Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 5:20 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Mathematics and the Lottery

646 replies. Last post 22 days ago by SEA-Pick3.

Page 2 of 44
4.616
PrintE-mailLink

Can a winning lottery system be created with existing math formulas?

Yes-It's all in the math books. [ 228 ]  [43.02%]
No-Anew math for will have to be created. [ 78 ]  [14.72%]
Math won't beat the lottery regularly. [ 224 ]  [42.26%]
Total Valid Votes [ 530 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 54 ]  

Guests cannot vote  ( Log In | Register )


United States
Member #93947
July 10, 2010
2180 Posts
Offline
Posted: July 25, 2011, 3:56 pm - IP Logged

Apples and oranges. Card counting simply shifts the advantage of a game that's not random from the house to the player by changing the rules of the game. Recognzing flaws, such as an improper RNG, are also based on a change in the rules of the game

The question of whether or not a winning system for beating the lottery is possible is an entirely different matter. Occasional flaws aside, lottery games are random; you place your bet without knowing anything about your hand or the dealers. Until somebody develops a math that can predict the future there's no chance of developing a winning system, because random results are unpredictable. Thinking you can somehow beat random is even sillier than thinking you can consistently beat  the house advantage in a casino game.

Even the vast majority of people who are hunting for that mythical system should be able to recognize the truth. How many of them have claimed their "system" worked for a while and then went cold? If the rules of the game didn't change a system that works now would continue to work.

I agree with you 100%.  Unfortunately, in addition to some pretty bad cases of innumeracy, I believe, based on analyzing their posts, there are a few vocal individuals here who have a vested interest in perpetuating the silly beliefs you refer to.

    JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

    United States
    Member #5599
    July 13, 2004
    1184 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: July 25, 2011, 11:30 pm - IP Logged

    Hi,

      Well, different views divided the members into seperate camps as it always does when it comes to this topic. I guess I'm just a rebel. Someone saying that it can't be done is motivation in itself. How many things couldn't be done and now are taken for granted as everyday. The math is there somewhere...who is clever enough to find it? *S*

    You are a slave to the choices you have made.  jk

    Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.

      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
      mid-Ohio
      United States
      Member #9
      March 24, 2001
      19821 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: July 26, 2011, 9:56 am - IP Logged

      Hi,

        Well, different views divided the members into seperate camps as it always does when it comes to this topic. I guess I'm just a rebel. Someone saying that it can't be done is motivation in itself. How many things couldn't be done and now are taken for granted as everyday. The math is there somewhere...who is clever enough to find it? *S*

      "The math is there somewhere...who is clever enough to find it? *S*"

      If it exists, only someone who is looking will ever have a chance of finding it.

       * 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
        3962 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: July 27, 2011, 4:51 am - IP Logged

        Hi,

          Well, different views divided the members into seperate camps as it always does when it comes to this topic. I guess I'm just a rebel. Someone saying that it can't be done is motivation in itself. How many things couldn't be done and now are taken for granted as everyday. The math is there somewhere...who is clever enough to find it? *S*

        JKING

        I don't think a math can solve random but that does not mean it can't be done.  Most every attempt I have ever

        seen is based on statistics and the study of past drawings which for the most part is fruitless.  We should be looking

        at the inner workings of random it's self.   Since the lottery draw is a closed system and the order in which the numbers

        are drawn is what we are looking for we need to focus on that aspect which is the random part of the draw.  The numbers

        are not the random event the order however is.  If the drawing apperatus was allowed to continue then all the balls would

        eventually come out, but if the numbers were random then it would be quite a different story.  This may seem like a no brainer

        but most have never thought of the drawing this way.  The statistical buffs will always say that if you do happen to win a

        few good prizes it is nothing more than chance and if you continue to play you will eventually loose more then you win but

        this is not always true even if you omit the large payoffs.   To attack the lottery draw you must attack the random part else

        you will fall victim to the odds.  I keep saying this but don't get much back but until you can take some of the randomness

        out of the equation then you are wasting your time.   The odds are based on "random selection"  take some of the random

        out of the process and the odds no longer apply.  The gamming industry counts on randomness and without it they could not

        survive.  Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play, why, because with each card that

        has been played the randomness of the next card drawn becomes less and less.  While it is true that all the numbers are

        returned to the hopper for ecah drawing one can still gain some useful information about how random works in a closed 

        system.  I don't pretend to have figured it all out but I have made some progress.  Want to solve the lottery or a part of

        it then study random.

         

        RL

        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

          Avatar
          Kentucky
          United States
          Member #32652
          February 14, 2006
          7298 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: July 27, 2011, 2:56 pm - IP Logged

          JKING

          I don't think a math can solve random but that does not mean it can't be done.  Most every attempt I have ever

          seen is based on statistics and the study of past drawings which for the most part is fruitless.  We should be looking

          at the inner workings of random it's self.   Since the lottery draw is a closed system and the order in which the numbers

          are drawn is what we are looking for we need to focus on that aspect which is the random part of the draw.  The numbers

          are not the random event the order however is.  If the drawing apperatus was allowed to continue then all the balls would

          eventually come out, but if the numbers were random then it would be quite a different story.  This may seem like a no brainer

          but most have never thought of the drawing this way.  The statistical buffs will always say that if you do happen to win a

          few good prizes it is nothing more than chance and if you continue to play you will eventually loose more then you win but

          this is not always true even if you omit the large payoffs.   To attack the lottery draw you must attack the random part else

          you will fall victim to the odds.  I keep saying this but don't get much back but until you can take some of the randomness

          out of the equation then you are wasting your time.   The odds are based on "random selection"  take some of the random

          out of the process and the odds no longer apply.  The gamming industry counts on randomness and without it they could not

          survive.  Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play, why, because with each card that

          has been played the randomness of the next card drawn becomes less and less.  While it is true that all the numbers are

          returned to the hopper for ecah drawing one can still gain some useful information about how random works in a closed 

          system.  I don't pretend to have figured it all out but I have made some progress.  Want to solve the lottery or a part of

          it then study random.

           

          RL

          "The statistical buffs will always say that if you do happen to win a few good prizes it is nothing more than chance and if you continue to play you will eventually loose more then you win but this is not always true even if you omit the large payoffs."

          It's a mystery to me why our resident statistical buff continues to show us information about betting strategies nobody uses and in some cases, they defy all common sense. If someone says they are playing a group of numbers (regardless of how they arrived at those numbers) because they are consistently getting enough matches to show a nice profit, our critic will say "but my Quick Pick statistics show it's impossible to continue showing a profit for the next 2000 years". It's useless to tell him the strategies are designed for short term play or like with yours, not playing every drawing because he refuses to allow facts and common sense to get in the way of his agenda. 

          "Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play"

          Edward O. Thorp gets the credit for proving that in certain situations players have an advantage but he wasn't a gambler. It wasn't until many of the real gamblers refined Thorp's methods the casinos began changing the rules of the game.

          Now we're suppose to be in really impressed by gaming articles written for Casino City Times when the same odds and house edges are found in millions of other articles and in books. I'm not awe struck because the writers have mathematical backgrounds or consulted with Steve Wynn while sitting next to him in a stall in the men's room.

          "To attack the lottery draw you must attack the random part else you will fall victim to the odds."

          There is no universal definition of lottery random. Which is more random, Tennessee's RNG or PA's ball machine?


            United States
            Member #93947
            July 10, 2010
            2180 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: July 27, 2011, 7:21 pm - IP Logged

            JKING

            I don't think a math can solve random but that does not mean it can't be done.  Most every attempt I have ever

            seen is based on statistics and the study of past drawings which for the most part is fruitless.  We should be looking

            at the inner workings of random it's self.   Since the lottery draw is a closed system and the order in which the numbers

            are drawn is what we are looking for we need to focus on that aspect which is the random part of the draw.  The numbers

            are not the random event the order however is.  If the drawing apperatus was allowed to continue then all the balls would

            eventually come out, but if the numbers were random then it would be quite a different story.  This may seem like a no brainer

            but most have never thought of the drawing this way.  The statistical buffs will always say that if you do happen to win a

            few good prizes it is nothing more than chance and if you continue to play you will eventually loose more then you win but

            this is not always true even if you omit the large payoffs.   To attack the lottery draw you must attack the random part else

            you will fall victim to the odds.  I keep saying this but don't get much back but until you can take some of the randomness

            out of the equation then you are wasting your time.   The odds are based on "random selection"  take some of the random

            out of the process and the odds no longer apply.  The gamming industry counts on randomness and without it they could not

            survive.  Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play, why, because with each card that

            has been played the randomness of the next card drawn becomes less and less.  While it is true that all the numbers are

            returned to the hopper for ecah drawing one can still gain some useful information about how random works in a closed 

            system.  I don't pretend to have figured it all out but I have made some progress.  Want to solve the lottery or a part of

            it then study random.

             

            RL

            RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

            "The gamming industry counts on randomness and without it they could not survive."

            And they seem to be surviving quite well, don't they?

            "Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play, why, because with each card that has been played the randomness of the next card drawn becomes less and less.  While it is true that all the numbers are returned to the hopper for ecah drawing one can still gain some useful information about how random works in a closed system."

            How so?

            "I don't pretend to have figured it all out but I have made some progress.  Want to solve the lottery or a part of it then study random."

            You're way ahead of Stack47, RL!  Some of your thinking here is quite innovative and rational.  However, before investing a lot of valuable time on this, revisit my post of almost a year ago, and think long and hard about what the Stanford authors had to say about the difference between what might be theoretically possible and what is reasonably plausible in practise.  Remember, by the time the balls are flying, the lottery terminals are closed! Wink

             

            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/219401/1808106

            --Jimmy4164


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: July 27, 2011, 7:52 pm - IP Logged
                RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                United States
                Member #59354
                March 13, 2008
                3962 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: July 28, 2011, 3:30 am - IP Logged

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                "The gamming industry counts on randomness and without it they could not survive."

                And they seem to be surviving quite well, don't they?

                "Blackjack is a random game but by counting cards you can improve your play, why, because with each card that has been played the randomness of the next card drawn becomes less and less.  While it is true that all the numbers are returned to the hopper for ecah drawing one can still gain some useful information about how random works in a closed system."

                How so?

                "I don't pretend to have figured it all out but I have made some progress.  Want to solve the lottery or a part of it then study random."

                You're way ahead of Stack47, RL!  Some of your thinking here is quite innovative and rational.  However, before investing a lot of valuable time on this, revisit my post of almost a year ago, and think long and hard about what the Stanford authors had to say about the difference between what might be theoretically possible and what is reasonably plausible in practise.  Remember, by the time the balls are flying, the lottery terminals are closed! Wink

                 

                http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/219401/1808106

                --Jimmy4164

                Jimmy

                The reason they do so well is that most players rely on chance.  It goes back to the 10 marbles and the

                paper bag experiment which is all one needs to understand chance, odds and probability.  It is almost

                mechanical in nature and just like the lottery the results will follow the rules +/- some small deviation given

                time.  You may select the correct marble 3 thime in a row but it was still a product of chance.  As you know I

                don't think about the current draw in terms of numbers being drawn but as a pre existing set which contains

                a number of different elements.

                I also never look at the actual numbers until I fill in the playslips.  The gamming industry knows that

                although some will win they know that many more will loose just like the selecting one marble from the

                bag, they could expect one to loose 9 out of 10 attempts.  Here is what I think, mathematics is a product

                of the conscious mind.  We have a need to make things fit togeather so that they make since.  We mow

                the lawn so that all the grass is the same hight,  WHY?  When we play the lottery we try to make random

                events fit into some sort of pattern that can be explained.  Probability is like a adjustable wrench that can

                be adjusted to explain the outcome as chance because it does not rule out anything.   If someone hit 10

                jackpots in a row it could still be said to be a product of chance.   Probability is great at providing information

                about what one can expect overall but it has no predictive qualities.  Certainty does not exist where random

                is involved but in pseudorandom events such as the lottery there are a few common rules that seem to hold

                up that take some of the uncertainty out.  I agree that every set has the same exact odds of being drawn for

                any one drawing but over time each set falls victim to the matrix.  If the matrix has a million sets then each set

                has a one in a million chance of being drawn.   The combinations of varibles within a pseudorandom event can

                out number the possible outcomes so some sets would have more than one set of variables which would give

                them a greater chance of hitting then sets with fewer combinations of variables from which the same set could

                be generated.  Lets say that you have 10 filters which all have a range of 0 to 5.  This would give you 60466176

                possible ways to set the 10 filters.  Lets say that you are playing a 5-39 matrix which has 575757 sets.  this would

                mean that 59890419 of the 10 filter setups would not produce any sets for obvious reasons however the drawing

                process could produce a set for each which would mean there are many ways the balls could bounce around and

                still produce the same set.   However given the almost unlimited variable values within a hopper full of balls being

                bounced around would the odds for each set still be the same as the odds given for the matrix.   This may seem a

                little foolish because there are only so many sets in the matrix from which one set will be drawn regardless of the

                total of variable values inside the hopper.   Random gets a little weird at this level because it seems that there is

                more than one set of variables for each set and if each set does not require the same variables to be drawn then

                would this give some sets either a greater or lesser chance than others.  I am not saying this would help someone

                pick the next 5 winning numbers, just put it out there to chew on.   Maybe someday I will post some of what I call

                the good stuff but not at this time because I can't defend my point of view.   Random vs Random kind of like folding

                space to get from point A to point B without having to put in the miles.

                RLBed

                Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                  US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                  Avatar
                  bgonçalves
                  Brasil
                  Member #92564
                  June 9, 2010
                  2122 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: July 28, 2011, 8:40 am - IP Logged
                  Hello.
                  Randonic, ok, elaborate
                  each statistic has a central stripe of greater probability
                  And exiting in the sweepstakes in 80%
                  of cases, then prepare various statistics, after seeing your larger intervals
                  and use and elaborate filter in this central limit of each statistic
                  Having a use around 80% then 100
                  sweepstakes will hit 80 times
                  Inclível also in Lotus, pareto's law goes in which everything
                  is 80/20, lottery game is not like calculator that has close 100% a system that
                  has a 70% utilization of 80% this very good!!!, we focus on the rule, not the
                  exception (20%) to focus on rule in 80% of cases. because the exception prevents
                  us from close 100%
                  these
                  20% that are random tends to come for the bettor not against!!!
                  Alias haven't seen wheels using
                  statistical criteria of statistical limit games, to mount.

                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: July 28, 2011, 11:28 am - IP Logged

                    Jimmy

                    The reason they do so well is that most players rely on chance.  It goes back to the 10 marbles and the

                    paper bag experiment which is all one needs to understand chance, odds and probability.  It is almost

                    mechanical in nature and just like the lottery the results will follow the rules +/- some small deviation given

                    time.  You may select the correct marble 3 thime in a row but it was still a product of chance.  As you know I

                    don't think about the current draw in terms of numbers being drawn but as a pre existing set which contains

                    a number of different elements.

                    I also never look at the actual numbers until I fill in the playslips.  The gamming industry knows that

                    although some will win they know that many more will loose just like the selecting one marble from the

                    bag, they could expect one to loose 9 out of 10 attempts.  Here is what I think, mathematics is a product

                    of the conscious mind.  We have a need to make things fit togeather so that they make since.  We mow

                    the lawn so that all the grass is the same hight,  WHY?  When we play the lottery we try to make random

                    events fit into some sort of pattern that can be explained.  Probability is like a adjustable wrench that can

                    be adjusted to explain the outcome as chance because it does not rule out anything.   If someone hit 10

                    jackpots in a row it could still be said to be a product of chance.   Probability is great at providing information

                    about what one can expect overall but it has no predictive qualities.  Certainty does not exist where random

                    is involved but in pseudorandom events such as the lottery there are a few common rules that seem to hold

                    up that take some of the uncertainty out.  I agree that every set has the same exact odds of being drawn for

                    any one drawing but over time each set falls victim to the matrix.  If the matrix has a million sets then each set

                    has a one in a million chance of being drawn.   The combinations of varibles within a pseudorandom event can

                    out number the possible outcomes so some sets would have more than one set of variables which would give

                    them a greater chance of hitting then sets with fewer combinations of variables from which the same set could

                    be generated.  Lets say that you have 10 filters which all have a range of 0 to 5.  This would give you 60466176

                    possible ways to set the 10 filters.  Lets say that you are playing a 5-39 matrix which has 575757 sets.  this would

                    mean that 59890419 of the 10 filter setups would not produce any sets for obvious reasons however the drawing

                    process could produce a set for each which would mean there are many ways the balls could bounce around and

                    still produce the same set.   However given the almost unlimited variable values within a hopper full of balls being

                    bounced around would the odds for each set still be the same as the odds given for the matrix.   This may seem a

                    little foolish because there are only so many sets in the matrix from which one set will be drawn regardless of the

                    total of variable values inside the hopper.   Random gets a little weird at this level because it seems that there is

                    more than one set of variables for each set and if each set does not require the same variables to be drawn then

                    would this give some sets either a greater or lesser chance than others.  I am not saying this would help someone

                    pick the next 5 winning numbers, just put it out there to chew on.   Maybe someday I will post some of what I call

                    the good stuff but not at this time because I can't defend my point of view.   Random vs Random kind of like folding

                    space to get from point A to point B without having to put in the miles.

                    RLBed

                    "When we play the lottery we try to make random events fit into some sort of pattern that can be explained."

                    I don't. 

                    "...but in pseudorandom events such as the lottery..."

                    Pseudorandom events are sequences that are repeatable (on demand) by re-application of the mathematical algorithm used to produce them.  The lotteries I play which use mechanical ball machines do not produce repeatable sequences.

                    It appears you didn't take a look back as I suggested.

                    http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/219401/1808106


                      RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                      United States
                      Member #59354
                      March 13, 2008
                      3962 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: July 29, 2011, 2:19 am - IP Logged

                      jimmy

                      QP's are Pseudorandom. 

                      Ball droppers are also pseudorandom because if everything could be repeated then the same set would

                      would be drawn. 

                      RL

                      Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                      I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                      they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                      USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                        US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                        United States
                        Member #59354
                        March 13, 2008
                        3962 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: July 29, 2011, 2:59 am - IP Logged
                        Hello.
                        Randonic, ok, elaborate
                        each statistic has a central stripe of greater probability
                        And exiting in the sweepstakes in 80%
                        of cases, then prepare various statistics, after seeing your larger intervals
                        and use and elaborate filter in this central limit of each statistic
                        Having a use around 80% then 100
                        sweepstakes will hit 80 times
                        Inclível also in Lotus, pareto's law goes in which everything
                        is 80/20, lottery game is not like calculator that has close 100% a system that
                        has a 70% utilization of 80% this very good!!!, we focus on the rule, not the
                        exception (20%) to focus on rule in 80% of cases. because the exception prevents
                        us from close 100%
                        these
                        20% that are random tends to come for the bettor not against!!!
                        Alias haven't seen wheels using
                        statistical criteria of statistical limit games, to mount.

                        Dr san

                        The 80/20 rule is a fact of life but concerning the lottery which 20% do you focus on.

                        While 80% of my settings are easy it's the remaining 20% that make or break the bank.

                        You won't get any argument from me in general about the 80/20 rule but do you think

                        this is the best we can do.  I like to think I am running at the 90/10 or 95/5 level because

                        for most draws If I had changed 2 settings I could of hit a JP or at least a 4of5.  This has

                        became a wall of sorts which I can't seem to scale but I can't miss by 2 settings forever. 

                        20% of my plays earn the most while 80% cost the most and I often gauge my play by this.

                        How do you use this to help you win or are you saying that we must just accept that 20%

                        will always be random no matter how or what we use to select.

                         

                        RL

                        Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                        I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                        they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                        USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                          US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                          Avatar
                          bgonçalves
                          Brasil
                          Member #92564
                          June 9, 2010
                          2122 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: July 29, 2011, 8:21 am - IP Logged
                          hello rl
                          randonic = Pareto's law, also known as the 80/20 Principle shows that 80% of the
                          sweepstakes has the same 20% of numbers.
                          Know the Pareto Law and apply it with other data can make you
                          discover how to win the lottery
                            JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

                            United States
                            Member #5599
                            July 13, 2004
                            1184 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: July 29, 2011, 2:00 pm - IP Logged
                            hello rl
                            randonic = Pareto's law, also known as the 80/20 Principle shows that 80% of the
                            sweepstakes has the same 20% of numbers.
                            Know the Pareto Law and apply it with other data can make you
                            discover how to win the lottery

                            FYI

                              I tested the law on one of the lottery games and found it had to be modified to be useful.

                              The inital result, using the top 20%, was that there was only 1 win out of 523 games using all top 20% numbers.

                              However, when I changed the pecentage to 27% I found 90 wins out of 523.

                            You are a slave to the choices you have made.  jk

                            Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                              United States
                              Member #59354
                              March 13, 2008
                              3962 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: July 30, 2011, 12:33 am - IP Logged

                              dr san

                              I know the 80/20 rule inside and out and understand what you say but what I am saying is that

                              you still have to pick the last 20%.  It's this last 20 that blocks the way.  Even with my software

                              80% of the settings are easy to hit but the other 20% are not.  This 20% is responsable for 80%

                              of my winnings.   Pareto's law is a basic rule and I think most already know or have heard of it. 

                              What I need is how to select the last 20. 

                               

                              jking

                              As a general rule if you are using 27% of the numbers then 27% of the draws will come from those

                              numbers over time.  Looking at my 5-39 using your results then 90 hits in 523 draws 90/523= 17%. 

                              The average hits for any group that contains 27% of the 39 numbers should be .27*523=141.

                              I think to test this one would need to test it draw by draw.  If for my 5-39 I found that 80% of the 

                              numbers came from the top 30% I would wheel the top 12 numbers every day for a 4of5 which can

                              be covered in 123 lines using covermaster.   This could provide a nice profit and  allow me to keep

                              playing until I hit big.  I don't think this is possible and the rule fails for lottery.  I will write a small

                              program and test the results for a day to day play and see how it does.  I think random will win this

                              one also.  I do find it a little funny that while I expect the 80/20 rule to fail selecting numbers that it

                              holds true for my filter settings.  This is why I don't look at numbers, while the numbers seem to have

                              no order the secondary data does.  Just my thoughts.

                              RL

                              Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

                              I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

                              they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

                              USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

                                US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  

                                 
                                Page 2 of 44