Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 11, 2016, 8:42 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Do statistics trump all other forms of math where lotteries are concerned?

Topic closed. 15 replies. Last post 6 years ago by JosephusMinimus.

Page 1 of 2
PrintE-mailLink
Avatar

United States
Member #105312
January 29, 2011
435 Posts
Offline
Posted: April 5, 2011, 8:38 am - IP Logged

Dozens, maybe hundreds of members on this site have devoted years and decades to studying lotteries and approaches to winning against them.  Most evidently believe they've learned something in the process and some are sharing what they believe they've learned on this forum, the Lottery Systems Forum, the Pick 5 Forum, the Jackpots Forum, the Pick 3 Forum and possibly elsewhere. 

The general methods they've developed fall into several distinct categories, some involving statistics, some involving other types of math entirely unrelated to statistics, all involving draw histories in one way or another, though for some it's only the most recent draws.

But the body of knowledge derived from direct observation, testing, experimenting and original thought represented by members here is staggering.  LottoLaughs says she spent decades developing the approach she frequently posts about on the Pick 5 Forum.  RJOH and RickG don't post a lot about what they're doing, but they stay at the top of the Top Predictors list.  RL says he's spent decades developing his own approach.  Laverne Maloney appears to know a surprising lot about lotteries and it's clearly based on direct observation.  Greenfox says he's studied it for decades.  WinD and WinSumLoseSum are there in the background only posting occasionally, but providing methods and comments across a wide range of math-related methods and approaches.

The forums are full of examples of people posting about math-based systems who rarely post on the math forum.  A few have tried during the time I've been reading here, but instead of discussions of math the discussion has been generally confined to demands of proof by members who believe statistics are the be all and end all of math and proclamations that any other sort of math approach to lotteries is pointless unless whatever's attempting to be discussed can be proved in advance to satisfy their personal biases in favor of the impossibility of the task.

The attempts by bean counters to discuss any relationship between math and lotteries outside their microscopic perceptions consistently devolve to personal attacks, name calling, condescension, smug denouncements, misrepresentation of claims made and, as in the case of RL, abandonment of further attempts to discuss the original subject.

Is there any way around this?

Can the math forum include discussions of lottery-related math within any context other than statistics?

    bobby623's avatar - abstract
    San Angelo, Texas
    United States
    Member #1097
    January 31, 2003
    1394 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: April 5, 2011, 11:44 am - IP Logged

    I don't know if this contribution fits your quest for a reasonable
    and sane discussion of lottery systems and playing techniques, but, why not give it a go.

    First, I have what I believe is a rational, sane, systematic, etc, method
    of picking lottery numbers for all of the games.

    I call it 'Gap Strategy' which, using winning number combinations as a base,
    generates 4 distinct data streams that are used according to a 'standard
    operating procedure' to help a player choose numbers to play.

    It is not a random number generator. There is no feature that can be
    activated to produce ready-made combinations.

    I've written many posts regarding the strategy the past couple of years.

    Recently, an LP member asked me what the 'gap numbers' generated by the
    strategy represent.

    First of all,

    Lottery drawings are random events. I don't believe super computers can predict exactly
    what the next 3-digit combination will be.

    It's all a matter of guesswork.

    When you watch a lottery ball machine in action, you realize pretty quickly that there is no way
    anyone can know in advance which numbered balls will be selected.

    The only thing you can see is that there is an unknown amount of spacing between the balls.

    Of course, trying to guess the exact amount of spacing is as difficult as trying to keep
    track of the numbers on the balls.

    The difference, in my humble opinion, is that the spacing is a contant. That is, we don't know
    what the exact changes are, we just know they exist.

    Again, in my humble opinion, we can use the advantages of 'substitution' to develop a strategy
    that quantifies the 'spaces', or, 'gaps' to build a logical and systematic data base for generating individual
    lottery numbers.

    Further, having a strategy for each of the three drums, hoppers, or chutes isn't necessary.
    Again, using the power of substitution, the Pick 3 game can be converted to a Pick 3 of 30
    game by placing three sets of 10 balls into a single vessel.

    We assign values and then use inventory and tracking data to choose numbers we think have the best chance of
    generating winning numbers.

    Does it work?

    Not every drawing, for sure. But, frequently the choices generated by the strategy are right on target.

    I'm always available if further explanation is desired.

      Avatar

      United States
      Member #105312
      January 29, 2011
      435 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: April 5, 2011, 12:40 pm - IP Logged

      I don't know if this contribution fits your quest for a reasonable
      and sane discussion of lottery systems and playing techniques, but, why not give it a go.

      First, I have what I believe is a rational, sane, systematic, etc, method
      of picking lottery numbers for all of the games.

      I call it 'Gap Strategy' which, using winning number combinations as a base,
      generates 4 distinct data streams that are used according to a 'standard
      operating procedure' to help a player choose numbers to play.

      It is not a random number generator. There is no feature that can be
      activated to produce ready-made combinations.

      I've written many posts regarding the strategy the past couple of years.

      Recently, an LP member asked me what the 'gap numbers' generated by the
      strategy represent.

      First of all,

      Lottery drawings are random events. I don't believe super computers can predict exactly
      what the next 3-digit combination will be.

      It's all a matter of guesswork.

      When you watch a lottery ball machine in action, you realize pretty quickly that there is no way
      anyone can know in advance which numbered balls will be selected.

      The only thing you can see is that there is an unknown amount of spacing between the balls.

      Of course, trying to guess the exact amount of spacing is as difficult as trying to keep
      track of the numbers on the balls.

      The difference, in my humble opinion, is that the spacing is a contant. That is, we don't know
      what the exact changes are, we just know they exist.

      Again, in my humble opinion, we can use the advantages of 'substitution' to develop a strategy
      that quantifies the 'spaces', or, 'gaps' to build a logical and systematic data base for generating individual
      lottery numbers.

      Further, having a strategy for each of the three drums, hoppers, or chutes isn't necessary.
      Again, using the power of substitution, the Pick 3 game can be converted to a Pick 3 of 30
      game by placing three sets of 10 balls into a single vessel.

      We assign values and then use inventory and tracking data to choose numbers we think have the best chance of
      generating winning numbers.

      Does it work?

      Not every drawing, for sure. But, frequently the choices generated by the strategy are right on target.

      I'm always available if further explanation is desired.

      Thanks for the reply bobby623.  I've been watching your Gap Strategy threads with interest.  I like the approach you've taken to communicating what you''re doing and consider your efforts laudable.  Glad to see you post on the Math Forum.

        bobby623's avatar - abstract
        San Angelo, Texas
        United States
        Member #1097
        January 31, 2003
        1394 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: April 5, 2011, 1:30 pm - IP Logged

        JosephusMinimus

        Thanks

        The primary objective is to convince regular lottery players who have the time and resources to play every draw that
        the gap strategy is worthwhile, and can be profitable over the long haul.

        Can you imagine the possible outcomes if  five Pick 3 players looking at the exact same data shared their choices?

        The difficulty, of course, is getting folks to try something new and different.

          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

          United States
          Member #59354
          March 13, 2008
          3986 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: April 5, 2011, 2:41 pm - IP Logged

          Josephus

          Maybe the Master Blaster could define a set of rules for what can and cannot be said but this would

          be hard to do and allow free speach at the same time.  I tried an approach of fighting fire with fire

          which, while it is very effective for firefighters I must say say that it had little effect on the problem 

          at hand and just made it worse.  I have resorted to using the tatics of a sane mam and decided

          that I will no longer stoop to that level and if I cannot respond in a civil manner I will not reply at all.

          I know this might lead to attacks by some who think that this will give them an edge but for now I will

          just bare the insults and not add to the flame and hope it burns out on it's own.   I will say in my defence

          that the tatics I used were outside my normal bounds,   I just used material that I seen here in the past

          as guide. 

           

          RL

            Avatar

            United States
            Member #105312
            January 29, 2011
            435 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: April 5, 2011, 3:45 pm - IP Logged

            Josephus

            Maybe the Master Blaster could define a set of rules for what can and cannot be said but this would

            be hard to do and allow free speach at the same time.  I tried an approach of fighting fire with fire

            which, while it is very effective for firefighters I must say say that it had little effect on the problem 

            at hand and just made it worse.  I have resorted to using the tatics of a sane mam and decided

            that I will no longer stoop to that level and if I cannot respond in a civil manner I will not reply at all.

            I know this might lead to attacks by some who think that this will give them an edge but for now I will

            just bare the insults and not add to the flame and hope it burns out on it's own.   I will say in my defence

            that the tatics I used were outside my normal bounds,   I just used material that I seen here in the past

            as guide. 

             

            RL

            Hi RL.  Thanks for the reply.  As a practical matter I doubt the management could do itself a favor by trying to curtail it.  The people who've been attacking you and who post the same messages phrased in different ways have been paying to say it over and over for a long time.   They'd probably quit paying for memberships if they were forbidden to say the only thing they ever say.

            I was searching my mind for other means of approaching the problem that doesn't rely on the hysterical taking a nap.  No chance of them doing that.

            But seeing a broader range of topical matter on the Math Forum would be nice.  It echoes and there's sheets all over the furniture compared to the overloaded Lottery Systems, Pick 3, 5 etc forums.

            Yeah, I'm glad to see you are letting yourself be baited anymore.

            Personally, I use my block feature.

              Raven62's avatar - binary
              New Jersey
              United States
              Member #17843
              June 28, 2005
              49835 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: April 5, 2011, 4:20 pm - IP Logged

              Dozens, maybe hundreds of members on this site have devoted years and decades to studying lotteries and approaches to winning against them.  Most evidently believe they've learned something in the process and some are sharing what they believe they've learned on this forum, the Lottery Systems Forum, the Pick 5 Forum, the Jackpots Forum, the Pick 3 Forum and possibly elsewhere. 

              The general methods they've developed fall into several distinct categories, some involving statistics, some involving other types of math entirely unrelated to statistics, all involving draw histories in one way or another, though for some it's only the most recent draws.

              But the body of knowledge derived from direct observation, testing, experimenting and original thought represented by members here is staggering.  LottoLaughs says she spent decades developing the approach she frequently posts about on the Pick 5 Forum.  RJOH and RickG don't post a lot about what they're doing, but they stay at the top of the Top Predictors list.  RL says he's spent decades developing his own approach.  Laverne Maloney appears to know a surprising lot about lotteries and it's clearly based on direct observation.  Greenfox says he's studied it for decades.  WinD and WinSumLoseSum are there in the background only posting occasionally, but providing methods and comments across a wide range of math-related methods and approaches.

              The forums are full of examples of people posting about math-based systems who rarely post on the math forum.  A few have tried during the time I've been reading here, but instead of discussions of math the discussion has been generally confined to demands of proof by members who believe statistics are the be all and end all of math and proclamations that any other sort of math approach to lotteries is pointless unless whatever's attempting to be discussed can be proved in advance to satisfy their personal biases in favor of the impossibility of the task.

              The attempts by bean counters to discuss any relationship between math and lotteries outside their microscopic perceptions consistently devolve to personal attacks, name calling, condescension, smug denouncements, misrepresentation of claims made and, as in the case of RL, abandonment of further attempts to discuss the original subject.

              Is there any way around this?

              Can the math forum include discussions of lottery-related math within any context other than statistics?

              Starting with the Basics: Is a Good Place to Begin:

              What is Mathematics?

              Mathematics: The study of numbers and their forms, arrangements, relationships and properties!

              What is Statistics?

              Statistics: The science of collecting and using numerical data as it relates to a particular subject! (In this Case: The Lottery)

              A mind once stretched by a new idea never returns to its original dimensions!

                Avatar

                United States
                Member #105312
                January 29, 2011
                435 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: April 5, 2011, 4:31 pm - IP Logged

                Starting with the Basics: Is a Good Place to Begin:

                What is Mathematics?

                Mathematics: The study of numbers and their forms, arrangements, relationships and properties!

                What is Statistics?

                Statistics: The science of collecting and using numerical data as it relates to a particular subject! (In this Case: The Lottery)

                Hi Raven: 
                There's merit to what you've said about math.  However, among statisticians, particularly academic statisticians, statistics isn't a science.  For them statistics is a religion.  Their approach to statistics differs from science throughout the definition of the word.

                Science:  Unbiased observation [minus preconceptions], premises, theories, hypotheses based on observation, testing of premises, theories and hypotheses, new observations based on outcomes of test results,  modify premises, hypotheses and theories to incorporate test result data, new tests. 

                Statistics as religion:  Didactic mantras and litanies of the products of the labors of rare people who practiced statistics as a science.

                The work RL, LottoLaughs, Greenfox and dozens of others who don't see themselves as scientists on this site are doing, comes near being science if it doesn't meet the precise definition.  What the Priests of the Goddess of Statistics are doing never comes close, though many would deny it by attempting to change the definition of science and the scientific method.  Science has nothing to do with memorizing the work of scientists.  Science is a method, and that method is simple, but leaves no elbow-room for litanies and crusades.

                  Raven62's avatar - binary
                  New Jersey
                  United States
                  Member #17843
                  June 28, 2005
                  49835 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: April 5, 2011, 4:52 pm - IP Logged

                  Hi Raven: 
                  There's merit to what you've said about math.  However, among statisticians, particularly academic statisticians, statistics isn't a science.  For them statistics is a religion.  Their approach to statistics differs from science throughout the definition of the word.

                  Science:  Unbiased observation [minus preconceptions], premises, theories, hypotheses based on observation, testing of premises, theories and hypotheses, new observations based on outcomes of test results,  modify premises, hypotheses and theories to incorporate test result data, new tests. 

                  Statistics as religion:  Didactic mantras and litanies of the products of the labors of rare people who practiced statistics as a science.

                  The work RL, LottoLaughs, Greenfox and dozens of others who don't see themselves as scientists on this site are doing, comes near being science if it doesn't meet the precise definition.  What the Priests of the Goddess of Statistics are doing never comes close, though many would deny it by attempting to change the definition of science and the scientific method.  Science has nothing to do with memorizing the work of scientists.  Science is a method, and that method is simple, but leaves no elbow-room for litanies and crusades.

                  What? So much for not encouraging discussion! See Ya!

                  A mind once stretched by a new idea never returns to its original dimensions!

                    Avatar

                    United States
                    Member #105312
                    January 29, 2011
                    435 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: April 5, 2011, 5:36 pm - IP Logged

                    What? So much for not encouraging discussion! See Ya!

                    That remains to be seen.  But at least the subject matter belongs in the math forum "math as it relates to lotteries", as opposed to the Mystical Forum "Statistics as a doctrinal religion applied to lotteries".

                      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                      mid-Ohio
                      United States
                      Member #9
                      March 24, 2001
                      19831 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: April 6, 2011, 1:11 pm - IP Logged

                      Dozens, maybe hundreds of members on this site have devoted years and decades to studying lotteries and approaches to winning against them.  Most evidently believe they've learned something in the process and some are sharing what they believe they've learned on this forum, the Lottery Systems Forum, the Pick 5 Forum, the Jackpots Forum, the Pick 3 Forum and possibly elsewhere. 

                      The general methods they've developed fall into several distinct categories, some involving statistics, some involving other types of math entirely unrelated to statistics, all involving draw histories in one way or another, though for some it's only the most recent draws.

                      But the body of knowledge derived from direct observation, testing, experimenting and original thought represented by members here is staggering.  LottoLaughs says she spent decades developing the approach she frequently posts about on the Pick 5 Forum.  RJOH and RickG don't post a lot about what they're doing, but they stay at the top of the Top Predictors list.  RL says he's spent decades developing his own approach.  Laverne Maloney appears to know a surprising lot about lotteries and it's clearly based on direct observation.  Greenfox says he's studied it for decades.  WinD and WinSumLoseSum are there in the background only posting occasionally, but providing methods and comments across a wide range of math-related methods and approaches.

                      The forums are full of examples of people posting about math-based systems who rarely post on the math forum.  A few have tried during the time I've been reading here, but instead of discussions of math the discussion has been generally confined to demands of proof by members who believe statistics are the be all and end all of math and proclamations that any other sort of math approach to lotteries is pointless unless whatever's attempting to be discussed can be proved in advance to satisfy their personal biases in favor of the impossibility of the task.

                      The attempts by bean counters to discuss any relationship between math and lotteries outside their microscopic perceptions consistently devolve to personal attacks, name calling, condescension, smug denouncements, misrepresentation of claims made and, as in the case of RL, abandonment of further attempts to discuss the original subject.

                      Is there any way around this?

                      Can the math forum include discussions of lottery-related math within any context other than statistics?

                      RJOH and RickG don't post a lot about what they're doing, but they stay at the top of the Top Predictors list.

                      I once was posting everything I'm doing in a thread that ran over 40 pages until I was told by other members that I was starting to repeat myself and it was too troublesome going back to read some of my previous posts.  The thread was "Creating a Winning MegaMillions System" in which I explained how I picked 20 lines for every MM drawing and posted the first 10 on the prediction page.  I explained how I evaluated each drawing results and adjusted my strategy accordingly.   After reviewing the thread, I agreed with the members and decided I had shared every idea I had and stopped posting.  I'm still using those same ideas and haven't come with any new ones since worth sharing.

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

                        Avatar

                        United States
                        Member #105312
                        January 29, 2011
                        435 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: April 6, 2011, 7:22 pm - IP Logged

                        RJOH and RickG don't post a lot about what they're doing, but they stay at the top of the Top Predictors list.

                        I once was posting everything I'm doing in a thread that ran over 40 pages until I was told by other members that I was starting to repeat myself and it was too troublesome going back to read some of my previous posts.  The thread was "Creating a Winning MegaMillions System" in which I explained how I picked 20 lines for every MM drawing and posted the first 10 on the prediction page.  I explained how I evaluated each drawing results and adjusted my strategy accordingly.   After reviewing the thread, I agreed with the members and decided I had shared every idea I had and stopped posting.  I'm still using those same ideas and haven't come with any new ones since worth sharing.

                        RJOH:  Link, or do I need to just search for the thread title?

                          time*treat's avatar - radar

                          United States
                          Member #13130
                          March 30, 2005
                          2171 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: April 6, 2011, 7:56 pm - IP Logged

                          RJOH:  Link, or do I need to just search for the thread title?

                          Developing a winning MegaMillions System

                          http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/180686

                          In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
                          Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.

                            Avatar

                            United States
                            Member #105312
                            January 29, 2011
                            435 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: April 7, 2011, 8:35 am - IP Logged

                            Thanks time*treat.

                              Avatar
                              bgonçalves
                              Brasil
                              Member #92564
                              June 9, 2010
                              2126 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: April 12, 2011, 8:30 am - IP Logged

                              Joseplus Hello, I agree with bobby623, it is impossible to predict with a super computer,
                              This is because in lottery is only possible to predict with confidence to 70% to 80% in a game example
                              From 49 / 6 can only provide four to five numbers, the rest is random. Can a pick3
                              Provide pairs the last digit is random, a super computer can help predict until this!
                              That is, it can help up to 80%, even here, one can use the law pareto where everything is 80/20
                              The random factor may be decreased with the help of supercomputer and several solftwares combined to see the entire vertical and separate the RL has a good approach of digits, I'd like to see your example in a study of lottery 49 / 6 making up to 4 numbers
                              The other two would be random numbers, the lottery may not want to close the deal
                              Every lottery because NUMC'll get! Sorry for the google translation! These three frequencies = repetitions, delays and cold by each vertical column is a good study, it is said
                              That nothing is by chance, also applies to lottery, nothing is by chance, EVERYTHING action and reaction in a game of 49 / 6 wheels need to create up to 4 numbers if 4 or 49 to 4, but the majority of the wheels has a fault structure in its construction because it can not reduce
                              The number of wheels to hit 100% within 4 numbers!