Denver, Co United States
Member #103,042
December 29, 2010
547 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Apr 1, 2011
For the anti-system players out there, if there is absolutely no difference between selecting your own numbers and QP's, then why would the lottery restrict the other 2 lines to just QP's?
I'm a system player and I believe lotteries really do believe there's no difference in the chances on winning using QPs or personal picks but offering the option add the additional cost of play slips and maintaining the terminals to read them correctly. QPs are never printed incorrectly.
Speaking of playslips, with matchplay, every ticket has only 3 lines. So, if you decide to play $100, you have to wait for the terminal to print out 50 individual tickets. Plus, when checking your winnings, every single ticket must be scanned. Just a pain in the neck. Needless to say, it's not my favorite game.
mid-Ohio United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by ameriken on Apr 1, 2011
Speaking of playslips, with matchplay, every ticket has only 3 lines. So, if you decide to play $100, you have to wait for the terminal to print out 50 individual tickets. Plus, when checking your winnings, every single ticket must be scanned. Just a pain in the neck. Needless to say, it's not my favorite game.
They obviously designed the game to discourages players picking their own numbers, but since 70-80 percent of lottery players choose QPs anyway it shouldn't effect the game that much.
* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
San Angelo, Texas United States
Member #1,097
January 31, 2003
1,648 Posts
Offline
Seems the $1 games are fading into history!
We won't know until it happens, but I'm betting the next jackpot game will cost
more than a dollar.
If my memory is functioning, I recall Texas had a Pick 4 game years ago where players bought one and the terminal added 4 or 5 quick picks. It was
a $2 game with a million dollar jackpot.
United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by ameriken on Apr 1, 2011
@RL-RANDOMLOGIC and Stack47: no matter what you post and no matter what kind of 'proof' you provide, the naysayers will continue to argue as to why it isn't good enough. They'll never be satisfied no matter what you say or post.
Where's the "proof?"
Posting scans of winning tickets proves nothing more than the fact that someone scanned a winning ticket. If I posted a scan of a winning ticket and told you I used my super software to select the numbers, how much money would you be willing to send me for the software - $19.95, $39.95, $99.95, more?
mid-Ohio United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Apr 1, 2011
Where's the "proof?"
Posting scans of winning tickets proves nothing more than the fact that someone scanned a winning ticket. If I posted a scan of a winning ticket and told you I used my super software to select the numbers, how much money would you be willing to send me for the software - $19.95, $39.95, $99.95, more?
Better yet, if you post your picks on the prediction board for one game like MegaMillions or PowerBall for one month and matched 5+1 just twice, you could name your price and I would pay it.
* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
mid-Ohio United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Apr 1, 2011
Better yet, if you post your picks on the prediction board for one game like MegaMillions or PowerBall for one month and matched 5+1 just twice, you could name your price and I would pay it.
Whoop!!! If you could do that you would stop posting to the prediction board and probably never offer to sell your system.
* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on Apr 1, 2011
Better yet, if you post your picks on the prediction board for one game like MegaMillions or PowerBall for one month and matched 5+1 just twice, you could name your price and I would pay it.
In that case, you would disappoint me, because I would then be forced to conclude that your were "Fooled By Randomness!" I thought you knew more about ROI and Confidence Intervals.
Denver, Co United States
Member #103,042
December 29, 2010
547 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Apr 1, 2011
Where's the "proof?"
Posting scans of winning tickets proves nothing more than the fact that someone scanned a winning ticket. If I posted a scan of a winning ticket and told you I used my super software to select the numbers, how much money would you be willing to send me for the software - $19.95, $39.95, $99.95, more?
That's exactly my point: no matter what someone tries to do to 'prove' they have had success, it will never be enough. As just just did, you can always find a reason to nullify their claim. So why even bother asking for something when you know in advance you will not accept it?
And why does anyone have to post proof to begin with? If you don't believe them, then let it go and move on to another thread or forum.
mid-Ohio United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20,272 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Apr 1, 2011
In that case, you would disappoint me, because I would then be forced to conclude that your were "Fooled By Randomness!" I thought you knew more about ROI and Confidence Intervals.
No I would have been fooled by unsolicited proof. ROI and Confidence Intervals are for those folks who don't play the lotteries. Lottery players already know the only way to come out ahead is to win big.
* you don't need to buy every combination, just the winning ones *
United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by ameriken on Apr 1, 2011
That's exactly my point: no matter what someone tries to do to 'prove' they have had success, it will never be enough. As just just did, you can always find a reason to nullify their claim. So why even bother asking for something when you know in advance you will not accept it?
And why does anyone have to post proof to begin with? If you don't believe them, then let it go and move on to another thread or forum.
light on my feet United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2,744 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Apr 1, 2011
From the PB website: "About 70% to 80% of purchases are computer picks. About 70% to 80% of winners are computer picks. Perhaps just one of those weird coincidences?"
From Visiondude: "you guys still can't change that 70/30 standard."
First of all it's not a standard; it's an overall average and the average makes no distinction of personal picks. Birthday numbers, dream numbers, and fortune cookie numbers are all included with system play. Because it's an average, in some drawings the percentages could favor personal picks. There is no actual data for personal picks so we can't compare system play to other non-QP methods.
Second of all, the "about 70/30" average only applies to PB and I haven't read where anyone claimed they have a jackpot winning PB system.
Thirdly, read the PB odds and payoff charts and it will tell you how many QPs you need to purchase before you can expect win any prize. Those numbers apply equally to systems so system player can expect to do no worse. The reason for using a system is to get higher than expected return, but even without a higher return the two plays are exactly the same.
We already know that more players choose QPs with no statistical advantage over PP and why about 70% of anything should outperform 30% of the same thing. Telling us what we already know redundantly is just more useless information.
"since we are in a mathematics forum, a little more "addition"... no single successful person at LP that can demonstrate sustained continuity of repeatability over time, and certainly there has never been an "ahhh hummm" moment in all of LP's history."
There are multiple winners on the very first page. These members have no legal, moral, or ethical obligations to you or anyone else to prove anything!
change the semantics, who cares.
the point i was making is that "you guys" claim you can alter the outcome thru personal effort, and i demonstrated that isn't remotely true, because you cannot change the win percentage demonstrated in those statistics.
if "you guys" really had something, those statistics would move in your favor.
the fact that they never move proves it's all random
before you attempt to post a thread "claiming" people can win thru their efforts with a "see, her are some winners" link, to be fair in the integrity game of life you would have to provide the info of how much the lost as well on their way to their "scanned ticket", and the most important qualifying quotient.....sustainability.
changing the semantics....repeatability.
scanned "winners" don't make a legit system.
you are right, no one "owes me" the right to prove anything, but if you are going to brag "you can", then that gets the attention it deserves to actually qualify "you can". that's fair. a respectful opposing view is fair, and only somebody with something to hide would oppose an opposing view.
oppsing views have no consequent on my position in life. challenges don't offend me.
on the other hand, when someone crosses the line into arrogance land, that's when they get thier position sliced open for everyone to see.