United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: July 25, 2011, 3:56 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by KY Floyd on July 25, 2011

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.

United States Member #5599 July 13, 2004 1203 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 occasionally find an acorn.

There is no elevator to success, you will have to take the stairs.

mid-Ohio United States Member #9 March 24, 2001 20207 Posts Offline

Posted: July 26, 2011, 9:56 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by JKING on July 25, 2011

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 winning ones *

United States Member #59354 March 13, 2008 4772 Posts Offline

Posted: July 27, 2011, 4:51 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by JKING on July 25, 2011

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

Kentucky United States Member #32652 February 14, 2006 7721 Posts Offline

Posted: July 27, 2011, 2:56 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on July 27, 2011

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

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on July 27, 2011

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 drawingone 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!

United States Member #59354 March 13, 2008 4772 Posts Offline

Posted: July 28, 2011, 3:30 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on July 27, 2011

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 drawingone 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!

bgonÃ§alves Brasil Member #92564 June 9, 2010 2401 Posts Online

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

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on July 28, 2011

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.

RL

"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.

United States Member #59354 March 13, 2008 4772 Posts Offline

Posted: July 29, 2011, 2:59 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dr san on July 28, 2011

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.

bgonÃ§alves Brasil Member #92564 June 9, 2010 2401 Posts Online

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

United States Member #5599 July 13, 2004 1203 Posts Offline

Posted: July 29, 2011, 2:00 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dr san on July 29, 2011

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 occasionally find an acorn.

There is no elevator to success, you will have to take the stairs.