Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 9, 2016, 6:13 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems

Topic closed. 136 replies. Last post 6 years ago by RL-RANDOMLOGIC.

Page 9 of 10
4.73
PrintE-mailLink
garyo1954's avatar - garyo
Dallas, Texas
United States
Member #4549
May 2, 2004
1730 Posts
Online
Posted: April 21, 2011, 9:40 pm - IP Logged

Since Basic is the most mentioned computer language here, I adapted the Roulette Simulation from TASC magazine to simulate a Pick3 Game.  You should be able to use the source code below to experiment with other simulations.  The code is simple because it merely outputs one number for each Trial (Person), leaving the graphics, if wanted, to Excel, or any other program you might prefer.  I loaded it into Excel and produced a Histogram similar to those I scanned from the magazine above.  The first picture is a pure bar chart based on the frequencies of Equity segments in the data.

If you're smiling at the crudeness and lack of good formatting and labels in this chart, then you are one of the people I'm hoping will give us some tips on how to better utilize Excel for charting!

This second graph is a screen capture describing the same data, but is using mean and standard calculations of the descriptive statistics module I have installed im my Excel.  It's called Analyze-It.  I've been told that newer versions of Excel can accomplish a lot of what it does, so this is just FWIW.

 

In this run, among other things, I found the following:

Of the 50,000 "People" who played for 13.7 years...

  1012  Broke even (Ended up with their original $5000)

    539  were ahead $500

    240  were ahead $1000

      37  were ahead $1500

        6  were ahead $2000

        4  were ahead $2500

I'll leave it up to you to calculate the fate of the rest! Smile

The source code below tells you what this data means.

I don't have time now to discuss this, so I'll leave it for you to mull over for a while.  What I'm hoping you will eventually be convinced that fair and purely random lotteries can result in people winning far above average expectations, even in Pick3s, WITH NO MORE THAN CHANCE to assist them!

Here's a link to the output of a run of the program below:

http://www.box.net/shared/sign4r88k3

Here's the source code of the Basic code.  Basic is not my "Native" language, so please check it carefully.

'
' Simulation of a Pick-3 Lottery Game
'
'     Adapted by Jimmy4164 from Phil Abel's
'     Roulette Simulation in Casino Trading,
'     TASC Magazine, November, 2003
'
'     Assumes that 50,000 People each buy one $1 Straight
'     ticket per day for 5000 Days, or about 13.7 Years.
'     A Win pays $500.

      DIM Equity AS LONG
      DIM Person AS LONG
      DIM DDraw AS INTEGER
      DIM LP AS INTEGER             ' Lottery's Pick
      DIM QP AS INTEGER             ' Player's QP

'     Print results to an Excel file for further analysis

      OPEN "PICK3.CSV" FOR OUTPUT AS #3

      PRINT #3, "Equity"

      RANDOMIZE 11  ' Try different seeds and observe results

      FOR Person = 1 TO 50000       ' 50,000 "People"

         Equity = 5000              ' $5000 Starting Equity

         FOR DDraw = 1 TO 5000      ' Cycle through the Draws

'           Buy a Ticket
            QP = 100 * INT(RND * 10) + 10 * INT(RND * 10) + INT(RND * 10)

'           Pay the Clerk!
            Equity = Equity - 1

'           Let the Balls Fly!
            LP = 100 * INT(RND * 10) + 10 * INT(RND * 10) + INT(RND * 10)

            IF QP = LP THEN Equity = Equity + 500

         NEXT DDraw

'        Write each Person's Equity to the file
         PRINT #3, Equity           ' $5000 - Costs + Winnings

         IF Person MOD 500 = 0 THEN PRINT Person, Equity, QP, LP 'Halo?

      NEXT Person

      CLOSE #3  ' Close the file

      END

Jimbooble!!!!!

VERY nice! No kidding. Haven't played with it yet, but I will.

Don't know what version of Excel you have, but 2007, (under Insert) there are plenty of options to make chart, line, bar, pie, area, column......don't use them much myself.

Nice explanation of what does what too!

Thanks for sharing it. Now I'll give this post 5 Star.  (Sorry for the 4. My thumbulator is pushing the thingabob on the widget too fast. Did I mention I hate Vista?)

    garyo1954's avatar - garyo
    Dallas, Texas
    United States
    Member #4549
    May 2, 2004
    1730 Posts
    Online
    Posted: April 22, 2011, 6:23 am - IP Logged

    Jimbooble!!!!

    Had fun playing with the code. Thanks for posting it!!!

    My complaints: NONE OF THIS IS YOUR FAULT!!

    1) The output screen is lacking any explanantion. It shows the number of draws, the ending balance (Equity after the 5000 draws), and then it shows the last QP number and last lottery draw. There were 4999 other draws not shown! Can't figure why that was done.

    2) It would have been much more realistic to dimension 50,000 (or at least 100 people with one QP each) for each LP of the 5000 draws.

    3) These 50,000 people are not all playing the same game! The way the program is written it runs 5000 draws for person one, then 5000 draws for person 2, 5000 more for person 3, all the way to 50,000.

    4) Each of these 50,000 people are playing $1 a night on one QP. (I know that's picky, but even I, the guy who plays out of a change spittoon, have never l played less than $1.50 and three numbers).

    I made some changes in the program so that everyone could see what was actually happening.  Here's the program with the changes:

    ' Simulation of a Pick-3 Lottery Game
    '     Adapted by garyo1954 from Jimmy4164's adaptation from Phil Abel's
    '     Roulette Simulation in Casino Trading,
    '     TASC Magazine, November, 2003
    '     Assumes that 50,000 People each buy one $1 Straight (for different games)
    '     ticket per day for 5000 DIFFERENT Days, or about A DIFFERENT 13.7 Years.
    '     A Win pays $500. VERY IMPORTANT: These people are not playing the same game at the same time!!!!!

    DIM Equity AS LONG
    DIM Person AS LONG
    DIM DDRAW AS INTEGER
    DIM LP AS INTEGER ' Lottery's Pick
    DIM QP AS INTEGER ' Player's QP

    '     Print results to an Excel file for further analysis
    OPEN "H:\QB64\PICK3\DATA\MCSIM3.CSV" FOR OUTPUT AS #3
    PRINT #3, "Equity"

    RANDOMIZE TIMER ' Try different seeds and observe results (changed to use TIMER)
    FOR Person = 1 TO 50000 'starts 50,000 repetitions of 5000 draws (outside loop)
           Equity = 5000 ' $5000 Starting Equity (YOUR $$$$$)
           FOR DDRAW = 1 TO 5000  '(starts 5000 draw cycle; nested loop/inside loop)
               '           Buy a Ticket (one person, one number, each draw)
               QP = 10 * INT(RND * 100) + INT(RND * 10)
               '           Pay the Clerk! (He wants your $1)
               Equity = Equity - 1 
               '           Let the Balls Fly! (draw here)
               LP = 10 * INT(RND * 100) + INT(RND * 10) 

            IF QP = LP THEN Equity = Equity + 500

    New lines for output screen here:

            IF QP = LP THEN Match = Match + 1 'added to count WINS
               PRINT "Person"; Person; SPC(2); "Draw"; DDRAW; SPC(2); "Equity-1"; Equity; SPC(2); "QP"; QP; SPC(2); "LP"; LP; SPC(2); "Win"; Match 'shows the result of each draw
               FOR J = 1 TO 50000: NEXT J 'slows output screen; add 0's to slow it more, delete 0's to speed it up, or delete whole line.

        NEXT DDRAW '(sends program back to FOR DDRAW for next draw; nested loop/inside loop)
           '        Write each Person's Equity to the file
           PRINT #3, Person, Equity, Match ' $5000 - Costs + Winnings (added Person number and Match to file)
           IF Person MOD 500 = 0 THEN PRINT Person, Equity, QP, LP 'Halo? (?!? Don't know. Would make more sense IF Equity = 0 THEN PRINT Person, Equity, QP, LP)
           Match = 0
    NEXT Person '(send program back to FOR Person to start another 5000 draws for next player; end of outside loop)
    CLOSE #3 ' Close the file
    END

    It's a nice simulation as long as everyone understands this is not 50,000 people playing $1 each draw on the same game. This is 50,000 people playing $1 a draw on different games or different draws.

    BTW, 10 wins break even! Anybody playing a single $1 a draw would have to be VERY lucky with QPs to do that.

    MY compliments for posting it Jimbooble!!!! May work on the output file part, REVISED SCREEN LOOKS LIKE:

      RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

      United States
      Member #59354
      March 13, 2008
      3983 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: April 23, 2011, 6:17 am - IP Logged

      Since Basic is the most mentioned computer language here, I adapted the Roulette Simulation from TASC magazine to simulate a Pick3 Game.  You should be able to use the source code below to experiment with other simulations.  The code is simple because it merely outputs one number for each Trial (Person), leaving the graphics, if wanted, to Excel, or any other program you might prefer.  I loaded it into Excel and produced a Histogram similar to those I scanned from the magazine above.  The first picture is a pure bar chart based on the frequencies of Equity segments in the data.

      If you're smiling at the crudeness and lack of good formatting and labels in this chart, then you are one of the people I'm hoping will give us some tips on how to better utilize Excel for charting!

      This second graph is a screen capture describing the same data, but is using mean and standard calculations of the descriptive statistics module I have installed im my Excel.  It's called Analyze-It.  I've been told that newer versions of Excel can accomplish a lot of what it does, so this is just FWIW.

       

      In this run, among other things, I found the following:

      Of the 50,000 "People" who played for 13.7 years...

        1012  Broke even (Ended up with their original $5000)

          539  were ahead $500

          240  were ahead $1000

            37  were ahead $1500

              6  were ahead $2000

              4  were ahead $2500

      I'll leave it up to you to calculate the fate of the rest! Smile

      The source code below tells you what this data means.

      I don't have time now to discuss this, so I'll leave it for you to mull over for a while.  What I'm hoping you will eventually be convinced that fair and purely random lotteries can result in people winning far above average expectations, even in Pick3s, WITH NO MORE THAN CHANCE to assist them!

      Here's a link to the output of a run of the program below:

      http://www.box.net/shared/sign4r88k3

      Here's the source code of the Basic code.  Basic is not my "Native" language, so please check it carefully.

      '
      ' Simulation of a Pick-3 Lottery Game
      '
      '     Adapted by Jimmy4164 from Phil Abel's
      '     Roulette Simulation in Casino Trading,
      '     TASC Magazine, November, 2003
      '
      '     Assumes that 50,000 People each buy one $1 Straight
      '     ticket per day for 5000 Days, or about 13.7 Years.
      '     A Win pays $500.

            DIM Equity AS LONG
            DIM Person AS LONG
            DIM DDraw AS INTEGER
            DIM LP AS INTEGER             ' Lottery's Pick
            DIM QP AS INTEGER             ' Player's QP

      '     Print results to an Excel file for further analysis

            OPEN "PICK3.CSV" FOR OUTPUT AS #3

            PRINT #3, "Equity"

            RANDOMIZE 11  ' Try different seeds and observe results

            FOR Person = 1 TO 50000       ' 50,000 "People"

               Equity = 5000              ' $5000 Starting Equity

               FOR DDraw = 1 TO 5000      ' Cycle through the Draws

      '           Buy a Ticket
                  QP = 100 * INT(RND * 10) + 10 * INT(RND * 10) + INT(RND * 10)

      '           Pay the Clerk!
                  Equity = Equity - 1

      '           Let the Balls Fly!
                  LP = 100 * INT(RND * 10) + 10 * INT(RND * 10) + INT(RND * 10)

                  IF QP = LP THEN Equity = Equity + 500

               NEXT DDraw

      '        Write each Person's Equity to the file
               PRINT #3, Equity           ' $5000 - Costs + Winnings

               IF Person MOD 500 = 0 THEN PRINT Person, Equity, QP, LP 'Halo?

            NEXT Person

            CLOSE #3  ' Close the file

            END

      Jimmy

      It looks like this code was written over 13.7 years ago and maybe twice that for a 8086 machine running

      msdos 1.0.


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 7, 2011, 12:51 am - IP Logged

        Here's a site that will interest Excel users...

        http://ExcelMonteCarlo.com


          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 9, 2011, 1:45 am - IP Logged

          I made a small modification to the Pick-3 simulation code [posted earlier in this thread] to produce output that should be more familiar to most people here.  Rather than output the Equity remaining from $5000 after 5000 $1 bets, I converted to Prize Ratio notation.  So, a Prize Ratio of 50 corresponds to $2500 Equity remaining in the earlier posting.  Here's a screen shot of the transformed results in Excel.

          I wrote a throw-away program to compress the 50,000 lines of output from the simulation to produce this frequency chart, and in the process discovered an error in my earlier posting.  When I said "6 were ahead $2000," I should have said "16 were ahead $2000."  This line corresponds to the 140% Prize Ratio in the chart immediately above.

          Hopefully, seeing the results displayed in this way will demonstrate more seamlessly what is going on in this random process, including the breadth of outcomes that are possible.  For example, we usually make casual references to the fact that in Pick-3 games, the average prize ratio is expected to be 50%.  However, as you can see, in this simulation of 50,000 people making 5000 bets each, only 8,872 actually got this 50% score.  Note also that because the lottery payouts are so low, a 100% Prize Ratio is required to break even, moneywise.  I'll leave it to you to look over the rest of the entries above, and draw further conclusions.  What I hope you are beginning to see is that randomness can result in big losers AND big winners!  And this is all possible with, or without, a system...

          There have been complaints that my code is not valid because it doesn't pit the 50,000 people against the same lottery draw, but rather gives each person their own draw for each bet.  The program is simpler the way it is, and I think you will eventually see that the results will be the same either way, but we can do it the other, just for fun!  I think JADELOTTERY's (1) simulation and proof in the 10 ticket/1 draw vs 1 ticket/10 draw Thread should preclude the need for another Pick-3 run, but WHY NOT?!

          I would like to be including the revised source code here, but because of what happened when I posted the original, I need more time to figure out how to get the code to people seriously interested without having it torn apart and changed in dubious ways.  I'm trying to write code for this thread that can be understood by non-programmers, so there will be no attempt to use tricky algorithms or output fancy graphics.  The core ideas in Monte Carlo simulations are really quite simple.  Don't worry; the revised program is nearly identical to the original, and I'll keep it safe until we can determine a safe way to publish it. Wink

          So, next up will be a run where each of the 50,000 "People" will bet against 1 Lottery Draw, 5000 times.  And if all goes well, we might smoothe out the graphs a little by including the more complex BOX calculations in subsequent runs.

          --Jimmy4164

          (1) http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/229884/2031617


            United States
            Member #93947
            July 10, 2010
            2180 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: May 12, 2011, 12:40 pm - IP Logged

            This is not what I said I would be posting next here.  But after considering Stack47's comments in the Poll Thread on this Topic, I think it's more important to continue looking at the effects on the distribution of winnings when the number of trials is increased or decreased.  Besides, if JADELOTTERY's simulation of One Ticket / Ten Draws vs Ten Tickets / One Draw does not convince you that the way we stage the draw / people loops here is irrelavent, I doubt if I'll change your mind.  But time permitting, we WILL try to do it eventually.

            Stack47 is interested in 100 Draws, but first, let's go the other way.  This graph depicts the frequency distribution of the Prize Ratios resulting from quadrupling the number of draws for each of the 50,000 players from 5,000 to 20,000.  Other than this change, the code is identical.

            Here is the Excel data compressed from the 50,000 Prize Ratios output from the Basic program:

            Prize_Ratio,    Frequency
             12.5 ,  12
             15.0 ,  13
             17.5 ,  24
             20.0 ,  50
             22.5 ,  75
             25.0 ,  193
             27.5 ,  534
             30.0 ,  855
             32.5 ,  1158
             35.0 ,  1956
             37.5 ,  2858
             40.0 ,  3332
             42.5 ,  3816
             45.0 ,  4294
             47.5 ,  4638
             50.0 ,  4496
             52.5 ,  4108
             55.0 ,  3797
             57.5 ,  3322
             60.0 ,  2757
             62.5 ,  2279
             65.0 ,  1878
             67.5 ,  1319
             70.0 ,  792
             72.5 ,  396
             75.0 ,  345
             77.5 ,  359
             80.0 ,  163
             82.5 ,  114
             85.0 ,  60
             87.5 ,  7

            ---------------------------------------

             
            Now, compare the graph and the frequency counts to their counterparts above in the last Post with 5000 Draws:
             
            What do you see as the primary difference?
             
            What happened to the 445 people who went completely bust in 5000 Draws?
             
            What happened to the 4 people who scored a 150% PR in 5000 Draws?
             
            What do you see happening to the shape of the curve in the graph as Draws are increased?
             
            Did anyone come out ahead in $ winnings in 20,000 Draws?
             
            --Jimmy4164
              RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

              United States
              Member #59354
              March 13, 2008
              3983 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: May 12, 2011, 3:11 pm - IP Logged

              This is not what I said I would be posting next here.  But after considering Stack47's comments in the Poll Thread on this Topic, I think it's more important to continue looking at the effects on the distribution of winnings when the number of trials is increased or decreased.  Besides, if JADELOTTERY's simulation of One Ticket / Ten Draws vs Ten Tickets / One Draw does not convince you that the way we stage the draw / people loops here is irrelavent, I doubt if I'll change your mind.  But time permitting, we WILL try to do it eventually.

              Stack47 is interested in 100 Draws, but first, let's go the other way.  This graph depicts the frequency distribution of the Prize Ratios resulting from quadrupling the number of draws for each of the 50,000 players from 5,000 to 20,000.  Other than this change, the code is identical.

              Here is the Excel data compressed from the 50,000 Prize Ratios output from the Basic program:

              Prize_Ratio,    Frequency
               12.5 ,  12
               15.0 ,  13
               17.5 ,  24
               20.0 ,  50
               22.5 ,  75
               25.0 ,  193
               27.5 ,  534
               30.0 ,  855
               32.5 ,  1158
               35.0 ,  1956
               37.5 ,  2858
               40.0 ,  3332
               42.5 ,  3816
               45.0 ,  4294
               47.5 ,  4638
               50.0 ,  4496
               52.5 ,  4108
               55.0 ,  3797
               57.5 ,  3322
               60.0 ,  2757
               62.5 ,  2279
               65.0 ,  1878
               67.5 ,  1319
               70.0 ,  792
               72.5 ,  396
               75.0 ,  345
               77.5 ,  359
               80.0 ,  163
               82.5 ,  114
               85.0 ,  60
               87.5 ,  7

              ---------------------------------------

               
              Now, compare the graph and the frequency counts to their counterparts above in the last Post with 5000 Draws:
               
              What do you see as the primary difference?
               
              What happened to the 445 people who went completely bust in 5000 Draws?
               
              What happened to the 4 people who scored a 150% PR in 5000 Draws?
               
              What do you see happening to the shape of the curve in the graph as Draws are increased?
               
              Did anyone come out ahead in $ winnings in 20,000 Draws?
               
              --Jimmy4164

              Jimmy

              Try as I might I cannot see the point of what you are doing here.  First, jades 1 for 10 or 10 for 1 has no real value

              other then to point out the odds for the draw are fixed.  If I play one ticket for 10 draws or I play ten tickets for one

              draw I would have the exact same odds.  Backtesting the lottery is also worthless in my opinion because it would

              require a person to go back in time to reap any benifit.   If one was using static settings that never changed even

              then what good would a backtest be.  Do the numbers that hit in the past have any effect on what will hit in the

              future.  Each draw is a new game, each draw is unrelated to the past and once the draw has been made then all the 

              odds, probabilities collapse for that draw.  Just because something has not hit in the past what would make you think

              that it will not hit in the future.  Backtest in certain situations is very useful but not the lottery.   To me the only real

              test of a lottery method or system would be to grade the performance of the users ability to select the variables that

              they put into play.  I don't claim to know how others rate there own performance when playing the lottery but if the

              ROI is used then I would think that most would be considered failures.  Some of my best setups produce the lowest

              returns.  In filter theory the closer you get to matching all the filters the more effect a single miss has on the outcome.

              It's easy for the nay sayers to stand back and spout the odds of failure and then take the stance of "I told you so"

              The thing that gets me the most about QP's is not how bad the sets generated are most of the time but that people

              exaggerate their chance of winning.  When people say that QP's are better because more JP's are won with QP's I am

              shamed.  The main problem here is an attempt to explain the psychology by people who have no credentials to do so.

              RL


                United States
                Member #93947
                July 10, 2010
                2180 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: May 12, 2011, 8:22 pm - IP Logged

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                What's under discussion here at the moment is the shape of the curve of the distribution of QuickPick winnings in a Pick3 game.  You're rambling here has very little if anything to do with that.  You said, "Try as I might I cannot see the point of what you are doing here."  You then proceed to completely ignore the data and graph and make no attempt to answer even one of the questions asked.  When your belief is that "Backtesting the lottery is also worthless...,"

                ...why are you posting in a Thread designed for people with an interest in Monte Carlo Techniques and Backtesting?

                --Jimmy4164

                P.S.  You must notice that I have nothing to say in the threads in which you are currently active because I have nothing supportive to say.  I would appreciate the same courtesy from you.

                  RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                  United States
                  Member #59354
                  March 13, 2008
                  3983 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: May 13, 2011, 12:43 pm - IP Logged

                  RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                  What's under discussion here at the moment is the shape of the curve of the distribution of QuickPick winnings in a Pick3 game.  You're rambling here has very little if anything to do with that.  You said, "Try as I might I cannot see the point of what you are doing here."  You then proceed to completely ignore the data and graph and make no attempt to answer even one of the questions asked.  When your belief is that "Backtesting the lottery is also worthless...,"

                  ...why are you posting in a Thread designed for people with an interest in Monte Carlo Techniques and Backtesting?

                  --Jimmy4164

                  P.S.  You must notice that I have nothing to say in the threads in which you are currently active because I have nothing supportive to say.  I would appreciate the same courtesy from you.

                  Jimmy

                  I thought this post was about  Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems  but I will refrane from posting

                  on your post.

                  RL

                    Avatar
                    Kentucky
                    United States
                    Member #32652
                    February 14, 2006
                    7318 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: May 13, 2011, 3:34 pm - IP Logged

                    This is not what I said I would be posting next here.  But after considering Stack47's comments in the Poll Thread on this Topic, I think it's more important to continue looking at the effects on the distribution of winnings when the number of trials is increased or decreased.  Besides, if JADELOTTERY's simulation of One Ticket / Ten Draws vs Ten Tickets / One Draw does not convince you that the way we stage the draw / people loops here is irrelavent, I doubt if I'll change your mind.  But time permitting, we WILL try to do it eventually.

                    Stack47 is interested in 100 Draws, but first, let's go the other way.  This graph depicts the frequency distribution of the Prize Ratios resulting from quadrupling the number of draws for each of the 50,000 players from 5,000 to 20,000.  Other than this change, the code is identical.

                    Here is the Excel data compressed from the 50,000 Prize Ratios output from the Basic program:

                    Prize_Ratio,    Frequency
                     12.5 ,  12
                     15.0 ,  13
                     17.5 ,  24
                     20.0 ,  50
                     22.5 ,  75
                     25.0 ,  193
                     27.5 ,  534
                     30.0 ,  855
                     32.5 ,  1158
                     35.0 ,  1956
                     37.5 ,  2858
                     40.0 ,  3332
                     42.5 ,  3816
                     45.0 ,  4294
                     47.5 ,  4638
                     50.0 ,  4496
                     52.5 ,  4108
                     55.0 ,  3797
                     57.5 ,  3322
                     60.0 ,  2757
                     62.5 ,  2279
                     65.0 ,  1878
                     67.5 ,  1319
                     70.0 ,  792
                     72.5 ,  396
                     75.0 ,  345
                     77.5 ,  359
                     80.0 ,  163
                     82.5 ,  114
                     85.0 ,  60
                     87.5 ,  7

                    ---------------------------------------

                     
                    Now, compare the graph and the frequency counts to their counterparts above in the last Post with 5000 Draws:
                     
                    What do you see as the primary difference?
                     
                    What happened to the 445 people who went completely bust in 5000 Draws?
                     
                    What happened to the 4 people who scored a 150% PR in 5000 Draws?
                     
                    What do you see happening to the shape of the curve in the graph as Draws are increased?
                     
                    Did anyone come out ahead in $ winnings in 20,000 Draws?
                     
                    --Jimmy4164

                    If I recall correctly your 33 and 1/2 years PA evening pick-3 analysis showed playing the most frequently drawn number in every drawing would result in a loss so there is really nothing to learn by extending it to 54 years.

                    "Did anyone come out ahead in $ winnings in 20,000 Draws?"

                    This question alone is why I believe the test should be more realistic pick-3 play. Considering the fact a player age 18 would be 72 at the end of the test, this questions should be "Will anyone still be alive after 20,000 draws?".

                    That being said, it does show what QP players should except by continuous play so I guess the next question is "can a system do better in a more reasonable number of drawings?". The old system I suggested is intended for box play using 3 different digits so to test it against say 1000 random ten box combo wagers for 100 drawings, the code would need changing to reflect the probable 28 drawings where some of the 1000 random wagers will collect double winnings.

                    Hopefully someone else has a straight system you can use for a test.

                      time*treat's avatar - radar

                      United States
                      Member #13130
                      March 30, 2005
                      2171 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: May 13, 2011, 8:41 pm - IP Logged

                      With only a finite number of chances to be on the "correct" side of the bell curve, I'd play for higher prizes.

                      P3 ain't it. That's like grinding shares for 1/16th of a point gains. Dead

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


                        United States
                        Member #93947
                        July 10, 2010
                        2180 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: May 16, 2011, 1:59 pm - IP Logged
                          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                          United States
                          Member #59354
                          March 13, 2008
                          3983 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: May 16, 2011, 8:14 pm - IP Logged

                          jimmy

                          Many of the most brilliant minds in recorded history believed in a afterlife or God in some fashion and I doubt

                          the bible is the problem.  I do agree that the bible is just a bunch or stories written by men.   I also wonder who

                          or what it was that gave Stephen Hawking a extended chance.  If memory serves, he was somehow warned about

                          wasting his early life.  The problem with the USA is money, either too much or too little.  Most of the other 

                          countries that are making leaps and bounds in technology is because they are just being introduced to it.  The

                          average american kid is only interested in the newest phone or video game.  Mom and Pop just keep throwing

                          things at them and they could care less how it works or the technology behind it.  How many people in India can

                          go out and buy a nice computer. 

                          When I was a Kid I lived in a rural area where on a good day we could receive one channel on the TV.  I had family

                          that lived in several large cities like Kansas City or Chicago and when they would visit they would talk about the

                          movies they watched while the only movies I had ever seen were on sunday nights Walt Disney Show.  As a young

                          kid in the early 60's I learned how to build a long range antenna without books our instructions of any kind.  Buy the

                          time I was around 12 years old I could rebuild any engine or fix any of the equipment on the farm.   I lived in a 

                          setting where I was not exposed to what the rest of the world had and when I did get the chance I made every

                          effort to learn everything I could.  The same thing is going on in the world today, US. people are spoiled.  You can

                          enter the home of a poor family in the US and find a computer connected to the internet and a couple flatscreen TV/s

                          connected by satellite.  Each of the kids will have a cell phone so they can text each other and their friends. They

                          stay up all night watching TV or playing video games.  Many people in the US start off better then most folks in the

                          rest of the world could hope to achieve by retirement age.  Crash the system, let a few million starve and see what

                          happends.   

                          RL


                            United States
                            Member #93947
                            July 10, 2010
                            2180 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: May 17, 2011, 12:48 am - IP Logged

                            I think you're confused RL.  Your response appears to be to truecritic's misguided comment on my Blog post which dealt with Stephen Hawking's religious beliefs.  My Blog entry is on Isaac Asimov's take on American science education...

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                              United States
                              Member #59354
                              March 13, 2008
                              3983 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: May 17, 2011, 4:12 am - IP Logged

                              Jimmy

                               Isaac Asimov's  article placed part of the blame for lack of science aptitude on the teachings of the bible.

                              I blame capitalism and greed for the lack of interest in these fields.  I read a article and it stated that many

                              of the most brilliant math students were being sucked up by wall street.  This alone would go a long way

                              in describing the problem.  All the power is now controlled by the banks and corporations which have sold

                              out america and it's people.  The banks and corporations don't care who has the technology as long as they

                              control it.   While capitalism is necessary to promote growth it has ran amuck in the US and abroad.  Every

                              thing that made america great has been flushed down the drain and it's people have been enslaved.  Look

                              at the cost of college these days, their interest is focused on the $$$ and learning has taken a back seat.

                              I keep waiting on some forgein investment group to buy up american national parks and turn them into a

                              money makers.  I think they are all scum sucking bottom feeding maggots and need to be done away with.

                              A revolution every now and then is a good thing. 

                              RL  

                                 
                                Page 9 of 10