast silent majority' did what they always do.

        I think the challenge proves that folks tend to resist change. We all have a way of playing and we are supremely
        confident we will hit a big one, if not today then tomorrow or the next day, or the day after .........

        I intend to keep plugging along with my workouts. I have the time, the interest and the money. It's
        just entertainment, in lieu of drinking, smoking, movies, expensive restaurant food, and, whatever.

        Good luck in your future activities

        But there was over 1900 who viewed the post's..No one always has an opinion just like on other post..Luminus did a lot of work on this thread and a good job..He proved his point..

          Luminus's avatar - ouskuu

          United States
          Member #51269
          April 3, 2007
          529 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: September 16, 2010, 1:59 am - IP Logged

          Once again, not a SINGLE person took the challenge after me.  That's VERY   telling to me.Ponder

           

          Thanks to those who cared.

            truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
            Michigan
            United States
            Member #22395
            September 24, 2005
            1583 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: September 16, 2010, 10:08 am - IP Logged

            Once again, not a SINGLE person took the challenge after me.  That's VERY   telling to me.Ponder

             

            Thanks to those who cared.

            I wouldn't take that alone as any indication.  You did see the famous thread about QPs vs SPs?

            It is almost 80 pages, so I am not going to check if you posted to it but if you did not, then maybe you would be interested.

            Statistically Speaking - QP's and PP's - Lottery Post Forums:
            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/217100

              Luminus's avatar - ouskuu

              United States
              Member #51269
              April 3, 2007
              529 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: September 17, 2010, 9:59 am - IP Logged

              I wouldn't take that alone as any indication.  You did see the famous thread about QPs vs SPs?

              It is almost 80 pages, so I am not going to check if you posted to it but if you did not, then maybe you would be interested.

              Statistically Speaking - QP's and PP's - Lottery Post Forums:
              http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/217100

              Taken from that thread:

              "As it stands now, if the percentages are correct, Player Picks win at the same dumb luck rate as Quick Picks."

              This is basically where my thinking is, now.

                Luminus's avatar - ouskuu

                United States
                Member #51269
                April 3, 2007
                529 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: September 17, 2010, 10:29 am - IP Logged

                Also from that thread:

                jarasan said,

                "There is probably a tighter ratio of QP ticket to QP player than PP ticket to PP player.  We need to know those ratios to get that garner.  With QP's you can't establish a baseline for comparison efficiently with the time it would take to do such a thing.   That is why the jackpot challenges are so good for PP'ing.  QP's are just the opposite,  no thought process in selection,  pure randomness,  not a "per se" method other than picking to play QP's.  When I play the dang numbers I play to win and beat the odds,  if you  select 3 numbers correctly out of 5 you have beat 1 / 306 odds in Mega, 4 of 5,  1 / 15,300+. w/ the mega ball over 1 / 600,000.  And with a short wheel you can win significantly,  you can never do this with QP's. 

                Bottom line is this:  it doesn't help improve your play to compare apples and oranges.

                The jackpot challenges help improve your play and is fully documented and tracked.  Has anybody just used RNG's to play the challenges?"

                 

                I highlighted the significant sentence.  That is a true statement.  However, as I've said, in the long run, the house wins.  It's not that systems don't work.  They clearly work to some degree.  The problem is that they're useless.Thumbs Down  It's like trying to pay off a $10,000 credit card debt, while only paying the minimum amount.  Yes, your payments are working to some degree, but in the long run its all useless.

                Also, I realize someone will mention my quote above this post about dumb luck and claim a contradiction. But you would be wrong.  Your systems still require luck to work, because you can't have a positive repeatable demonstration on the drop of a dime.  You'll always claim it takes time to work.

                  truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                  Michigan
                  United States
                  Member #22395
                  September 24, 2005
                  1583 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: September 17, 2010, 12:29 pm - IP Logged

                  Also from that thread:

                  jarasan said,

                  "There is probably a tighter ratio of QP ticket to QP player than PP ticket to PP player.  We need to know those ratios to get that garner.  With QP's you can't establish a baseline for comparison efficiently with the time it would take to do such a thing.   That is why the jackpot challenges are so good for PP'ing.  QP's are just the opposite,  no thought process in selection,  pure randomness,  not a "per se" method other than picking to play QP's.  When I play the dang numbers I play to win and beat the odds,  if you  select 3 numbers correctly out of 5 you have beat 1 / 306 odds in Mega, 4 of 5,  1 / 15,300+. w/ the mega ball over 1 / 600,000.  And with a short wheel you can win significantly,  you can never do this with QP's. 

                  Bottom line is this:  it doesn't help improve your play to compare apples and oranges.

                  The jackpot challenges help improve your play and is fully documented and tracked.  Has anybody just used RNG's to play the challenges?"

                   

                  I highlighted the significant sentence.  That is a true statement.  However, as I've said, in the long run, the house wins.  It's not that systems don't work.  They clearly work to some degree.  The problem is that they're useless.Thumbs Down  It's like trying to pay off a $10,000 credit card debt, while only paying the minimum amount.  Yes, your payments are working to some degree, but in the long run its all useless.

                  Also, I realize someone will mention my quote above this post about dumb luck and claim a contradiction. But you would be wrong.  Your systems still require luck to work, because you can't have a positive repeatable demonstration on the drop of a dime.  You'll always claim it takes time to work.

                  Quote: "However, as I've said, in the long run, the house wins."

                  Systems or Quick Picks, the house has the same huge edge!  I don't think your statement it fully true.  There are millionaires made every week from some lottery here in the U.S.  Yes, you absolutely need luck but all you need is one (decent) jackpot hit in a lifetime.

                  Not trying to encourage you (or anyone) to gamble.

                    Luminus's avatar - ouskuu

                    United States
                    Member #51269
                    April 3, 2007
                    529 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: September 18, 2010, 2:06 pm - IP Logged

                    Quote: "However, as I've said, in the long run, the house wins."

                    Systems or Quick Picks, the house has the same huge edge!  I don't think your statement it fully true.  There are millionaires made every week from some lottery here in the U.S.  Yes, you absolutely need luck but all you need is one (decent) jackpot hit in a lifetime.

                    Not trying to encourage you (or anyone) to gamble.

                    I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.  I'm not suggesting anyone should stop playing the lottery.  I'm saying stop wasting time on systems as they are pointless.