Welcome Guest
You last visited January 16, 2017, 9:40 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 2 of 62
Denver, Co
United States
Member #103046
December 29, 2010
546 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 25, 2011, 8:37 pm - IP Logged

Your system may be capable of doing that but only if you allow it to pick more combinations.

My system usually goes through approximately 5000 randomly picked combinations to come up with approximately 500 combinations within the parameters I choose of which I usually pick 10-20 to play.  Lately I've been saving and checking those 500 combinations to see if I rejected any big winners and occasionally I find one, it's just that I didn't include it in the 10-20 lines I chose to play.  On those few occasions, had I played all 500 lines or so, I would have won big but not the jackpot.   Had I ever rejected a jackpot winner, I might be tempted to try playing all those combinations once in a while.

If only I could be so lucky, RJoh.

I will say that once in a while, using the Expert Lotto 'winning number history' filters, I can poduce a set of 200 to 500 combinations that hold a couple of 4/5 winners and several 3/5 winners. Like you, it's a matter of having the money to buy those tickets. In January I was lucky enough to pick 10 lines and win 1-4/5, 2-3/5 and 2-2/5 combinations. Recently I had 3 4/5 combinations out of 400 lines, but didn't buy any of the tickets. But most times, I dont get that close and may be lucky to get a few 2/5's. So if I were picking the right numbers but wrong combinations of those numbers, I wouldnt feel so bad.

The problem I am having is when I use ideas such as Gail Howards biases and charts, I'll end up with 14 to 18 numbers that I am absolutely positive will produce at least one or two 3/5 winners out of 25 tickets, and not one of those 14 to 18 numbers will hit, or I may get 3 or 4 2/5 hit. That is extremely frustrating to know that the numbers that hit were in all the numbers you threw away.

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 25, 2011, 11:01 pm - IP Logged

Mayhem I'm down! Anyone want to help us take down the Texas Pick 3, night game here's the chart of the top 25 sets (out of 210):

X1 through X6 are the digits in the set. Longest is the longest the set has stayed out since day 1. Now Out is the current number of draws this set has been out. As you can see the top 3 draws are all within 8 draws of their longest out. Just take the top set {1,2,3,5,6,8}, wheel all the combinations, pare them in any way you like to fit your budget, and play.

WARNING THIS SYSTEM IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY! (But there is no rule that says you must play all the combinations.) USE AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION!

What I like about this system is, 1) it gives you combinations to focus on and, 2) a time frame which you can reasonably expect a hit. Those are the two most frequently asked questions in any discussion on any system. What numbers do I play? And how long should I play them?

Wreck that lottery Mayhem!  (Reminder: In the event it doesn't appear tonight, please be aware that no animals were harmed in the making of this post and that should make you happy.)

Josephus, thank you for the kind comments regarding my earlier post. I composed it this morning having coffee, prior to juggling my brain mowing, hoping it would offer some insight to your questions. LP is a diverse cross section of people in your neighborhood, city, state, region and nation, all with varying viewpoints and interesting ideas. I hope what I offered proved valid if not valuable.

G

D-A-M-N-I-T! How is this supposed to be kept secret now?!

This style of play is what I believe to be the ultimate long-term strategy for the lottery. It saves you from having to perpetually predict the next draw, which is a quicker way to insanity than drilling holes in your head. When back-testing a system it usually fails because of playing during the loosing intervals between wins. By being patient and seeing when something is fixing to go longer than it historically ever has (given your starting parameters) its a good bet to play it for a few days. Dropping in like a sniper, stalking, and then going in for the kill. Efficiency at its best. It doesn't have to be these combinations either. You could try it with OOO, EEE, HHH, LLL, Consecutive Order, or whatever suits your fancy. I'm currently doing OOO and charting it for all states. I like to reduce a set to 5 numbers so a wheel that includes unmatched and doubles is 120 combinations.

Only time will tell though....speaking of time....

A way to conquer time is not in outrunning its infinince, but in realizing its spiral nature in a closed system (the lottery). Notice the context of intervals above. Even music is an organization of time. Which is to say we've taken something in another dimension, something that is normally a perpetual illusion to us, and made it a tangible third dimensional entity. Time travel anyone?

Yeah I know infinice is not a word...but it darn well should be.

How you do anything is how you do everything.

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 3:11 am - IP Logged

Josephus, these are good question, but hard to answer due to the varying ideas of what success means to each player. BUDGET often plays a major part.

One Pick 3 player may play 10 combos, \$5, anticipating box hits, while another plays 20 combos for \$10. Our second player will feel the increased number of box hits is worth the cost. And yet a third player, will play 10 combos at \$10, in hopes of a .50/box, .50/straight win.

When you deal with occasional accurate predictions, the real question is: Is the payout worth the wait? We know that 72% of Pick3 draws are going to be single numbers. Even if they offer the smallest payout, they offer an opportunity of a hit more often. Doubles are drawn 27% of the time. Many people feel since doubles pay double, and are a smaller group, they are the moneymaker. And the third mindset is 'you can't lose playing triples.' If a triple hasn't shown in say, 80 draws, it is time to start playing triples.

Replication from one state to the next is possible with any system. Since each system is built along certain rules or a framework in which you insert the variables of your own game, it often depends on how well you know the game in your state as to success or failure. This is not set in stone as trends change from time to time, which is one of the biggest failures of all systems. Again, how well you know your game, and how quickly you identify trends can make or break any system. All lotteries are in flux.

Remember, the purpose of every every system is to find a universal key that works every draw, for any lottery. Backtesting has advantages in helping do that.

But backtesting can't account for the BRAIN.

From the pure numbers standpoint, backtesting can give an idea of how a system was producing 6 months, 6 years, or over the life of the game, based on the criteria you select, but it cannot account for what is registering in the brain at that time.

Examples of things that would register in the brain, at the time they were occurring, but can't be accounted for in pure mathematical backtests would be: doubles haven't hit in 15 draws, the digit 6 hasn't been seen in 24 draws, or triples have been out 118 days. Likewise you may have seen certain 'triggers' fall that would have led you to a hit that would be glossed over by pure math.

Inasmuch as it produces results showing IF one played in this manner, ignoring all other factors, THEN this would likely be the outcome, backtesting serves a purpose.

Creative systems intrigue me. I like people who think, who stand on the edge and look in, look out and both ways before crossing the street. Back in mid 2009, I'll guess August, WinD and/or paurths (forgive me if I appear to be giving more credit to one than I should, both are excellent thinkers!), presented a system for pick 3  players that (I feel) never received its due.

The idea is simple enough. One makes sets of 5, 6, or 7 digits. In the case of 6 digits, one would make every set from {0,1,2,3,4,5} to {4,5,6,7,8,9} and track those for longest sets out.

We then take that set, wheel the digits, and play those sets. Very simple, viable idea. Excellent, strong foundation. The drawback was not in the system itself, but in others understanding of the idea, coupled with the complexity of tracking each set. Many felt that the longest out set was supposed to hit that draw. If it didn't, the system was a failure.

At the same time, I was working from the oppsite side, based on the idea that 'a trend will continue.' I could see it no other way, so I was tracking sets that continued to hit. In doing so, I found a handful of sets that separate themselves from the pack by a couple of percentage points.

I realized WinD and/or paurths system was head and shoulders above mine when backtesting proved a set only needed to hit 2 or 3 times in the next 100 draws to maintain a leading edge, where their system did away with the headache of percentages completely.

I still use some of the routines written around their system.

1) In total, a system is only as good as the idea we use to build the framework and how well we intepret the output.

2) Backtesting has a purpose, but can never take us back to that point in time to allow us to know what the brain was thinking.

G

The mood here is civilized and I hope my comment doesn't change that.  I just spent valuable time digesting most of this thread, especially what I'm replying to here, so I think that gives me the right to comment.

You say that back-testing can't account for the brain, and you give a few examples:

*  doubles haven't hit in 15 draws

*  the digit 6 hasn't been seen in 24 draws

*  triples have been out 118 days

*  there are other triggers that can't be quantified or made into rules

I'm sorry Gary, but I must respectfully disagree.  I base this on my experience on a team writing computer simulations of operating systems to determine the effects on performance of changing hardware configurations without having to actually build the modified systems.  To people who haven't written complex computer programs, the kinds of things you mention above might make it appear too daunting to attempt to back-test or simulate them.  I personally have worked on programs with orders of magnitude more complexity than anything I can conceive of that you could propose as a set of filters and rules for selecting lines of lottery plays.  Just imagine the mountain of interrelated code that holds this beast called LotteryPost.com together!  The three items above would be trivial to capture with code.  This is just the way I see it.

JosephusMinimus has brought some moderation to these discussions, and I hope he can continue to do that while considering what I've said here.  I think you're selling yourself short when you accept defeat before trying to specify your systems and discussing them with programmers.  If you don't want your ideas made public, that's fine.  But at least do whatever it takes to back-test or simulate your ideas so you can know for sure whether your systems work or not.

--Jimmy4164

p.s.  Your thoughts regarding trends, their persistence, their cycles, are what race handicappers and stock traders think about every day.  Think about that.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 6:31 am - IP Logged

The mood here is civilized and I hope my comment doesn't change that.  I just spent valuable time digesting most of this thread, especially what I'm replying to here, so I think that gives me the right to comment.

You say that back-testing can't account for the brain, and you give a few examples:

*  doubles haven't hit in 15 draws

*  the digit 6 hasn't been seen in 24 draws

*  triples have been out 118 days

*  there are other triggers that can't be quantified or made into rules

I'm sorry Gary, but I must respectfully disagree.  I base this on my experience on a team writing computer simulations of operating systems to determine the effects on performance of changing hardware configurations without having to actually build the modified systems.  To people who haven't written complex computer programs, the kinds of things you mention above might make it appear too daunting to attempt to back-test or simulate them.  I personally have worked on programs with orders of magnitude more complexity than anything I can conceive of that you could propose as a set of filters and rules for selecting lines of lottery plays.  Just imagine the mountain of interrelated code that holds this beast called LotteryPost.com together!  The three items above would be trivial to capture with code.  This is just the way I see it.

JosephusMinimus has brought some moderation to these discussions, and I hope he can continue to do that while considering what I've said here.  I think you're selling yourself short when you accept defeat before trying to specify your systems and discussing them with programmers.  If you don't want your ideas made public, that's fine.  But at least do whatever it takes to back-test or simulate your ideas so you can know for sure whether your systems work or not.

--Jimmy4164

p.s.  Your thoughts regarding trends, their persistence, their cycles, are what race handicappers and stock traders think about every day.  Think about that.

Jimmie:  Part of my reason for beginning this thread was an attempt to get civility out of the trailer park and into a friendlier neighborhood.  Or at least offer it as alternative if anyone felt the trailer park was too noisy with all the shooting and domestic violence to be much fun.

Thanks for the civil post.  Respectful disagreement has a pleasant ring to it.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 7:41 am - IP Logged

D-A-M-N-I-T! How is this supposed to be kept secret now?!

This style of play is what I believe to be the ultimate long-term strategy for the lottery. It saves you from having to perpetually predict the next draw, which is a quicker way to insanity than drilling holes in your head. When back-testing a system it usually fails because of playing during the loosing intervals between wins. By being patient and seeing when something is fixing to go longer than it historically ever has (given your starting parameters) its a good bet to play it for a few days. Dropping in like a sniper, stalking, and then going in for the kill. Efficiency at its best. It doesn't have to be these combinations either. You could try it with OOO, EEE, HHH, LLL, Consecutive Order, or whatever suits your fancy. I'm currently doing OOO and charting it for all states. I like to reduce a set to 5 numbers so a wheel that includes unmatched and doubles is 120 combinations.

Only time will tell though....speaking of time....

A way to conquer time is not in outrunning its infinince, but in realizing its spiral nature in a closed system (the lottery). Notice the context of intervals above. Even music is an organization of time. Which is to say we've taken something in another dimension, something that is normally a perpetual illusion to us, and made it a tangible third dimensional entity. Time travel anyone?

Yeah I know infinice is not a word...but it darn well should be.

Good Morning Mayhem.  Interesting post.

The premise anything within time operates as a closed system and relying on it operating as a closed system isn't a necessarily reflected in what we're able to observe around us.  The open end of everything we observe and have observed gapes into the boundary line we allow ourselves to think of as the present, which is actually the future.  We just aren't able to get near enough to the border to examine it as closely as our minds insist we do.

We reside in the past and we're unable to construct so much as a word in our minds, let alone a sentence, the beginning of which isn't history.  True also of lottery draws and how they might relate to anything on the other side of the boundary line.

There's a spiral-like component revealed in the histories of draws coincident with other spirals we observe in nature.  A lot of the posters here and on the other forums attempt to stand in the past and aim into what they hope will be the future along a linear path in their studies of time when they believe they are studying lottery systems.  Others attempt to back into the future while sighting down a linear path further into the past.

I'd suggest neither of those is particularly successful.  But attempting to avoid the pitfalls of a linear path by a hypothesis of a spiral one within a closed system also mightn't come closer to whatever each of us believes is the destination beyond the border guards and customs agents.

In a real sense conquering time is what most posters aspire to.  Studying the landscape of the past in an attempt to anticipate how the landscape will change when the boundaries have moved mightn't provide any more answers than any other method.  The double helix might come nearer the answer if an answer exists.

I'm rambling.  I apologize.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 10:36 am - IP Logged

Here's  map of a series of recent pick 4 draws.  It doesn't represent a long history but the double helix is there as far back as you care to follow it.

---111----
--11---1-1
--1-1-11--
--21--1---
-----21-1-
--12----1-
--------12
-11----1--
--111----1
-2----1---
------1-2-
---121----
-1--1---11
----1---12
----1-----
--111-1---
-2-----1-1
-1------1-
-1--1-11--
------21-1
---2--2---
-1--2----1
--2-----11
--111----1
------11-2
----1----3
-1--1--1-1

Carters Lake, Ga.
United States
Member #5313
June 29, 2004
1065 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 11:06 am - IP Logged

Thanks to all of you,

This may be the best thread ever posted on LP. As you can see I have been here a long time.

Thanks again to all.

ez

........ in the long run........

Burnsville
United States
Member #107244
March 4, 2011
853 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 11:30 am - IP Logged

The forums here exist in a hope that some means of predicting future lottery draws is possible.  Within those forums the threads split off into groupings concerning statistical approaches, results of past draws, math calculations and countless other and sometimes undefined methods.

If a successful lottery system showed itself on one of those forums how would success be defined?  Would an occasional accurate prediction qualify it as successful?  Would the 'system' need to be subject to replication from one lottery to another?  One draw to another?

Suppose the system backtested so accurately that every past draw could be accurately predicted but the system was incapable of predicting future draws.  Could that system be described as successful?

Morning Josephus and everyone,

Very nice question,

Was looking around seeing what's going on and wanted to comment on this.

Your question here, i think is how people are trying to do a certain thing with different methods and what is the difference in the methods. I mean everyone on this forum are here with a set goal in mind of finding a way to beat the odds of a said thing. This thing being winning the lottery, since this forum is about lottery. That said....

When i think of a system, i think of different components working together to get whatever said, be, accomplished, assembled.........

Whatever the case may be. A sound "system" composes of different components to create sound. An electrical "system" is different components assembled together to spread electricity. Being an electrican for better than half my life, installing an electrical "system" in a house/building, you not only have all the components, (wire, breakers, receptacles, and so on), one also has to use mathematical equations, heights, distances, many calculations to install a system successfully. It's the same for getting anything else completed.

Guessing is just that. Thinking that a certain thing might actually work. Without guessing though, i propose this world would be without many of the things it has. Without guessing that a certain thought/system, whatever might work then who knows if it would? Guessing to me, leads to systems, further leading to solutions. Guessing without trial and error can never be. If someone guesses a thing will work and it doesn't, well guess again till one gets it right. It's how, i'm sure that everything we have or know is based on.

I see dreams and quick picks not as a system, but as another form of guessing. One's guessing that a dream or quick pick may win.  There though, some have won with both. I'm not positive about the success of either with these, but i can only assume it boils down to however much one believes either will work.  I personaly have won with picking numbers off of signs by the road side, guessing that i might win with them, and i've won with working with what i do.

Anyway, i think without "guessing" there are no "system".

Now, as far as the lottery goes, is it not considered "the lottery system"? And a number is a number, but aren't all the numbers considered "the number system"?  So if the lottery IS numbers, wouldn't it be considered a "system"?

I see the basic numbers as 0-9. From that point on they form together in systems to complete another number.  0 is the starting point, meaning nothing and deriving up to the other numbers that account for what they mean. 0 is also the "base" that gives all the other's their true meaning. So to derive a "true system" for the lottery, wouldn't one have to break down the system to it's truest, barest, form to understand how it works before being able to know how to work it?

Much like one learning to build or create anything. We all have to either be taught how to do it or jump in, tear it down to the base core and see what is what, and what goes where themselves.

I would really hate to see what shape the world would be in without guessing though. Without guessing that something could be, there would be nothing, or 0.

Did the people that figured out what foods we have now are safe to eat by knowing it or trying (guessing) that they are?

So i see the difference of "guessing" and a "system" as pretty much the same thing, only slightly different. Guessing would be the starting point, the system derives from the guessing, leading to the conclusion.

I believe the key to figuring out how to win the lottery is realizing that it's numbers. We have to break the numbers down to their simplest form of 0-9, and go from there. I've seen enough to know that it's DEFINETLY NOT random. It's impossible for it to be random with numbers. There is only one way for the lottery to be random, which i won't say, as to keep it possble for anyone to win and to keep the game going.

We are also told that there are so many odds of winning, but i don't believe that. That i believe is said to keep the odds in favor of us not winning. Some astronomical number that says "there's no way we can win", but how many people just go out and buy a ticket for the first time and win big, on the premise that they might win. Might win, being guessing. I see the odds  being as a whole, not individual. It would have to be a whole to explain, somone buying only one ticket and winning.

As far as a "system" that works goes, the way people are, it should never really exist. If so it should never be revealed completely. If it was revealed completely, the whole lottery system would have to be shut down. Greed would take over and noone would be able to ever win, which would eventually result in not buying tickets, that would shut it all down. I don't see a system for the smaller jackpot games that truly works, hurting much, so that's the way to go.

The only way to produce a successful system is to try or "guess" to figure out how it works. The only way to do that is to tear it down and see what does what and that requires backtesting. Not just 5 or 10 games back, but 5 or 10 games back for each number, or more. If one is working with 23, don't just look at it as 23. Simplify the number down to 1 or 5 and look around at the numbers surrounding it, and see if there aren't links all around.

We mostly look at the lottery as impossible to win, but if we set that fear aside of losing, and only think "guess" of winning i think  "guess" our odds will go up.

You can't steal second and keep your foot on FIRST!!!

When you go through hardships and decide not to surrender, that is strength”.

-Arnold (Ahnald) Schwarzenegger-

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 1:07 pm - IP Logged

Here's  map of a series of recent pick 4 draws.  It doesn't represent a long history but the double helix is there as far back as you care to follow it.

---111----
--11---1-1
--1-1-11--
--21--1---
-----21-1-
--12----1-
--------12
-11----1--
--111----1
-2----1---
------1-2-
---121----
-1--1---11
----1---12
----1-----
--111-1---
-2-----1-1
-1------1-
-1--1-11--
------21-1
---2--2---
-1--2----1
--2-----11
--111----1
------11-2
----1----3
-1--1--1-1

That is awesome. Is that a consecutive set of draws? How did you derive those numbers or thier placement? Do tell.

How you do anything is how you do everything.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 1:13 pm - IP Logged

That is awesome. Is that a consecutive set of draws? How did you derive those numbers or thier placement? Do tell.

Visual mapping Texas Pick 4 Daytime

countifs on EXCEL then  a bit of search/replace on a text file with a good text editor.

It takes less time to map a 20 year database start to finish than it will take me to finish this sentence.  Well, actually it takes all of ten minutes to map a 20 year draw history.

0123456789Date

-1--1-1--1-xx1/20/2011
--1-----11-xx1/20/2011
-1-2----1--xx1/21/2011
----21-----xx1/21/2011
---11-1--1-xx1/22/2011
--2---1----xx1/22/2011
---1-11----xx1/24/2011
----111----xx1/24/2011
---12---1--xx1/25/2011
11---1-----xx1/25/2011
-1-------3-xx1/26/2011
----12-----xx1/26/2011
-------121-xx1/27/2011
11---1-----xx1/27/2011
---1--11-1-xx1/28/2011
--111------xx1/28/2011
-1-111-----xx1/29/2011
111--------xx1/29/2011
--1-111----xx1/31/2011
-1-1----1--xx1/31/2011
-11-1-1----xx2/1/2011
-11----1---xx2/1/2011
--21-----1-xx2/2/2011
1---11-----xx2/2/2011
---1----11-xx2/3/2011
-1-----11--xx2/3/2011
--1--1-----xx2/4/2011
----111----xx2/4/2011
------12-1-xx2/5/2011
------1-11-xx2/5/2011
--11---1---xx2/7/2011
-----111---xx2/7/2011
--1-111----xx2/8/2011
--1--11----xx2/8/2011
------11-2-xx2/9/2011
----2----1-xx2/9/2011
--2--------xx2/10/2011
--1-2------xx2/10/2011
--1-1----2-xx2/11/2011
---1----2--xx2/11/2011
--11-1---1-xx2/12/2011
---1---1-1-xx2/12/2011
--1-----11-xx2/14/2011
---111-----xx2/14/2011
-2-1----1--xx2/15/2011
1--------2-xx2/15/2011
-1-----1-1-xx2/16/2011
----1-1-1--xx2/16/2011
-11------1-xx2/17/2011
-1--1--1---xx2/17/2011
-----1-111-xx2/18/2011
--1-1---1--xx2/18/2011
--1-21-----xx2/19/2011
1--1-1-----xx2/19/2011
---11--2---xx2/21/2011
1-----2----xx2/21/2011
----2-11---xx2/22/2011
1--1-----1-xx2/22/2011
---111-----xx2/23/2011
------1--2-xx2/23/2011
--11---1-1-xx2/24/2011
-----1--11-xx2/24/2011
--1-1-11---xx2/25/2011
-1-----11--xx2/25/2011
--21--1----xx2/26/2011
-1--11-----xx2/26/2011
-----21-1--xx2/28/2011
1-----11---xx2/28/2011
--12----1--xx3/1/2011
---21------xx3/1/2011
--------12-xx3/2/2011
----1--11--xx3/2/2011
-11----1---xx3/3/2011
--11---1---xx3/3/2011
--111----1-xx3/4/2011
----2-1----xx3/4/2011
-2----1----xx3/5/2011
1----1-1---xx3/5/2011
------1-2--xx3/7/2011
1-1-----1--xx3/7/2011
---121-----xx3/8/2011
-------21--xx3/8/2011
-1--1---11-xx3/9/2011
----1--11--xx3/9/2011
----1---12-xx3/10/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/10/2011
----1------xx3/11/2011
--2---1----xx3/11/2011
--111-1----xx3/12/2011
----1--11--xx3/12/2011
-2-----1-1-xx3/14/2011
---1-----2-xx3/14/2011
-1------1--xx3/15/2011
---21------xx3/15/2011
-1--1-11---xx3/16/2011
----2----1-xx3/16/2011
------21-1-xx3/17/2011
-1---2-----xx3/17/2011
---2--2----xx3/18/2011
1--1---1---xx3/18/2011
-1--2----1-xx3/19/2011
-------2-1-xx3/19/2011
--2-----11-xx3/21/2011
1---11-----xx3/21/2011
--111----1-xx3/22/2011
1-------11-xx3/22/2011
------11-2-xx3/23/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/23/2011
----1----3-xx3/24/2011
-----3-----xx3/24/2011
-1--1--1-1-xx3/25/2011
11-----1---xx3/25/2011

Thanbks for the interest

United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 3:33 pm - IP Logged

Visual mapping Texas Pick 4 Daytime

countifs on EXCEL then  a bit of search/replace on a text file with a good text editor.

It takes less time to map a 20 year database start to finish than it will take me to finish this sentence.  Well, actually it takes all of ten minutes to map a 20 year draw history.

0123456789Date

-1--1-1--1-xx1/20/2011
--1-----11-xx1/20/2011
-1-2----1--xx1/21/2011
----21-----xx1/21/2011
---11-1--1-xx1/22/2011
--2---1----xx1/22/2011
---1-11----xx1/24/2011
----111----xx1/24/2011
---12---1--xx1/25/2011
11---1-----xx1/25/2011
-1-------3-xx1/26/2011
----12-----xx1/26/2011
-------121-xx1/27/2011
11---1-----xx1/27/2011
---1--11-1-xx1/28/2011
--111------xx1/28/2011
-1-111-----xx1/29/2011
111--------xx1/29/2011
--1-111----xx1/31/2011
-1-1----1--xx1/31/2011
-11-1-1----xx2/1/2011
-11----1---xx2/1/2011
--21-----1-xx2/2/2011
1---11-----xx2/2/2011
---1----11-xx2/3/2011
-1-----11--xx2/3/2011
--1--1-----xx2/4/2011
----111----xx2/4/2011
------12-1-xx2/5/2011
------1-11-xx2/5/2011
--11---1---xx2/7/2011
-----111---xx2/7/2011
--1-111----xx2/8/2011
--1--11----xx2/8/2011
------11-2-xx2/9/2011
----2----1-xx2/9/2011
--2--------xx2/10/2011
--1-2------xx2/10/2011
--1-1----2-xx2/11/2011
---1----2--xx2/11/2011
--11-1---1-xx2/12/2011
---1---1-1-xx2/12/2011
--1-----11-xx2/14/2011
---111-----xx2/14/2011
-2-1----1--xx2/15/2011
1--------2-xx2/15/2011
-1-----1-1-xx2/16/2011
----1-1-1--xx2/16/2011
-11------1-xx2/17/2011
-1--1--1---xx2/17/2011
-----1-111-xx2/18/2011
--1-1---1--xx2/18/2011
--1-21-----xx2/19/2011
1--1-1-----xx2/19/2011
---11--2---xx2/21/2011
1-----2----xx2/21/2011
----2-11---xx2/22/2011
1--1-----1-xx2/22/2011
---111-----xx2/23/2011
------1--2-xx2/23/2011
--11---1-1-xx2/24/2011
-----1--11-xx2/24/2011
--1-1-11---xx2/25/2011
-1-----11--xx2/25/2011
--21--1----xx2/26/2011
-1--11-----xx2/26/2011
-----21-1--xx2/28/2011
1-----11---xx2/28/2011
--12----1--xx3/1/2011
---21------xx3/1/2011
--------12-xx3/2/2011
----1--11--xx3/2/2011
-11----1---xx3/3/2011
--11---1---xx3/3/2011
--111----1-xx3/4/2011
----2-1----xx3/4/2011
-2----1----xx3/5/2011
1----1-1---xx3/5/2011
------1-2--xx3/7/2011
1-1-----1--xx3/7/2011
---121-----xx3/8/2011
-------21--xx3/8/2011
-1--1---11-xx3/9/2011
----1--11--xx3/9/2011
----1---12-xx3/10/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/10/2011
----1------xx3/11/2011
--2---1----xx3/11/2011
--111-1----xx3/12/2011
----1--11--xx3/12/2011
-2-----1-1-xx3/14/2011
---1-----2-xx3/14/2011
-1------1--xx3/15/2011
---21------xx3/15/2011
-1--1-11---xx3/16/2011
----2----1-xx3/16/2011
------21-1-xx3/17/2011
-1---2-----xx3/17/2011
---2--2----xx3/18/2011
1--1---1---xx3/18/2011
-1--2----1-xx3/19/2011
-------2-1-xx3/19/2011
--2-----11-xx3/21/2011
1---11-----xx3/21/2011
--111----1-xx3/22/2011
1-------11-xx3/22/2011
------11-2-xx3/23/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/23/2011
----1----3-xx3/24/2011
-----3-----xx3/24/2011
-1--1--1-1-xx3/25/2011
11-----1---xx3/25/2011

Thanbks for the interest

"Visual mapping Texas Pick 4 Daytime"

I'm seeing two entries below for each date.  Is the 1st entry midday and the 2nd evening?

Do you think it would be helpful to display this breakdown for another state on the same dates side by side with TX?

(Note Lucida Console aligns things better.)

0123456789   Date

-1--1-1--1-xx1/20/2011
--1-----11-xx1/20/2011
-1-2----1--xx1/21/2011
----21-----xx1/21/2011
---11-1--1-xx1/22/2011
--2---1----xx1/22/2011
---1-11----xx1/24/2011
----111----xx1/24/2011
---12---1--xx1/25/2011
11---1-----xx1/25/2011
-1-------3-xx1/26/2011
----12-----xx1/26/2011
-------121-xx1/27/2011
11---1-----xx1/27/2011
---1--11-1-xx1/28/2011
--111------xx1/28/2011
-1-111-----xx1/29/2011
111--------xx1/29/2011
--1-111----xx1/31/2011
-1-1----1--xx1/31/2011
-11-1-1----xx2/1/2011
-11----1---xx2/1/2011
--21-----1-xx2/2/2011
1---11-----xx2/2/2011
---1----11-xx2/3/2011
-1-----11--xx2/3/2011
--1--1-----xx2/4/2011
----111----xx2/4/2011
------12-1-xx2/5/2011
------1-11-xx2/5/2011
--11---1---xx2/7/2011
-----111---xx2/7/2011
--1-111----xx2/8/2011
--1--11----xx2/8/2011
------11-2-xx2/9/2011
----2----1-xx2/9/2011
--2--------xx2/10/2011
--1-2------xx2/10/2011
--1-1----2-xx2/11/2011
---1----2--xx2/11/2011
--11-1---1-xx2/12/2011
---1---1-1-xx2/12/2011
--1-----11-xx2/14/2011
---111-----xx2/14/2011
-2-1----1--xx2/15/2011
1--------2-xx2/15/2011
-1-----1-1-xx2/16/2011
----1-1-1--xx2/16/2011
-11------1-xx2/17/2011
-1--1--1---xx2/17/2011
-----1-111-xx2/18/2011
--1-1---1--xx2/18/2011
--1-21-----xx2/19/2011
1--1-1-----xx2/19/2011
---11--2---xx2/21/2011
1-----2----xx2/21/2011
----2-11---xx2/22/2011
1--1-----1-xx2/22/2011
---111-----xx2/23/2011
------1--2-xx2/23/2011
--11---1-1-xx2/24/2011
-----1--11-xx2/24/2011
--1-1-11---xx2/25/2011
-1-----11--xx2/25/2011
--21--1----xx2/26/2011
-1--11-----xx2/26/2011
-----21-1--xx2/28/2011
1-----11---xx2/28/2011
--12----1--xx3/1/2011
---21------xx3/1/2011
--------12-xx3/2/2011
----1--11--xx3/2/2011
-11----1---xx3/3/2011
--11---1---xx3/3/2011
--111----1-xx3/4/2011
----2-1----xx3/4/2011
-2----1----xx3/5/2011
1----1-1---xx3/5/2011
------1-2--xx3/7/2011
1-1-----1--xx3/7/2011
---121-----xx3/8/2011
-------21--xx3/8/2011
-1--1---11-xx3/9/2011
----1--11--xx3/9/2011
----1---12-xx3/10/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/10/2011
----1------xx3/11/2011
--2---1----xx3/11/2011
--111-1----xx3/12/2011
----1--11--xx3/12/2011
-2-----1-1-xx3/14/2011
---1-----2-xx3/14/2011
-1------1--xx3/15/2011
---21------xx3/15/2011
-1--1-11---xx3/16/2011
----2----1-xx3/16/2011
------21-1-xx3/17/2011
-1---2-----xx3/17/2011
---2--2----xx3/18/2011
1--1---1---xx3/18/2011
-1--2----1-xx3/19/2011
-------2-1-xx3/19/2011
--2-----11-xx3/21/2011
1---11-----xx3/21/2011
--111----1-xx3/22/2011
1-------11-xx3/22/2011
------11-2-xx3/23/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/23/2011
----1----3-xx3/24/2011
-----3-----xx3/24/2011
-1--1--1-1-xx3/25/2011
11-----1---xx3/25/2011

Fort Worth, TX
United States
Member #106060
February 11, 2011
188 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 4:18 pm - IP Logged

Thanks Jimmy that helped a bunch. Cant believe I asked how the pattern was derived. Aligned it makes a lot more sense.  Now we just need to arrange this into a Möbius strip...

How you do anything is how you do everything.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 4:22 pm - IP Logged

"Visual mapping Texas Pick 4 Daytime"

I'm seeing two entries below for each date.  Is the 1st entry midday and the 2nd evening?

Do you think it would be helpful to display this breakdown for another state on the same dates side by side with TX?

(Note Lucida Console aligns things better.)

0123456789   Date

-1--1-1--1-xx1/20/2011
--1-----11-xx1/20/2011
-1-2----1--xx1/21/2011
----21-----xx1/21/2011
---11-1--1-xx1/22/2011
--2---1----xx1/22/2011
---1-11----xx1/24/2011
----111----xx1/24/2011
---12---1--xx1/25/2011
11---1-----xx1/25/2011
-1-------3-xx1/26/2011
----12-----xx1/26/2011
-------121-xx1/27/2011
11---1-----xx1/27/2011
---1--11-1-xx1/28/2011
--111------xx1/28/2011
-1-111-----xx1/29/2011
111--------xx1/29/2011
--1-111----xx1/31/2011
-1-1----1--xx1/31/2011
-11-1-1----xx2/1/2011
-11----1---xx2/1/2011
--21-----1-xx2/2/2011
1---11-----xx2/2/2011
---1----11-xx2/3/2011
-1-----11--xx2/3/2011
--1--1-----xx2/4/2011
----111----xx2/4/2011
------12-1-xx2/5/2011
------1-11-xx2/5/2011
--11---1---xx2/7/2011
-----111---xx2/7/2011
--1-111----xx2/8/2011
--1--11----xx2/8/2011
------11-2-xx2/9/2011
----2----1-xx2/9/2011
--2--------xx2/10/2011
--1-2------xx2/10/2011
--1-1----2-xx2/11/2011
---1----2--xx2/11/2011
--11-1---1-xx2/12/2011
---1---1-1-xx2/12/2011
--1-----11-xx2/14/2011
---111-----xx2/14/2011
-2-1----1--xx2/15/2011
1--------2-xx2/15/2011
-1-----1-1-xx2/16/2011
----1-1-1--xx2/16/2011
-11------1-xx2/17/2011
-1--1--1---xx2/17/2011
-----1-111-xx2/18/2011
--1-1---1--xx2/18/2011
--1-21-----xx2/19/2011
1--1-1-----xx2/19/2011
---11--2---xx2/21/2011
1-----2----xx2/21/2011
----2-11---xx2/22/2011
1--1-----1-xx2/22/2011
---111-----xx2/23/2011
------1--2-xx2/23/2011
--11---1-1-xx2/24/2011
-----1--11-xx2/24/2011
--1-1-11---xx2/25/2011
-1-----11--xx2/25/2011
--21--1----xx2/26/2011
-1--11-----xx2/26/2011
-----21-1--xx2/28/2011
1-----11---xx2/28/2011
--12----1--xx3/1/2011
---21------xx3/1/2011
--------12-xx3/2/2011
----1--11--xx3/2/2011
-11----1---xx3/3/2011
--11---1---xx3/3/2011
--111----1-xx3/4/2011
----2-1----xx3/4/2011
-2----1----xx3/5/2011
1----1-1---xx3/5/2011
------1-2--xx3/7/2011
1-1-----1--xx3/7/2011
---121-----xx3/8/2011
-------21--xx3/8/2011
-1--1---11-xx3/9/2011
----1--11--xx3/9/2011
----1---12-xx3/10/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/10/2011
----1------xx3/11/2011
--2---1----xx3/11/2011
--111-1----xx3/12/2011
----1--11--xx3/12/2011
-2-----1-1-xx3/14/2011
---1-----2-xx3/14/2011
-1------1--xx3/15/2011
---21------xx3/15/2011
-1--1-11---xx3/16/2011
----2----1-xx3/16/2011
------21-1-xx3/17/2011
-1---2-----xx3/17/2011
---2--2----xx3/18/2011
1--1---1---xx3/18/2011
-1--2----1-xx3/19/2011
-------2-1-xx3/19/2011
--2-----11-xx3/21/2011
1---11-----xx3/21/2011
--111----1-xx3/22/2011
1-------11-xx3/22/2011
------11-2-xx3/23/2011
---1-1--1--xx3/23/2011
----1----3-xx3/24/2011
-----3-----xx3/24/2011
-1--1--1-1-xx3/25/2011
11-----1---xx3/25/2011

Hi Jimmy.  Thanks for pointing out that I mistakenly copied the map for the Texas Pick 3 day and the  Texas Pick 4 day [drawn seconds apart] instead of simply the Pick 4.

I'm not able to say what would be helpful or wouldn't insofar as combining distinct lotteries.  Too much depends on the use the person doing it was examining.

What you see is two pick 3 and pick 4 draws.  It could as easily be a day and night, or two entirely different lotteries.

I don't know anything about Lucinda Console.

Thanks for the comment

Dallas, Texas
United States
Member #4549
May 2, 2004
1823 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 4:42 pm - IP Logged

The mood here is civilized and I hope my comment doesn't change that.  I just spent valuable time digesting most of this thread, especially what I'm replying to here, so I think that gives me the right to comment.

You say that back-testing can't account for the brain, and you give a few examples:

*  doubles haven't hit in 15 draws

*  the digit 6 hasn't been seen in 24 draws

*  triples have been out 118 days

*  there are other triggers that can't be quantified or made into rules

I'm sorry Gary, but I must respectfully disagree.  I base this on my experience on a team writing computer simulations of operating systems to determine the effects on performance of changing hardware configurations without having to actually build the modified systems.  To people who haven't written complex computer programs, the kinds of things you mention above might make it appear too daunting to attempt to back-test or simulate them.  I personally have worked on programs with orders of magnitude more complexity than anything I can conceive of that you could propose as a set of filters and rules for selecting lines of lottery plays.  Just imagine the mountain of interrelated code that holds this beast called LotteryPost.com together!  The three items above would be trivial to capture with code.  This is just the way I see it.

JosephusMinimus has brought some moderation to these discussions, and I hope he can continue to do that while considering what I've said here.  I think you're selling yourself short when you accept defeat before trying to specify your systems and discussing them with programmers.  If you don't want your ideas made public, that's fine.  But at least do whatever it takes to back-test or simulate your ideas so you can know for sure whether your systems work or not.

--Jimmy4164

p.s.  Your thoughts regarding trends, their persistence, their cycles, are what race handicappers and stock traders think about every day.  Think about that.

Jimmy,

That's fine.

Upon review, based on the face of what is written, I would disagree too. Maybe I should have taken more time to lay out my thinking, in a procedural, step by step manner. Unfortuately, I didn't.

I expected people would agree that the brain is superior inasmuch as holds ability to reason, to acquire new knowledge, and experience creative ideas stemming from a moment of inspiration. The brain, in my opinion, does these without someone's written filters and rules. And works without imposed boundaries.

I have spent enough months at midnight and believe one can pare data to the point it is worthless. Or compound data to the point it becomes a rehash, prove useless, or period specific. GIGO

A computer cannot have that 'Eureka!' self-aware moment of discovery. It cannot choose to pursue an alternative course of it's own free will based on free form thought derived from discovery.

These are the reasons I am cautious about backtesting.

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 26, 2011, 5:19 pm - IP Logged

Thanks Jimmy that helped a bunch. Cant believe I asked how the pattern was derived. Aligned it makes a lot more sense.  Now we just need to arrange this into a Möbius strip...

Analemma

 Page 2 of 62