Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 23, 2017, 7:51 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# What is a lottery system? What distinguishes a lottery system from guesses, dreams and quick picks?

Topic closed. 918 replies. Last post 6 years ago by mayhem.

 Page 12 of 62
PrintE-mailLink

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 12:30 am - IP Logged

I'm not interested in what you have to say, garyo1954.

I addressed the question to RL-RANDOMLOGIC - I'll wait for his reply.

Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7344 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 12:33 am - IP Logged

Actually, even in the PB, MM and Pick 6 games, I would like a system that is consistently repeatable so I can at least win back some of the money I am spending while traveling down the road toward the JP. If a system truly works, then it should regularly and consistently be hitting 4/6 and 5/6, or 3/5 and 4/5.

"If a system truly works, then it should regularly and consistently be hitting 4/6 and 5/6, or 3/5 and 4/5."

In 5/39 pick-5 games you can cover all 39 numbers on 8 lines, but you can't expect to consistently match 3 or 4 number on one line waiting for a jackpot hit. The intent of that type play is to match all 5 drawn numbers on the same line so hitting the jackpot makes it a success. Since it's using all 39 numbers it can hit other jackpots.

If the intent is to consistently match 3 and 4 number by using a smaller amount of numbers, the system should be designed to do just that. The likely results are playing for a small loss or tiny profit. The method for matching 3 or 4 numbers would probably be different than a method designed to match all 5 numbers.

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 12:35 am - IP Logged

If your system isn't making you money then why do it? Bad ideas are still ideas after all. Just because something is definable doesn't make it automatically good.

How you do anything is how you do everything.

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19903 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 12:46 am - IP Logged

If your system isn't making you money then why do it? Bad ideas are still ideas after all. Just because something is definable doesn't make it automatically good.

That's like asking the average lottery player if he's not winning any money playing the lotteries why does he continue to buy tickets?

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

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 12:46 am - IP Logged

Visiondude

I know now that I have been wasting my time here trying to explain something that seems to

be way over the heads of some.  I am beginning to experience a little frustration that must be

very similar to yours in your quest to prove God exist.  Just can't be done, for every proof you can

give I can give two that explain it away.   I will however list in order the things that I have claimed

and attempt one more time to slience the zealous critics.

#1   My system is a system

#2   My system has a definable set of rules that have been explained very clearly

The fact that it is misunderstood is a result of not being able to think outside the box.

#3   My system is not based on the odds for the game nor does it predict anything

#4   My system Is not to be measured by how many winning numbers it produces each run

#5   My system is designed to produce the smartest lines that can be gotten based on the matrix and the

users imputs.

#6   My system performs at 100% , 100% of the time.

#7   My software does in a few seconds what could take years to do on paper.

#8   My system requires the user to make choices based on the population and distrubition of values within the matrix

#9   My system will not produce Jackpots if the user makes mistakes in the input stage.

#10 My system will produce many lower prizes even if the inputs are selected incorrectly.

#11 My system has basic inputs that are very easy to predict and more complex inputs that are not.

#12 My system will produce the JP set every time the correct inputs are entered.

#13 My system produces its own odds which can be calculated using real math.

#13 My system is not based on numbers but strings of digits.

#14 My system is not effected by the so called randomness of the draw.

If the measure of a system is based on it's ability to hit jackpots then I would give my system a A+

If the measure of a system is based on it's repeatability then I would give my system a A+

If the measure of a system is based on what the user inputs then I would give my system a A+

and the user can judge his/her own performance.

The balls bouncing around and the balls falling out of the hopper is just an illusion as to what is really

going on in a draw.  The full set already exist in the matrix.  Think of a large wheel similar to the one

used on the game show "The Price is Right."  Now imagine that every set / line is written somewhere

on the wheel.  For my 5-39 game you would have 575757 spaces on the wheel.  Give the wheel a spin

and see where it stops.  This would make a very good way to conduct the draw but many would  not

trust it for obivious reasons.  The balls in a hopper do not control the randomness of the draw but

are shown to convince the ticket holder that the draw is fair because how could they cheat with all the

bouncing going on.   You can pick your numbers and hope the correct five or six fall out making you the

winner but this is not the case for most.  I believe that if you are picking numbers soley based only what

was drawn in past you are wasting your time.  If you count all the numbers on the big wheel you will

find that each number shows the exact number of times but if you count the digits you will find that there

is a very big difference in the totals.  You will also find that the digit (1) can be found on 509977? of the

spaces while poor digit (0) only gets 198765? spaces or lines.  Now any serious player must be able by

using very simple math be able to tell you that digit (1) will show 2.56 more times in any one spin then

digit (0). how hard is that to understand.  If however digit (0) has not shown for several days then one

might conclude that since 198765 spaces on the wheel have a digit (0) then some very simple math can

be used to calculate the odds of it missing again.  Be very careful here in the way you interpet this data.

If you think that it will hit because it is due to hit then you would fall into the gamblers fallacy. However

if you see correctly that it is a matter of the wheel stoping on any one space that does not have a (0)

then this is not.  To do this correctly you must know the times it appears on the wheel ie matrix and think

of the next drawing as just the wheel starting up again and then spinning to a stop.  Remember the balls

bouncing around mean nothing because the full set already exist in the matrix.   It is very hard for people

to forget the random actions of the draw and to stop thinking in terms of numbers but as jimmy says so

often it is very liberating to know the truth.   The sets or lines of numbers / digits on the wheel could be

mixed up in any order and it would not matter.  The wheel will stop on one of the lines and it does not

matter which unless you only count jackpots.  Playing digits without regaurd to the numbers they form

is the digit system.  Pick the digits in accordance to the population while paying attention to where the

wheel stopped in a few past draws will in my opinion fair much better.  At the end of the draw I count

how many of the digits I got correct and that is what I base how well I am doing.  Match the correct

digits and you win.  I have been doing this for so long I cannot even think of the draw in terms of

numbers.  I am not here to down play any system that anyone is using, If it works for them then I would

pat them on the back and say good job.  I guess I could post my digit selections but then again why

would I need to.  I think most could use the 1-2-3 rule and pick 2 or 3 more at random.  How many people

would need to post most days for someone to match them all being that there are only 35 combinations

if you use 6 total digits and 21 if using 5 along with the base 1-2-3.

RL

" I am beginning to experience a little frustration that must be very similar to yours in your quest to prove God exist.  Just can't be  done, for every proof you can  give I can give two that explain it away".

and you just explained the difference in how a reasonable persons mind works,  and how wishful thinking ditches reality.........because your goal in the debate would be TO explain it away,  wherein my quest about the debate about the lottery being totally random (and therefore "unpredictable") is to qualify that either it does work, or it doesn't work.

i would love so much for someone to stop claiming it does,  and demonstrating that it actually does.

i would love to see that people CAN manipulate the outcome thru their effort for personal gain.....so i want to believe.

the difference....i WANT to know,  so therefore if there was proof,  i would accept it and change my position on it.

you are correct if you are saying people cannot believe,  who do not want to believe out of the gate.  that is true.

but your comparison is incomparable,  because God has given us centuries of solid trackable proof throughout history,  and all that takes is a reasonable person willing to adjust to the evidence,  whereas in all of the "history" of LP,  there hasn't been one person who could belly up to the bar and say "pardner,  lemme show you how it's done", (by actually doing it).

not one

the truth is,  i want to know........so bring "that person" front and center so i can believeth...

VISION

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 1:07 am - IP Logged

"success is sustained and demonstrated again thru the one and only qualifying factor.....repeatability"

If someone won a jackpot large enough for them to retire, they probably wouldn't care about whether or not their system could hit again. Repeatability doesn't matter when it comes to the big jackpot games. Win once, and be done if that's what you so choose. That's the difference between the small games and the Pick 6, Powerball, and Mega Millions. I could see people wanting their system to be repeatable if they're playing Pick 3, Pick 4, and Pick 5. We're not talking "set for life" amounts when playing those types of games. They were successful, and they only needed to do it once.

for face value.....i totally agree.

really,  after a JP win of any size,  who cares spiff about repreatability much anymore as a qualifying factor.

the sticky sticking point i am attempting to make is the differentiation between "luck" and "skill".

truthfully speaking,  a systems player can't even brag with certainity that they bagged the big one based on skill.

a one time occurance does not denote skill.  it favors more of the definition of luck than skill.

repeatability screams skill

true, repeatability is more easily observed in the smaller numbered games,  because the player is inclined to keep after the game,  thinking they can conquer it thru skill.

good by me.....show us anyone that can even demonstrate sustained repeatability in any game,  long enough that no one can deny it isn't anything but skill.

my point,  that hasn't ever happened,  nor will it ever happen,  even in a 3 number game

i think you have seen me in action long enough to know i make this as easy as possible,  by providing opportunity for someone to demonstrate this just in the 3 number games.   i gave up years ago talking to systems players about "proof" in the major leagues.

said it many times over.....some one show us with their pick 3 prowess (and you certainly don't have to show anyone how you did it).....and visiondude will sing the praises that the lottery can be manipulated.

who doesn't want to be the hero that did that?

followed by 9 years of silence

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 1:18 am - IP Logged

If your system isn't making you money then why do it? Bad ideas are still ideas after all. Just because something is definable doesn't make it automatically good.

perfect.

i think any reasonable person would agree,  that a defineable "system that works" is one where you can demonstrate obvious manipulation by the player using his system,  and the obviousness of that is sustained repeatability that leads to profitability over efforts.

i am thinking on a resonable level,  when i say as a systems skeptic that i am not "demanding" JP accuracy out of the gate.

that would be cake,  but not reasonable.

just the ability to manipulate it enough to extract profit over effort.

i think a reasonable person would agree that's the definition of a "successful system".

yet,  still after 9 years,  despite reducing this equation to it's most simplest terms/conditions,  still not one person can do even that.

maybe a hit here and there, maybe even a string of them for a spell.

but sustainability over time.

ahhhhhhh nope.

that's because no one can

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 1:27 am - IP Logged

let me demonstrate why i am not the most popular "dude" in the room.

this is nuts and bolts,  and devides the claimers from the i cans.

RL,  you spent several pages stating that you "can",  now show us you can.

pick any game,  and state,  and put up your picks pre draw.

don't use the excuse you don't want to give your secrets away,  you don't have to tell people how you did it,  just do it instead of explaining that "you can".

that is the most effective way of ending these back and forths once and for all.

some simple demonstration by someone who actually can.

i would think with all the time you put into it,  coupled with your self belief in it's merits,  this somehow would make you lick your chops.

am i right about that?

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4094 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 1:42 am - IP Logged

RL,  while i do appreciate the effort and extent you went to in your  attempt at legitimizing your personal pursuit of the lottery,  it's still a claimed hypothesis,  and nothing more.

while you laid out it's partial methodology,  the fact still remains,  when it gets down to it's reall life application (putting your own money on it),   "it" ....(like any other "system") .....can not produce a consistent sustainable repeatability where you can truthfully claim you can actually create an edge via your efforts.

you,  nor anyone else can actually demonstrate the ability to predict/alter/manipulate a random event

the following "reminder" is not for your benefit,  because you obviously discard this small piece of reality,  but it is for the reading audience,  and it goes like this.

(1) lottery balls have no memory.  they don't know which one is due,  which one is shy,  which one has been on vacation for months,  they have no idea who has been penciling them in because they like "that number",  they have no idea when a computer program has been "fine tuned" to favor them......lottery balls have zero memory, and each one has the same chance to come up every draw.   it is incongruent with logical thinking that even though they haven't made an appearance in a very long time,  that somehow they are "due".  that's rediculous,  considering at each draw each ball has the same chance period.

(2)  even if someone could detect a pattern via the usage of the same ballsets,  you nor anyone else knows which ballsets or machines they are using for that draw,  because they switch them around while denying public knowledge, thereby negating any pattern.

(3)  no one experiences continuity of success,  as claimed "success" is always represented in a sliding scale form "painted" by the claimed "successor".  proponents of lottery "systems" who claim they have something are in a constant state of flux, forever searching and tweaking.  why is that,  if it "works".   these facts portend excuse,  not success.

success is sustained and demonstrated again thru the one and only qualifying factor.....repeatability

without repeatability,  you have wishful thinking.

(4)  tons of hyperbole,  on the back of high falutin hypothesis,  sans hard evidence.  "i can i can i can i can,  and here's how i do it"....."what,  you want me to show you that it works?  noooo, i can't do that"    followed by the excuse...."hey,  it's my system and my hard work,  get your own"

.......which is lame,  because people like don't care "how it works", only that it does...

9 years at LP,  and still not one who actually demonstrates they can when pressed to do so.  that is a fact

(5)  this is a hard fact of life,  and one reminder guys like you are not going to like,  but it's necessary to prove my point that it's just random......that even if anyone could,  the lotteries would change it up and negate your hard work toot suite,  forcing your wishful thinking back to square one,  where you are going to have to expend even more time and effort into something that would eventually happen again, ad infirediculoustimedraininginitum

you want the hard truth (wishful thinkers ignore hard truth,  but here goes)......there will never come a time in future history where anyone will exploit the lottery for manipulative gain.  the hard truth is,  the lotteries wouldn't allow it if it were possible,  and would immediately send it back to impossible land.

you cannot reason with a person who doesn't accept that common sense fact of life.

any "pursuit" now certainly has no future, because the future will always be manipulated so you can't  anyways.

now,  does that mean we shouldn't pursue something in life based on eventual roadblocks?  heck no.  you charge ahead,  when there is a goal that is attainable

the lottery is a random event everytime it happens,  because past history doesn't count,  anymore than the impossibility of future predictability, anyomre than the certainity the lotteries won't allow it.

do you have to buy only 1QP?    no no and no times PI.

but you waste time thinking you can manipulate a designed random event designed enough to be impossible to exploit

crazy that after all these years at LP that it never occured to me that the lottery can ruin wishful thinking with one small tweak of the matrix,  negating completely all your previous efforts,  only to sit and wait until they tweak it again.

therein lay the reasoning why i preach the gospel of common sense.

it is amazing where a man or woman can take themselves,  so long as it's not on the bullet train of desperation

Vision

I would only ask that everyone you try to convince that there is a God would take your advice given here.

You offer no proof of what you say and just keep repeating gossip it like a swinging door.  Where is the proof to

prove your claim that no one here has ever came up with a system that wins.  Maybe this is just your assumption

just like the one you have about a God.   PROVE IT or shut up,  is this not the same thing that you require of

me.  Why don't you just admit why you continue to demand proof while giving none.  To say no one has ever

done this is just babble.  You and Side Step jim have nothing to offer, nothing.  Sorry if your faith has left you

hardended to the point that you can no longer believe anything,  but that's what you end up like when you live

a double life.  Trying to get someone to believe your claims by faith all the while demanding proof from everyone

else for everything they believe.  Spend some time in front of a mirror and see it you like what you see.  I have

been at LP almost since the very first day so your claims of having been here for soooo long really mean nothing.

Do you have my software?  Have you tried to develop some skills at selecting digits? Have you ran thousands of

simulations?  Do you know everything that I use?  I bet the answer is no to all the above but yet you have no

problems stating as a fact that it does not work.  Shame, shame, shame on you.

Prove that it does not work, you know what, you can't because it does.  Sorry if you can't see the error of your

ways but that's what happends to people who think too highly of themselves.   Jimmy has no interest in any

thing but jimmy.  He can't understand the system either so he just uses lame old stats that everyone should

have learned by the 9th grade.  It's funny to me how indoctrinated some people are, almost to the point that

they are as predictable as the sun rising in the east.   They have placed themselves in a box and closed the lid

only comming out to belittle anyone that says anything other then what they believe.  You want the truth but

you can't handle the truth unless it lines up with what you think the truth is.  I would laugh if it was not so sad.

Go ahead and blast away because I am both visiondud and jimmy bo bo proof.  You can't convince me that my system

is not better then a QP, much much better.  Maybe I am just way smarter then both of you, when was the last time

you got a 5 of 5 on a QP, I have hit 2 in the last couple weeks using my system, No I did not buy tickets those

days and I also know you won't believe it, thats your problem not mine.

RL

Dallas, Texas
United States
Member #4549
May 2, 2004
1848 Posts
Online
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 1:57 am - IP Logged

I'm not interested in what you have to say, garyo1954.

I addressed the question to RL-RANDOMLOGIC - I'll wait for his reply.

Jimboo-boo!!!!!!

You still have two lifelines.

1) Phone Home.

2) Let the audience decide.

Would you like to use one of your lifelines now?

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4094 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 2:02 am - IP Logged

for face value.....i totally agree.

really,  after a JP win of any size,  who cares spiff about repreatability much anymore as a qualifying factor.

the sticky sticking point i am attempting to make is the differentiation between "luck" and "skill".

truthfully speaking,  a systems player can't even brag with certainity that they bagged the big one based on skill.

a one time occurance does not denote skill.  it favors more of the definition of luck than skill.

repeatability screams skill

true, repeatability is more easily observed in the smaller numbered games,  because the player is inclined to keep after the game,  thinking they can conquer it thru skill.

good by me.....show us anyone that can even demonstrate sustained repeatability in any game,  long enough that no one can deny it isn't anything but skill.

my point,  that hasn't ever happened,  nor will it ever happen,  even in a 3 number game

i think you have seen me in action long enough to know i make this as easy as possible,  by providing opportunity for someone to demonstrate this just in the 3 number games.   i gave up years ago talking to systems players about "proof" in the major leagues.

said it many times over.....some one show us with their pick 3 prowess (and you certainly don't have to show anyone how you did it).....and visiondude will sing the praises that the lottery can be manipulated.

who doesn't want to be the hero that did that?

followed by 9 years of silence

Maybe it's not that simple,  When God knocks on my door and points at a few stars and says move around

a little and the stars do just that then I will quit playing the digit system for something better.  Let's just

say that I learn from the best, and just like the God you believe in, The non-belivers can go straight to .............

Take up your quest with God first and then work your way down to little misguided untruthful me.  I posted a

system that takes skill and time to learn,  If I posted my combos and showed the world that it really does work

then everyone would believe however the same thing could be said for the Big Guy.   Anyone who thinks if they

had my software could hit a jackpot in the next week or so would be very disapointed just like a person who

thinks that by accepting Jesus would make all their problems go away.  However if they adhear to the teachings they

can over time improve there results very much.   You don't know what you ask.....

RL

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 2:16 am - IP Logged

That's like asking the average lottery player if he's not winning any money playing the lotteries why does he continue to buy tickets?

Point taken. Personally though, I would stop playing if I went negative. Hasn't happened so far because I'm extremely patient, go in with a few hundred dollars, play the same combinations (for the particular run), and play consecutive days until a past due combo comes up. I have yet to run dry past initial investment before hitting. Just like running a business, risks must be taken, short term losses must be accepted, and long-term losses....are a disaster.

How you do anything is how you do everything.

light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 2:40 am - IP Logged

Vision

I would only ask that everyone you try to convince that there is a God would take your advice given here.

You offer no proof of what you say and just keep repeating gossip it like a swinging door.  Where is the proof to

prove your claim that no one here has ever came up with a system that wins.  Maybe this is just your assumption

just like the one you have about a God.   PROVE IT or shut up,  is this not the same thing that you require of

me.  Why don't you just admit why you continue to demand proof while giving none.  To say no one has ever

done this is just babble.  You and Side Step jim have nothing to offer, nothing.  Sorry if your faith has left you

hardended to the point that you can no longer believe anything,  but that's what you end up like when you live

a double life.  Trying to get someone to believe your claims by faith all the while demanding proof from everyone

else for everything they believe.  Spend some time in front of a mirror and see it you like what you see.  I have

been at LP almost since the very first day so your claims of having been here for soooo long really mean nothing.

Do you have my software?  Have you tried to develop some skills at selecting digits? Have you ran thousands of

simulations?  Do you know everything that I use?  I bet the answer is no to all the above but yet you have no

problems stating as a fact that it does not work.  Shame, shame, shame on you.

Prove that it does not work, you know what, you can't because it does.  Sorry if you can't see the error of your

ways but that's what happends to people who think too highly of themselves.   Jimmy has no interest in any

thing but jimmy.  He can't understand the system either so he just uses lame old stats that everyone should

have learned by the 9th grade.  It's funny to me how indoctrinated some people are, almost to the point that

they are as predictable as the sun rising in the east.   They have placed themselves in a box and closed the lid

only comming out to belittle anyone that says anything other then what they believe.  You want the truth but

you can't handle the truth unless it lines up with what you think the truth is.  I would laugh if it was not so sad.

Go ahead and blast away because I am both visiondud and jimmy bo bo proof.  You can't convince me that my system

is not better then a QP, much much better.  Maybe I am just way smarter then both of you, when was the last time

you got a 5 of 5 on a QP, I have hit 2 in the last couple weeks using my system, No I did not buy tickets those

days and I also know you won't believe it, thats your problem not mine.

RL

instead of jumping at the chance to prove claims you made (and i didn't),  somehow you dream you can turn this back around on me, and blame me for your unwilliningness?

seriously,  this is like the thousandth time someone has resorted to this tactic when it then becomes obvious they can't.

blame the other guy so they "don't have to"

you know,  you having read past threads i was involved in,  when anyone challenged me to throw out "proofs" about beliefs i base my decision making on,  i hopped all over that chance.

devoted pages and pages to it,  despite being the lone ranger while taking pot shots from the many

you?   not you,  you blame me and look for the exit door.

i have been more than willing to parade out undeniable history.

done it a ton of times,  all archived under my username,  easily accessable by anyone.

for you to say "you haven't"......that's a blatant lie.

be glad to do it again right here should i need to,  no problema.

you know me.....someone else creates that opportunity,  i am theresville

YOU are the one that referenced "god" in this thread.....i didn't breathe a word about it.

true replicated history doesn't need "faith" to believe it,  it just needs a person willing to adjust to it's facts.

same thing applies to the lottery,  or SHOULD,  should someone like yourself actually back up what they claim.

and i was right on the money when i said "no one has" demonstrated sustained repeatability .

if they had,  you would have brought up 'examples" to prove your point.

you couldn't even offer up yourself,  despite your claimed "success rate"

it's tragically pathetic to watch a man extoll virtues he cannot demonstrate,  and attempt to blame another for his unwillingness to do so.

my statement still holds true,  and is now both current and obvious (thanks to you).....that no one has in 9 years,  cuz no one can

you can add yourself to the list of "i can'ts"........and you will never get away with blaming me.

unless of course you change your mind,  and your parade out your numbers pre draw to show the LP crowd that you do in fact "have something that is better than QP's".

remember RL,  you made that claim,  i didn't.

you should know by now i am a man that stands behind what i say / believe.  pages and pages of devotion to blocks of time to make sure i do.

i am not afraid of the reprisal of what i believe, and the defense thereof

you know you won't catch me looking for the exit.  i stay till the curtain closes.

that being said,  trumpet out your "proof",  then if you want some positional belief reciprocation,  i will do it right here.

well,  think up another excuse to offer up the LP crowd why you can't (or better yet won't)

you get to that crucial intersection in life where a man either is, or isn't.   he can either do what he says he can do,  or he can't.  after that "intersection",  the truth about him becomes apparent

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

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

until further notice,  it's  france everyday

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 2:48 am - IP Logged

It's just a game! Life must be getting too easy. Reading through all this is like reading through some heavy handed mideavel romance novel.

How you do anything is how you do everything.

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
4094 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 30, 2011, 2:53 am - IP Logged

garyo1954,

Apparently you were afraid too many people might read my tough question for RL-RANDOMLOGIC prompting you to try to bury it the moment you saw it.  That's acceptable here, but I don't think lies are.

You said, "Look at Jimmy's claim that he improved RickG's system and then derided RickG's winning percentage."

You know very well I did not try to improve RickG's system, nor did I deride his winning percentage.

These are two BLATANT lies!

Now, what does that make you?

--Jimmy4164

P.S.  BTW, RL-RANDOMLOGIC came nowhere near answering the question above, and he knows it!

Here it is again:

RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

Since you have stated on many occasions that you are not guilty of the Gambler's Fallacy, I was surprised that your 14 points above didn't include a rule forcing you to deal only with the configuation of the matrix, never looking back.  But then I noticed that you said, "I believe that if you are picking numbers soley based only what was drawn in past you are wasting your time."  Could it be that your qualification with the word "soley" is what prohibits you from making this your point #15?

I have a simple question for you motivated by the puzzlement I experience each time I see you make references to your need to make frequent adjustments to your program parameters:

What methods would you employ to set your program parameters if you were tasked with selecting a set of bets in a (5,39) Lotto game for the OPENING DAY DRAW in a state that previously did not have such a game?  For discussion purposes, let's assume it's a mechanical ball drop drawing system.

I really hope you can approach this question calmly and briefly.  I am not asking you to reveal specifics of your filtering techniques.  All I am looking for is a concise explanation of how your system works without looking back.

--Jimmy4164

jimmy

I thought that I had answered your question but will take another shot. Not sure It will be what you are

looking for any more then the first reply.  As for being afraid, fear is not a option for me, I have stood toe

to toe many many times and love the taste of blood.  If the question was tough I guess my teeth are sharp

enought that they never noticed.

#1

Since you have stated on many occasions that you are not guilty of the Gambler's Fallacy, I was surprised that your 14 points above didn't include a rule forcing you to deal only with the configuation of the matrix, never looking back.

I stated that I do use draw history to track what can, does, and has happened.  The Gamblers fallacy would be

if I thought that since a coin toss has hit heads five times in a role that the next flip must be heads also or that

the next flip must produce a tails because the last 5 were heads.  I believe nothing of the kind, I believe that

events in a lottery will follow the percents of events that are within the matrix.  Look at the BIG WHEEL scenario

that I posted and that should answer your question.  I don't know how to put it any other way.

#2

But then I noticed that you said, "I believe that if you are picking numbers soley based only what was drawn in past you are wasting your time."  Could it be that your qualification with the word "soley" is what prohibits you from making this your point #15?

If you are mocking my spelling then sorry for the mistake I meant "solely"  another one of my many typeo's.  There

was no point 15 because, because the 14 covered it if you read the whole post

#3

I have a simple question for you motivated by the puzzlement I experience each time I see you make references to your need to make frequent adjustments to your program parameters:

Is there a question here, sorry If I missed it again.

#4

What methods would you employ to set your program parameters if you were tasked with selecting a set of bets in a (5,39) Lotto game for the OPENING DAY DRAW in a state that previously did not have such a game?  For discussion purposes, let's assume it's a mechanical ball drop drawing system.

This is the only real question that I seen in the post and the one I provided a answer to.  For starters I would not

play until I had enough history to test my theory about the drawings following the matrix. Once it proved that it did

then I would track the progress and play accordingly.

#5

I really hope you can approach this question calmly and briefly.  I am not asking you to reveal specifics of your filtering techniques.  All I am looking for is a concise explanation of how your system works without looking back.

As I have stated I do look back and use this information in ways that are mathematically sound. I am not fooled

by randomness or suffer from the fallacy.  The draw is nothing more then a sample taken from a larger pool, the balls

bouncing around does not mean anything. Again read the BIG WHEEL scenario as it explains how I see the drawing

and why I believe the things I do.   Playing a system is all about trapping a set of numbers within a small group.

I only need to trap 2 numbers on any one line on average to break even and win a few larger prizes to make a profit.

I still can't see what is so hard or unbeliveable about doing this.  I have days where every ticket I play has at least

a 2 of 5 match which covers the cost of the ticket.

Hope this helps, and have a nice day.

RL

 Page 12 of 62