Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 10, 2016, 11:02 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

How do you know if your Lottery System is getting better ?

Topic closed. 67 replies. Last post 6 years ago by guesser.

Page 3 of 5
PrintE-mailLink
guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

United States
Member #41383
June 16, 2006
1969 Posts
Offline
Posted: May 20, 2011, 1:32 am - IP Logged

I am absolutely 100% convinced you can have a system thet will get you 2, maybe 3 numbers once every couple of weeks, because I do that often.

But 3x5 isn't good enough.

The best you can do is develop your 'star' numbers - the 2 or 3 you 'know' will hit, and then you have to get lucky with the other 3 or 2 and have them in a pool you devise, and pray that luck is shining on you.

Right now I am not fooling myself: I generally only get 2 numbers I 'know' will hit, the rest I just hope I get lucky.

If someone does indeed hit all the numbers with a system, it won't be the system that gets it, it will be the drawing: the numbers that come up just happen to match what your system dictates, because if anyone had a TRUE system that worked, they would win the jackpot EVERY TIME.

Some folks simply don't understand the above.

    RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
    mid-Ohio
    United States
    Member #9
    March 24, 2001
    19831 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: May 20, 2011, 2:09 pm - IP Logged

    I am absolutely 100% convinced you can have a system thet will get you 2, maybe 3 numbers once every couple of weeks, because I do that often.

    But 3x5 isn't good enough.

    The best you can do is develop your 'star' numbers - the 2 or 3 you 'know' will hit, and then you have to get lucky with the other 3 or 2 and have them in a pool you devise, and pray that luck is shining on you.

    Right now I am not fooling myself: I generally only get 2 numbers I 'know' will hit, the rest I just hope I get lucky.

    If someone does indeed hit all the numbers with a system, it won't be the system that gets it, it will be the drawing: the numbers that come up just happen to match what your system dictates, because if anyone had a TRUE system that worked, they would win the jackpot EVERY TIME.

    Some folks simply don't understand the above.

    ", because if anyone had a TRUE system that worked, they would win the jackpot EVERY TIME."

    By that definition there may not be any TRUE systems or any that work.  What I've been calling a system and developing for sometime must be nothing more than a a fancy RNG but it does what I expect of it even thought the closest I've ever come to winning a jackpot was matching 5/6 in the Ohio Super Lotto in 2002.  Only buying 10-20 tickets when I play I don't expect to win a jackpot every time, once may be plenty. 

    I look as past drawings, particularly those with previous number distribution patterns similar to those before the next drawing and use that information to set parameters and enter numbers in my system for picking some combinations randomly.

     * 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: May 20, 2011, 2:47 pm - IP Logged

      I am absolutely 100% convinced you can have a system thet will get you 2, maybe 3 numbers once every couple of weeks, because I do that often.

      But 3x5 isn't good enough.

      The best you can do is develop your 'star' numbers - the 2 or 3 you 'know' will hit, and then you have to get lucky with the other 3 or 2 and have them in a pool you devise, and pray that luck is shining on you.

      Right now I am not fooling myself: I generally only get 2 numbers I 'know' will hit, the rest I just hope I get lucky.

      If someone does indeed hit all the numbers with a system, it won't be the system that gets it, it will be the drawing: the numbers that come up just happen to match what your system dictates, because if anyone had a TRUE system that worked, they would win the jackpot EVERY TIME.

      Some folks simply don't understand the above.

      Guesser:  Probably the folks you think don't understand the above aren't confused by what you've said.  They understand all of what you've posted within the above.  They probably will agree 3x5 every couple of weeks isn't good enough. 

      A lot of those folks would probably disagree with the part you added all the caps to for emphasis.  They'd understand it, but they simply wouldn't think the statement is necessarily true.

      Nothing's added to the validity of your statement by suggesting people who disagree with it don't comprehend the meaning of the words.

        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

        United States
        Member #59354
        March 13, 2008
        3986 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 21, 2011, 2:57 am - IP Logged

        I don't know what a lottery system is anymore, I thought I knew but now I am not so sure.  I have written many

        different lottery programs over many many years and I now think that none of them could be called a system.  I

        use to think that a system was anything that was made up of smaller parts that functioned as a whole.  I have

        now come to the conculsion that every lottery software is nothing more then a wheel.  Some wheel numbers in a

        random manner and others wheel numerically.  Any analysis that is peformed and that  includes everything  one

        can conceive is just a filter no matter how complex or simple it might be.   I have a AI/bayesian predictor that was

        written over many years but it is still just a basic filter in what it does.  Most people think of wheels as a way to

        get a guaranteed hit (x of x)  prize if your list of numbers contains so many of the numbers drawn.  I now think 

        that all lottery programs do this same thing except they don't give a guarantee win because to many variables

        are used to calculate all the different ways to win a prize.   All lottery software seeks to remove the unlikely and

        keep the likely however what is likely?  What we should be focused on is analysis which will most often lead to

        some sort of statistical answer which does not offer any real help.  Sure some of the time it is bound to be correct

        but if something existed that could be defined as a system then it would win over and over.  Some will find this

        hard to swallow but it is true. 

        The mear fact that statistical analysis can never accomplish this should cause a person to rethink what they use

        and how they use it.   I always rate how I am doing by tracking how many of the variables that I choose correctly

        because like the wheel with a win guarantee if I choose correctly then I will win a JP.  I have had days where I 

        missed only one setting and hit a couple 2 of 5's and other days when I missed 5 or more and hit several 4 of 5's.

        How many filters are needed to reduce the sets to a playable amount is another factor and I always say fewer

        choices means fewer mistakes.  If a program uses the most advanced math to choose what set or sets to play

        then it is still rejecting all the others or filtering the rest out.  The data that we use in our analysis has a large 

        effect on how we do.  If we or the program we use can't make since of this data then it will never perform better

        then a random QP.  That is not to say that it will never win but if it does then it is just a chance event.

        Before we can even know how our system is doing we must know where it is lacking and what if any changes is

        needed.  Lets say that you select 20 numbers from the pool but you only end up with 2 or 3 correct.  A random

        selection of 20 numbers from a pool of 39 which produces only 2 or 3 of the correct numbers is exactly what is

        expected so if your method produces 2 or 3 numbers it shows no advantage whatsoever.  Now if you can select

        20 numbers and get 4 or 5 correct most of the time then you are doing quite well.  If you are only getting 2 or 3

        correct then you need to change how you are making selections or drop the process all togeather and try something

        else. 

        I stopped picking numbers along time ago and started selecting digits because most of the time I would choose

        less then the expected.   I often have at least 4 of 5 numbers in play now but getting them all on the same line

        is something else.  I don't mean to sound all doom and gloom but I hope people take what I have said here to

        heart.  Don't kid yourself about how you are doing, I have been active in lottery analysis for over 20 years and

        even with the success I have had I am still looking for something better all the time.  You must allow yourself to

        move around and look at other things that could help.  For the last few weeks I have been doing much thinking

        and I have concluded that much of my success comes from my ability to visually see what will hit.  All the analysis

        I do only accounts for about 10% of my choices.

         

        RL

          guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

          United States
          Member #41383
          June 16, 2006
          1969 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 21, 2011, 3:16 am - IP Logged

          Guesser:  Probably the folks you think don't understand the above aren't confused by what you've said.  They understand all of what you've posted within the above.  They probably will agree 3x5 every couple of weeks isn't good enough. 

          A lot of those folks would probably disagree with the part you added all the caps to for emphasis.  They'd understand it, but they simply wouldn't think the statement is necessarily true.

          Nothing's added to the validity of your statement by suggesting people who disagree with it don't comprehend the meaning of the words.

          To each their own, but I am under no illusions here.

          I use a 'system' more to eliminate possibilities as opposed to picking numbers, but still, it amazes me that folks think there is an automatic turn-key system that will bag them a jackpot, and then they cannot figure out why their system doesn't 'work'.

          Folks are free to figure out if a statement is true or not, if they didn't, life would be boring. And I am not suggesting people cannot comprehend what I or anyone else writes, but I WILL suggest a lot of folks don't really understand the odds, or accept the fact that luck has a lot to do with it.

          If folks can figure out if a statement is true or not, (especially not), more power to them, feel free to debate the poster, me or anyone else.

          If the numbers hit that we predict beforehand are 'supposed to' hit, we would not have a lottery.

            guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

            United States
            Member #41383
            June 16, 2006
            1969 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: May 21, 2011, 3:20 am - IP Logged

            RL, I like what you said.

            I too, have figured out not to play numbers, but to play positions, ie if there is a single number that has not hit in X games, you play it, not matter what  that number is, and so on.

            But it is up to you to figure out when 'X' is, and also figuring out what numbers fall into the pots called V, W, Y  and Z.

            And never fall in love with a number, that will kill you. Like the RB 28 some are in love with. It may hit, it may hit tonight, nobody knows.

              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
              mid-Ohio
              United States
              Member #9
              March 24, 2001
              19831 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: May 21, 2011, 11:58 am - IP Logged

              Over the years it's been threads like this one that have caused system players to rethink how they are playing lotteries and some to conclude they've been wasting their time and others to realize winning a lottery jackpot isn't easy or cheap even using the fine systems they've spent years developing or their hard earned money buying without a little luck.

              What are they going to do?  Give up and start buying QP? 

              For me no way, I still believe I can do better than buying a random QP, if not today with my present system (fancy home made RNG or what ever you want to call it) then with an improved version of it tomorrow.

              Is my system get any better?  I can't say cause I can't prove it by my winnings but I keep making changes to it that make me think it is and I'm enjoying playing the lotteries as much as I ever did.

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

                Avatar
                CT
                United States
                Member #60059
                April 4, 2008
                858 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: May 21, 2011, 2:19 pm - IP Logged

                Any system should give many oppurtunities to reduce the number of numbers to play.

                Here is an example:

                Pick 3: Starting with 220 boxed numbers.

                The first selection should be No Carryover, CarryOver, Double CarryOver, Triple CarryOver.

                The second selection be to include Single or Double numbers.

                Getting these 2 critera correct gives you a good starting list of numbers.

                Usally between 20 to 60 numbers

                Tracking the sum will narrow this list down further.

                 

                In nutshell there is the start of any system.

                Most systems over complicate the process.

                Remember K.I.S.S.

                Luck be with you!!!

                NOTE: All numbers posted are BOXED and unless otherwise noted.

                  RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                  mid-Ohio
                  United States
                  Member #9
                  March 24, 2001
                  19831 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: May 21, 2011, 2:31 pm - IP Logged

                  Any system should give many oppurtunities to reduce the number of numbers to play.

                  Here is an example:

                  Pick 3: Starting with 220 boxed numbers.

                  The first selection should be No Carryover, CarryOver, Double CarryOver, Triple CarryOver.

                  The second selection be to include Single or Double numbers.

                  Getting these 2 critera correct gives you a good starting list of numbers.

                  Usally between 20 to 60 numbers

                  Tracking the sum will narrow this list down further.

                   

                  In nutshell there is the start of any system.

                  Most systems over complicate the process.

                  Remember K.I.S.S.

                  Trying to get a box hit with 220 possible out comes is as simple as it gets, the only thing simpler would be guessing heads or tails of a coin flip but you don't need a system for that.

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

                    RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                    United States
                    Member #59354
                    March 13, 2008
                    3986 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: May 21, 2011, 2:56 pm - IP Logged

                    Over the years it's been threads like this one that have caused system players to rethink how they are playing lotteries and some to conclude they've been wasting their time and others to realize winning a lottery jackpot isn't easy or cheap even using the fine systems they've spent years developing or their hard earned money buying without a little luck.

                    What are they going to do?  Give up and start buying QP? 

                    For me no way, I still believe I can do better than buying a random QP, if not today with my present system (fancy home made RNG or what ever you want to call it) then with an improved version of it tomorrow.

                    Is my system get any better?  I can't say cause I can't prove it by my winnings but I keep making changes to it that make me think it is and I'm enjoying playing the lotteries as much as I ever did.

                    RJOh

                    I am trying to throw statictical analysis out of my selection process.  If using statistics as a means to predict what

                    will happen next, I am fully convinced that one will end up as a contributing statistic and broke.  When I win my

                    next Jackpot it will not be based on any form of luck or statistic but on my abilities.  I know you have heard the

                    old saying "I would rather push a Harley then ride a honda"  This is how I feel about system play vs quick picks.

                    If you want to see how well statistics do when playing the lottery then buy a few QP's because they are rooted

                    in them.  As for what a system is I don't know,  I am going to start calling my program a lottery tool or just call

                    it a program.  When we use the word system it draws fire from others but as programmers we have no problem 

                    with it.   The main reason we draw fire is because so many have different ideas what a system is or should contain.

                    What we need is a set of lottery definitions written down for reference.  Doctors, lawyers, electronics, biology,

                    physics just to name a few all have their own terminology so why not define a few lottery terms.   To me a system

                    would require some type of analysis tool and a means to put the data retrieved into play.  I don't think that a system

                    has to win anything to earn the name system.  Maybe a non winning system should be called a yet to win system.

                    My many bouts with jimmy got me a little off track because I went back to a staticial way of thinking which was 

                    something I dropped many years ago because thats when I found that they could do nothing for me.  I drop a few

                    ideas here and there for others to try but as you once said, most people don't want to help you with your system

                    they want to get you to play there's.   Statistics rule out statistics as a means of selecting numbers so why would

                    we continue using them.  Not giving up just getting smarter. 

                     

                    RL

                      Raven62's avatar - binary
                      New Jersey
                      United States
                      Member #17843
                      June 28, 2005
                      49835 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: May 21, 2011, 4:18 pm - IP Logged

                      The word luck is only used because most folks don't have the information needed to win. There is a reason for everything that happens and just because we don't understand it makes it look like "Luck".

                      Surely ping pong balls don't have a brain, but that's irrelevant. I hear so many folks say that. I don't care If they have a brain or not, what I care about is how they behave whether they like it or not. Observing behavior has nothing to do with whether the object can think or not. I along with the multitudes of folks out there don't have the knowledge or brainpower to beat the system 95% of the time, but that doesn't mean a system that is changing and very complex which can beat the system doesn't exist.

                      Here's  a  raw example:

                      If we could travel back in time to caveman days and bring a car with us with the keys on the front seat, eventually the caveman will toy around with it until he realizes he has to turn the key in the ignition. His caveman buddy may tell him  ( in caveman language) that since it took him a year to realize thow to start the car, it was just luck. But in fact, there was systematic way of starting the car, and the caveman was simply ignorant of that fact.

                      Just like the caveman, we are all ignorant of the very complex system that is needed to beat a chaotic environment such as the Pick 3, but that doesn't change the fact that there is a systematic way to beat it.

                      Everything in life is an illusion, and that includes perception...

                      It's All Smoke & Mirrors!

                      That's why the Lotteries use multiple Ball Sets, multiple Ball Machines, and have no Witnesses at the Drawings... LOL

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

                        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                        mid-Ohio
                        United States
                        Member #9
                        March 24, 2001
                        19831 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: May 21, 2011, 5:40 pm - IP Logged

                        I Agree! RL,

                        I agree about referring to lottery programs as tools rather than systems.  It seems as systems, players expect them to be lottery tools and intelligence all rolled in to one package and when they don't pick winners say they don't work.  Computer programs always follow instructions, they aren't intelligent, that's why there are programmers.

                        As for statistical analysis, my lottery program depends on it.  When I load a lottery file it doesn't know if it's for a pick5 or pick6 with or without bonus numbers, it can be any of the four with up to 60 numbers.  After a minute or two depending on the size of the file, parameters based on that file come up on the screen and it's then I accept and or enter data to replace some or all of them.  It's my intelligence that make the final decision, the statistics just help me keep my inputs realistic.

                        As for as going broke using statistics I'm not worried, my weekly budget for lottery tickets is less than some spend on beer and cigarettes and I don't use either.

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

                          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                          United States
                          Member #59354
                          March 13, 2008
                          3986 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: May 21, 2011, 7:32 pm - IP Logged

                          I Agree! RL,

                          I agree about referring to lottery programs as tools rather than systems.  It seems as systems, players expect them to be lottery tools and intelligence all rolled in to one package and when they don't pick winners say they don't work.  Computer programs always follow instructions, they aren't intelligent, that's why there are programmers.

                          As for statistical analysis, my lottery program depends on it.  When I load a lottery file it doesn't know if it's for a pick5 or pick6 with or without bonus numbers, it can be any of the four with up to 60 numbers.  After a minute or two depending on the size of the file, parameters based on that file come up on the screen and it's then I accept and or enter data to replace some or all of them.  It's my intelligence that make the final decision, the statistics just help me keep my inputs realistic.

                          As for as going broke using statistics I'm not worried, my weekly budget for lottery tickets is less than some spend on beer and cigarettes and I don't use either.

                          RJOh

                          I need to rephrase or remove my previous statement,  The stats when used correctly can offer some

                          good information and give a person a better understanding of what one might expect.  There is no

                          way to analyze data without using the stats in some way.  What I was attacking was maybe my own

                          attempts to quantify my selections into a mathematically provable set of rules which ended in failure.

                          We must use all our abilities as best we can because the odds against us are so great.   I have no

                          right to attack what anyone uses even if they choose QP.  Please accept my apologies.     

                          RL

                            guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

                            United States
                            Member #41383
                            June 16, 2006
                            1969 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: May 22, 2011, 12:23 am - IP Logged

                            It's All Smoke & Mirrors!

                            That's why the Lotteries use multiple Ball Sets, multiple Ball Machines, and have no Witnesses at the Drawings... LOL

                            Reagrding your last comment: 'no witnesses' -

                            YOU ARE WRONG!

                            ASK ME HOW I KNOW!!

                              guesser's avatar - Lottery-017.jpg

                              United States
                              Member #41383
                              June 16, 2006
                              1969 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: May 22, 2011, 12:30 am - IP Logged

                              Over the years it's been threads like this one that have caused system players to rethink how they are playing lotteries and some to conclude they've been wasting their time and others to realize winning a lottery jackpot isn't easy or cheap even using the fine systems they've spent years developing or their hard earned money buying without a little luck.

                              What are they going to do?  Give up and start buying QP? 

                              For me no way, I still believe I can do better than buying a random QP, if not today with my present system (fancy home made RNG or what ever you want to call it) then with an improved version of it tomorrow.

                              Is my system get any better?  I can't say cause I can't prove it by my winnings but I keep making changes to it that make me think it is and I'm enjoying playing the lotteries as much as I ever did.

                              Well stated.

                              There are TENDENCIES in the choices, the problem is, once you have narrowed those down, you STILL need luck to hit it.

                              For example, there are 5 WB's that hit, I narrow each one of those down to a pool of numbers, usually four each, but even at that, you still need a lot of luck to get each one right.

                              I have hit 4x5 eleven times, and of those eleven times TWICE I had the 5th number in my pool, but you simply cannot play every combo - and the day you spend $300 trying all the combinations that are 'supposed to hit', they don't, I've been there/done that three or four times about five years ago. The one time I did hit 5x5 (long ago) was numbers I picked out of thin air (kinda), so yes, LUCK has a lot to do with it.

                              Do you pick numbers, or do they pick you?