Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 4, 2016, 5:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Mathematics and the Lottery

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

Page 32 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 )

RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3962 Posts
Offline
Posted: May 6, 2014, 7:34 pm - IP Logged

bobby623

rely on interpretation of TRENDS  to make choices on which digits have best chance of winning.
No predictions, just solid, educated guesswork..

I Agree!

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  

    lotterybraker's avatar - pyramid
    mississippi
    United States
    Member #34478
    March 3, 2006
    5903 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: May 6, 2014, 7:41 pm - IP Logged

    bobby623

    rely on interpretation of TRENDS  to make choices on which digits have best chance of winning.
    No predictions, just solid, educated guesswork..

    I Agree!

    HELLO RL...I have spent almost HALF MY LIFE trying everything I can think OF JUST TO ELIMINATE THE GUESS WORK...hahahaha..but I DO USE THE numbers themselves though...especially the past....everything I do and can do DOES ONETHING...it USES RANDOM AGAINST ITSELF...or if you prefer..I take a field that is already running...or I will CREATE ONE that I may or may not like better and work in it until  RANDOM changes out the PATTERN...TREND...the RUN...or whatever you want to refer to it as....

    "Attention all Mathematicians: Check your degree at the door because when it comes to whole numbers you are the Amateur"

      JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

      United States
      Member #5599
      July 13, 2004
      1184 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: May 7, 2014, 12:24 am - IP Logged

      Hi,

        I am seeing a lot of traditional arguments being posted. Even though all of us would like to and work for the general solution to pick winning numbers, none of us have. Therefore, all methods and attempts that have a solid mathematical foundation should be respected. A lot of work, time, and experience has been put in by quite a few of the members. You don't always have to agree with someone approach to learn from it. I would also remind you that in the big jackpot games, you only have to hit it once for a life changing event.

        As for me, I would say that a winning system should be based on probabilities more/rather than possibilities. Finite randomness does have rules. Occurrences over a time frame and over comparative time frames to name a couple. Those alone can reduce the degree of uncertainty.

       

       To take things a step further I would also refer you to...

      http://phys.org/news/2014-04-uncertainty-rigorous-heisenberg-famous-principle.html

      "Quantum mechanics requires that we devise approximate joint measurements because the theory itself prohibits simultaneous ideal measurements of position and momentum—and this is the content of the uncertainty relation proven by the researchers."

      Change that to position and time....you get the idea

      Anyway, thanks for the input and comments. Best of luck.

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

      Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.


        United States
        Member #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 7, 2014, 2:10 am - IP Logged

        General comment

        I've been reading these kinds of posts on random, etc, for 10 years.
        You would think there would be a consensus the majority would accept, but, egos seem to getting in the way.
        If there is a method or system that will accurately and consistently predict the next winning combination, I doubt the owner
        could keep it secret.
        If the owner is macho selfish and using the method to win lots of money, I doubt he/she could get away with it for very long.
        I've read many jackpot winner stories and never felt there was a connection with other wins.
        Of course, the person could be a small time player and be satisfied with lower state prizes.
        But, human nature being what it is, keeping that kind of secret for very long is doubtful.

        Now we have a company called Steve Player that seems to have luck playing the Daily Games.
        I've gotten offers in the mail that show graphics of winning Pick 4 tickets.
        There is no doubt the company has a winning method, but not one that wins all the time, or one average players could afford.
        If I had the deep pockets Steve Player has, I'd be playing hundreds of combinations in every drawing.
        I'd win often, but, I wouldn't reveal how much I spent.

        It would surely would be appreciated if all the math-heads here would get off the random subject and start talking
        about alternative playing methods, like substitution.
        I'm not talking about the manifold methods one can find in the Systems, Pick 3 and Pick 4 forums. These have been tried for 40 plus years
        and not a one can pass a test because they all have one major fault - the owner wants everyone to believe that he/she has found the
        secret and can predict winning combinations right up to the last minute before a drawing takes place.
        Bullcrap!!
        The only methods that, in my opinion, have a chance are the ones that study the history of the game, define it's progress with useful tracking charts
        and rely on interpretation of TRENDS  to make choices on which digits have best chance of winning.
        No predictions, just solid, educated guesswork.

        bobby623,

        You said, "You would think there would be a consensus the majority would accept [about randomness],,,"

        In fact, there is such a consensus.  Unfortunately, the majority don't seem to be well represented among the posters at LP.

        "There is no doubt the company [Steve Player] has a winning method,,,"

        Are you really sure about that?  You mean you can't think of even one of the several simple explanations for how one person or company can end up with many winning tickets that they did not purchase from a lottery outlet?  Ask around and see how hard [or easy] it is to find someone willing to cash winning tickets for a $FEE.  Some of the clients of these people even include drug dealers needing a laundry for their cash.  Google "math detective lottery".

        "It would surely would be appreciated if all the math-heads here would get off the random subject and start talking
        about alternative playing methods, like substitution."

        How can you expect "math-heads" to pursue such methods when they know they are a waste of time?

        "No predictions, just solid, educated guesswork."

        Educated Guesswork!

        That says it all!

        --Jimmy4164

        P.S.

        JKING,

        "Change that to position and time....you get the idea"

        Interchange Time and Momentum - Are you sure?

          SergeM's avatar - slow icon.png
          Economy class
          Belgium
          Member #123700
          February 27, 2012
          4035 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 7, 2014, 5:01 am - IP Logged

          Hi,

            I am seeing a lot of traditional arguments being posted. Even though all of us would like to and work for the general solution to pick winning numbers, none of us have. Therefore, all methods and attempts that have a solid mathematical foundation should be respected. A lot of work, time, and experience has been put in by quite a few of the members. You don't always have to agree with someone approach to learn from it. I would also remind you that in the big jackpot games, you only have to hit it once for a life changing event.

            As for me, I would say that a winning system should be based on probabilities more/rather than possibilities. Finite randomness does have rules. Occurrences over a time frame and over comparative time frames to name a couple. Those alone can reduce the degree of uncertainty.

           

           To take things a step further I would also refer you to...

          http://phys.org/news/2014-04-uncertainty-rigorous-heisenberg-famous-principle.html

          "Quantum mechanics requires that we devise approximate joint measurements because the theory itself prohibits simultaneous ideal measurements of position and momentum—and this is the content of the uncertainty relation proven by the researchers."

          Change that to position and time....you get the idea

          Anyway, thanks for the input and comments. Best of luck.

          10 coin flips, p(head) = .5

          If you flip a coin 10 times, this can produce 0 to ten times head. Your probability is true for how many times?
          In which order are the results coming? What deviation of the outcome is tolerable?

          If you feel that you control the outcome, you can throw the coin in a bowl two meters away from you.

          The rules of the guess game. You pay one dollar for guessing a flip. When you are right you get 1 dollar back.
          After hundred flips you might have half of your money left. Now let us say that you can skip the betting, what is the result?
          What would be the result when you have to bet one dollar every flip. What is the outcome? Is the outcome the same for a year if you flip 100 times a day? ...

          In binary we get for three flips:

          111
          110
          101
          100
          011
          010
          001
          000

            JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

            United States
            Member #5599
            July 13, 2004
            1184 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: May 7, 2014, 10:59 am - IP Logged

            10 coin flips, p(head) = .5

            If you flip a coin 10 times, this can produce 0 to ten times head. Your probability is true for how many times?
            In which order are the results coming? What deviation of the outcome is tolerable?

            If you feel that you control the outcome, you can throw the coin in a bowl two meters away from you.

            The rules of the guess game. You pay one dollar for guessing a flip. When you are right you get 1 dollar back.
            After hundred flips you might have half of your money left. Now let us say that you can skip the betting, what is the result?
            What would be the result when you have to bet one dollar every flip. What is the outcome? Is the outcome the same for a year if you flip 100 times a day? ...

            In binary we get for three flips:

            111
            110
            101
            100
            011
            010
            001
            000

            Hi Serge,

               Why do work with samples and logic that don't work or even give a hint of what might work?

               I'll bet you could be a lot more constructive than that.

               It's almost like you've defeated yourself from creating a winning strategy right from the start.

               Of course, given the subject, it is always easier to say why you can't rather than finding a method of why you can.

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

            Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.

              bobby623's avatar - abstract
              San Angelo, Texas
              United States
              Member #1097
              January 31, 2003
              1394 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: May 7, 2014, 11:25 am - IP Logged

              Jimmy

              How can you expect "math-heads" to pursue such methods when they know they are a waste of time?

              Think about this:

              1. Assign each lottery digit a substitute digit in a way that generates three Major groups of substitute digits.
              For example:
              Major A - Substitute digits 1, 2 and 3.
              Major B - Substitute digits 4, 5 and 6.
              Major C - Substitute digits 7, 8, 9, 0.

              (The only record of lottery digit history is the pairs)

              Develop tracking charts that plot the progress of the digits in each group over a period of time, with a method
              to continue the process ad infinite.

              Develop a method to accurately map the trends lines over a period of time.

              Develop alphabetical and numerical structures for the game being analyzed.

              The goal (not prediction) is to choose one or two digits from each Major group required by
              the structure being constructed. There are methods for this procedure. Usually, a minimum of
              3 combinations, including a lottery double).

              Play the 'hand-made' combinations one time.

              Question: What does this do to your notions about not using lottery history for anything?
              All the customary ideas about odds and percentages vanish.
              All play choices would indeed be made according to one's interpretation of TRENDS, or educated guesswork, and luck.
              Be nice if you experts would chew on a substitution bone, rather than methods and mathematics that haven't produced
              anything worthwhile for 40-plus years.

                RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                mid-Ohio
                United States
                Member #9
                March 24, 2001
                19817 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: May 7, 2014, 11:34 am - IP Logged

                I'm sure there are members out there that are working on systems for making some pretty good guesses about the next winning combination but could not pass the standard test that those who are doing nothing request of predicting the next winner in the game they are playing.  Players expecting someone else efforts to make them a winner are wasting their asking other to prove something to them.

                Players only share what they think others can improve on, if they think they got something that's working then they are more likely to keep it to themselves.

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

                  bobby623's avatar - abstract
                  San Angelo, Texas
                  United States
                  Member #1097
                  January 31, 2003
                  1394 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: May 7, 2014, 12:33 pm - IP Logged

                  I'm sure there are members out there that are working on systems for making some pretty good guesses about the next winning combination but could not pass the standard test that those who are doing nothing request of predicting the next winner in the game they are playing.  Players expecting someone else efforts to make them a winner are wasting their asking other to prove something to them.

                  Players only share what they think others can improve on, if they think they got something that's working then they are more likely to keep it to themselves.

                  RJOH

                  Secrecy has a role in just about everything.
                  But, when it comes to lottery play based on TRENDS, one has to have pretty solid data base.
                  As far as I know, I'm the only regular here who uses substitution methods and applicable trends to choose digits to play.
                  I win some, I lose more.
                  What I'm attempting to do here is create some interest among folks who have tons of experience in programming, analysis
                  and other areas that would lessen the workload, but improve the guesswork.
                  I've been around a long time and I'm not confident that anyone here will get involved. It's a whole lot easier to just
                  say it  won't work, and continue to be critical of anything and everything anyone has to offer.
                  I'm not looking trying to get someone to prove my methods. I know they work.
                  I just need some ideas on how to make the guesswork more productive.
                  An aside - Texas now has 4 drawings per day.
                  This doubled the workload for Paper/Pencil methods.
                  I tried to keep up but eventually got overwhelmed.
                  As an alternative, I'm limiting my plays to one Pick 3 (Day) and one Daily 4 (Eve).
                  As a result, I had to start over with new data base for each game.
                  Data for over 300 drawings went down the tubes.
                  If I were a programmer, I would have automated some of the data bases, but I'm just an old timer with lot of free time and an interest in lottery play.
                  My thoughts, I guess you could call them ' LP dreams', are that if someone with the proper skills would
                  see the advantage of substitution and climb aboard.
                  But, alas!, I'm running into the same old 'crap' being posted by the ton everyday.
                  What ever happened to taking a chance?


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: May 7, 2014, 2:03 pm - IP Logged

                    I'm sure there are members out there that are working on systems for making some pretty good guesses about the next winning combination but could not pass the standard test that those who are doing nothing request of predicting the next winner in the game they are playing.  Players expecting someone else efforts to make them a winner are wasting their asking other to prove something to them.

                    Players only share what they think others can improve on, if they think they got something that's working then they are more likely to keep it to themselves.

                    RJOh,

                    Either:

                    1)  You truly believe so strongly that there exists a way to beat the lottery that you suspect I'm fishing here for a system that works...

                    2)  Or, you are just another manifestation of the person here with the strongest vested interest in maintaining doubt about the possibility of predicting future draws.

                    Others must decide.

                    And I notice bobby623 ignored my last post other than to use it to ramble on about "substitution," which is an absurd idea.

                    --Jimmy4164

                      SergeM's avatar - slow icon.png
                      Economy class
                      Belgium
                      Member #123700
                      February 27, 2012
                      4035 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: May 7, 2014, 2:19 pm - IP Logged

                      Hi Serge,

                         Why do work with samples and logic that don't work or even give a hint of what might work?

                         I'll bet you could be a lot more constructive than that.

                         It's almost like you've defeated yourself from creating a winning strategy right from the start.

                         Of course, given the subject, it is always easier to say why you can't rather than finding a method of why you can.

                      I don't intend to show my little programs that analyse drawings of lotto or pick 3. The idea is to be constructive and critical with mathematical knowledge.

                      If you think that you have something on the binary outcomes of coin flips, then respond to that! I don't make it difficult to you. What do you suggest?

                      It is not easy to say that you cannot win when you are a player.

                        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                        United States
                        Member #59354
                        March 13, 2008
                        3962 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: May 7, 2014, 2:58 pm - IP Logged

                        There is a ton of good stuff here at LP but it's fragmented and scattered all over.  Math is a good tool for

                        testing ideas but don't expect it to hand you the winning numbers.  Most serious system players are not

                        going to just give away that which they have worked on for years.   I personally don't believe in prediction

                        but that does not stop me from working on it because I could be wrong.  As a matter of fact I could be

                        wrong about a lot of stuff but I am the kind of guy that likes to explore.  Textbooks are fine for learning the

                        basics but I have never seen a "Everything you should know" book that was worth the paper it was written

                        on.   Math will continue to adapt as needed to solve new problems, we always hear about the Einstein's but

                        there are thousands that devoted their entire life and added nothing.   Most system players glean the edges

                        looking for leftovers that others might have missed.  Skeptics IMHO are maybe the lowest form of life on the

                        planet and should be ignored.  I don't think they will ever go away and to borrow a phrase from the movie

                        The outlaw Josey Wales,  "buzzards got to eat too."  There are a lot of people here at LP that never post 

                        anything but scour the pages looking for information, some of which are sharks with deep pockets.  While

                        a break even system may not look to inviting to a average player someone with deep pockets may see it

                        as a gold mine.  What if you knew that you could spend five to ten million and get most if not all your money

                        back without a JP win.   A break even system will earn millions in profits over time. 

                         

                        Just something to consider.

                        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  

                          RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                          mid-Ohio
                          United States
                          Member #9
                          March 24, 2001
                          19817 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: May 7, 2014, 6:22 pm - IP Logged

                          RJOH

                          Secrecy has a role in just about everything.
                          But, when it comes to lottery play based on TRENDS, one has to have pretty solid data base.
                          As far as I know, I'm the only regular here who uses substitution methods and applicable trends to choose digits to play.
                          I win some, I lose more.
                          What I'm attempting to do here is create some interest among folks who have tons of experience in programming, analysis
                          and other areas that would lessen the workload, but improve the guesswork.
                          I've been around a long time and I'm not confident that anyone here will get involved. It's a whole lot easier to just
                          say it  won't work, and continue to be critical of anything and everything anyone has to offer.
                          I'm not looking trying to get someone to prove my methods. I know they work.
                          I just need some ideas on how to make the guesswork more productive.
                          An aside - Texas now has 4 drawings per day.
                          This doubled the workload for Paper/Pencil methods.
                          I tried to keep up but eventually got overwhelmed.
                          As an alternative, I'm limiting my plays to one Pick 3 (Day) and one Daily 4 (Eve).
                          As a result, I had to start over with new data base for each game.
                          Data for over 300 drawings went down the tubes.
                          If I were a programmer, I would have automated some of the data bases, but I'm just an old timer with lot of free time and an interest in lottery play.
                          My thoughts, I guess you could call them ' LP dreams', are that if someone with the proper skills would
                          see the advantage of substitution and climb aboard.
                          But, alas!, I'm running into the same old 'crap' being posted by the ton everyday.
                          What ever happened to taking a chance?

                          "If I were a programmer, I would have automated some of the data bases, but I'm just an old timer with lot of free time and an interest in lottery play."

                          I'm an old timer too and what I knew about programming using GWBasic is worthless now that Microsoft stopped supporting Windows XP and I have to adjust by learning a newer version of Basic that works with newer versions of Windows.  My point is programming is evolving and so are programmers who wish to keep up. 

                          If you aren't a programmer it's because you never took the time to learn and never will be one until you do regardless of your age.  Basic was fairly easy to learn when I was younger but now that I'm older and have more time to waste I should be OK once I decide which one to relearn.  I will never learn to write programs for a living but I don't need to if all I need to do is manage my lottery data.

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

                            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                            mid-Ohio
                            United States
                            Member #9
                            March 24, 2001
                            19817 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: May 7, 2014, 7:46 pm - IP Logged

                            RJOh,

                            Either:

                            1)  You truly believe so strongly that there exists a way to beat the lottery that you suspect I'm fishing here for a system that works...

                            2)  Or, you are just another manifestation of the person here with the strongest vested interest in maintaining doubt about the possibility of predicting future draws.

                            Others must decide.

                            And I notice bobby623 ignored my last post other than to use it to ramble on about "substitution," which is an absurd idea.

                            --Jimmy4164

                            "Either:

                            1) You truly believe so strongly that there exists a way to beat the lottery that you suspect I'm fishing here for a system that works..."

                            Actually I hadn't thought about you when I wrote may response, I was addressing the more typical responder in the math forum.  From your posts in other thread I know you seek to enlighten other lottery players who think that some thought about the combinations they play might given them an edge, but such players aren't interested in what you think.

                            Since you are posting in the math forum I assume you're fishing for ideas like the rest of us, but like I said before you're wasting your time.

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


                              United States
                              Member #93947
                              July 10, 2010
                              2180 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: May 7, 2014, 9:40 pm - IP Logged

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC said above,

                              "Most serious system players are not going to just give away that which they have worked on for years."

                              This raises a serious question.  If he subscribes to what he said here, WHY would he go to such great lengths, sometimes going into excrutiating detail, trying to teach people how his "system" works, how to use it, and how they can expect to profit from it?  WHY?

                              WHY?

                              --Jimmy4164

                                 
                                Page 32 of 44