Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 20, 2017, 4:53 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Mathematics and the Lottery

682 replies. Last post 16 days ago by Sunglasses.

Page 4 of 46
4.717
PrintE-mailLink

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

Yes-It's all in the math books. [ 232 ]  [43.28%]
No-Anew math for will have to be created. [ 78 ]  [14.55%]
Math won't beat the lottery regularly. [ 226 ]  [42.16%]
Total Valid Votes [ 536 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 54 ]  

Guests cannot vote  ( Log In | Register )

Avatar
bgonçalves
Brasil
Member #92564
June 9, 2010
2134 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 6, 2011, 6:21 am - IP Logged
Hello,
jking, ok, the forum was created for this even, to discuss in order from bottom
to top, i.e. improve systems, jking, have you tried making your Lottery,
vertically of each independent position, then have it both ways, by all and
separate position vertically because it seems that when you have a sistem of
groups and see the endings (last digit) of each sample number 12 number 2 is the
termiançao
, because the
type of front goes from 0 to 3 ok, so the study is in groups and 3rd endings (0,
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.9).
This law of 80/20 or close, after well structure can be good
for wheels, linked to sweepstakes,
Example to create with all lottery numbers (39) set a limit in
each position (Umaña track) maximum 3 numbers of previous results, you can
choose which termination goes in each bin example 1st position has these endings
(2, 4, 5, 9) and thus with the other positions, then the condition of wheel hit
is from within groups, endings, and focus on taking
, will hit 80% of the time, because it seems
at the very problem has the solution!
Thanks jking
    Avatar
    bgonçalves
    Brasil
    Member #92564
    June 9, 2010
    2134 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 6, 2011, 10:46 am - IP Logged
    Hello,
    jking, ok, the forum was created for this even, to discuss in order from bottom
    to top, i.e. improve systems, jking, have you tried making your Lottery,
    vertically of each independent position, then have it both ways, by all and
    separate position vertically because it seems that when you have a sistem of
    groups and see the endings (last digit) of each sample number 12 number 2 is the
    termiançao
    , because the
    type of front goes from 0 to 3 ok, so the study is in groups and 3rd endings (0,
    1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.9).
    This law of 80/20 or close, after well structure can be good
    for wheels, linked to sweepstakes,
    Example to create with all lottery numbers (39) set a limit in
    each position (Umaña track) maximum 3 numbers of previous results, you can
    choose which termination goes in each bin example 1st position has these endings
    (2, 4, 5, 9) and thus with the other positions, then the condition of wheel hit
    is from within groups, endings, and focus on taking
    , will hit 80% of the time, because it seems
    at the very problem has the solution!
    Thanks jking

    hello, jking, link=http://chandoo.org/wp/2009/09/02/pareto-charts/


      United States
      Member #75358
      June 1, 2009
      5345 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 6, 2011, 7:06 pm - IP Logged

      If you click here you will be able to surmise how I voted...

      http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html

      (Be sure to click on "Who is the Wizard of Odds."

      Tell the person I know in a certain state, which I won't mention, that has made almost $700,000 bucks, If not more by now in the P-4 game playing online, that the Gambler's fallacy is true.  The catch is that he does play a lot of numbers for each draw. One of his strategies is to play the remainder of the combos not shown straight yet in his state. There are about 6,300  combos that fit that category. Additionally, he'll play about 2 to 4 other smaller groups of numbers that were generated by a few programs. Most of the time when a win occurs, he wins straight multiple times because the winning number will appear not only in the large pool of 6,300, but also in the smaller pools mentioned earlier.

        Avatar
        bgonçalves
        Brasil
        Member #92564
        June 9, 2010
        2134 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 6, 2011, 8:09 pm - IP Logged
        Hello,
        jking.
        Example of a
        6/49 Lottery there is more than 13 million combinations, all combinations have
        the same chance to leave, but 80% of these conbinçoes (13 million) will come out
        only 20% of the time, the 20% larger combinations odds chances fell and 80% of
        the sweepstakes, I wonder what the 20% of the 13 million conbinaçoes of those of
        greater sao? track each student's Bell
        ,?
          JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

          United States
          Member #5599
          July 13, 2004
          1192 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 7, 2011, 12:32 am - IP Logged

          Hi,

            I am already doing a lot of what your talking about already, except for the 3 numbers of previous results.. Thanks for the link on pareto charts. It reminds me of all the pareto charts I generated in aerospace industry.

            I'm still tweeking the 80/20 for the lottery. It is appearing that the optimum value for the California Fantasy 5 is 24% and for Mega Millions it is 23%. I will incorporate into one of my systems and see how it plays. I will to continue working on the 80/20 rule for awhile before picking up any new projects.

            Do you have mathematical references when it comes to occurrance growth patterns over time?

           Or, given a range of lottery numbers(say 1 to 39), the growth patterns till all 39 numbers are picked (fill in rates)?

           Again, thanks for your comments.

          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: August 7, 2011, 12:37 am - IP Logged

            Tell the person I know in a certain state, which I won't mention, that has made almost $700,000 bucks, If not more by now in the P-4 game playing online, that the Gambler's fallacy is true.  The catch is that he does play a lot of numbers for each draw. One of his strategies is to play the remainder of the combos not shown straight yet in his state. There are about 6,300  combos that fit that category. Additionally, he'll play about 2 to 4 other smaller groups of numbers that were generated by a few programs. Most of the time when a win occurs, he wins straight multiple times because the winning number will appear not only in the large pool of 6,300, but also in the smaller pools mentioned earlier.

            joker17,

            This was discussed in depth in my two threads on Backtesting and Simulating.  If I convinced anyone that they can't control their fortunes while betting on random processes, they didn't post anything to indicate that I did.  If you go back to the beginning of the "Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems" thread and study it, perhaps you'll begin to see what Michael Bluejay and I are trying to explain.  A graphical explanation of what you and your friend are observing can be seen here in this post:

            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/229947/2032391

            The Gambler's Fallacy is very sedutive.  No one is saying there will NOT be winners.  There are and will be MANY winners!  Unfortunately, there are MORE losers!  When you observe people winning on multiple draws, sometimes over long periods of time, what you are seeing is what is POSSIBLE through RANDOMNESS.  If you are gambling online where the house only has a 10% edge (as opposed to the 50% edge in the lottery) you will see even more winners!

            The KEY thing to understand about this is that no matter what you observe about lottery systems, outcomes are the result of randomness, not the completion of a pattern or the filling of a shortage of a particular number in a sequence.  All you can accomplish with systems is exercise some control over the DISTRIBUTION of your winnings, but NOT the long term amount.

            There are people who will never be able to comprehend that natural selection has random components that over LONG periods of time can result in the evolution of a species.  Likewise, there are people who will never understand how randomness can produce beautiful bell shaped curves from the results of betting on random events.

            Given some of your posts that I've read, I really think you would enjoy the book discussed here.  Give it a shot...

            http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1727449

            --Jimmy4164


              United States
              Member #75358
              June 1, 2009
              5345 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 7, 2011, 10:12 am - IP Logged

              joker17,

              This was discussed in depth in my two threads on Backtesting and Simulating.  If I convinced anyone that they can't control their fortunes while betting on random processes, they didn't post anything to indicate that I did.  If you go back to the beginning of the "Backtesting and Simulating Lottery Systems" thread and study it, perhaps you'll begin to see what Michael Bluejay and I are trying to explain.  A graphical explanation of what you and your friend are observing can be seen here in this post:

              http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/229947/2032391

              The Gambler's Fallacy is very sedutive.  No one is saying there will NOT be winners.  There are and will be MANY winners!  Unfortunately, there are MORE losers!  When you observe people winning on multiple draws, sometimes over long periods of time, what you are seeing is what is POSSIBLE through RANDOMNESS.  If you are gambling online where the house only has a 10% edge (as opposed to the 50% edge in the lottery) you will see even more winners!

              The KEY thing to understand about this is that no matter what you observe about lottery systems, outcomes are the result of randomness, not the completion of a pattern or the filling of a shortage of a particular number in a sequence.  All you can accomplish with systems is exercise some control over the DISTRIBUTION of your winnings, but NOT the long term amount.

              There are people who will never be able to comprehend that natural selection has random components that over LONG periods of time can result in the evolution of a species.  Likewise, there are people who will never understand how randomness can produce beautiful bell shaped curves from the results of betting on random events.

              Given some of your posts that I've read, I really think you would enjoy the book discussed here.  Give it a shot...

              http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/218174/1727449

              --Jimmy4164

              You mean I have to buy the book?...

              Maybe one day I'll buy it and read it. But nevertheless, whatever this guy wrote in the book will not deter me from believing that there are patterns one can see, and given enough time, one can hone their skills to better predict the outcome.

              I have scanned the "Koycerin" wagering method and can send it to you to read. He's a math professor. I know you and I discussed this earlier, but I only posted the first few pages.  My point of the coin flip by Koycerin was to show that no matter how much you believe that the 11th time the coin still has a 50/50 chance, WHAT WOULD YOU BET ON?...That was the crux of that paticular point to which you never responded. But there is a lot more to what he is saying.

               He blows the conventional random theories out of the water. Theories that have brainwashed students at Universities around the world for many many years.

              What he calls RND, or Random Number Displacement occurs in every event that has a 50/50 chance, not just in gambling , but any event. According to Koycerin, there are professional gamblers who go around the casinos looking for RNDs to occur, then look for pattern verification, and bet accordingly, making a very nice living in the process.

              I was trying to use it myself, but the pattern verification became too confusing, leading me to believe a computer program would work much smoother.

              If you'd like to read it let me know. I can send it to you in attachments.


                United States
                Member #93947
                July 10, 2010
                2180 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 7, 2011, 1:33 pm - IP Logged

                You mean I have to buy the book?...

                Maybe one day I'll buy it and read it. But nevertheless, whatever this guy wrote in the book will not deter me from believing that there are patterns one can see, and given enough time, one can hone their skills to better predict the outcome.

                I have scanned the "Koycerin" wagering method and can send it to you to read. He's a math professor. I know you and I discussed this earlier, but I only posted the first few pages.  My point of the coin flip by Koycerin was to show that no matter how much you believe that the 11th time the coin still has a 50/50 chance, WHAT WOULD YOU BET ON?...That was the crux of that paticular point to which you never responded. But there is a lot more to what he is saying.

                 He blows the conventional random theories out of the water. Theories that have brainwashed students at Universities around the world for many many years.

                What he calls RND, or Random Number Displacement occurs in every event that has a 50/50 chance, not just in gambling , but any event. According to Koycerin, there are professional gamblers who go around the casinos looking for RNDs to occur, then look for pattern verification, and bet accordingly, making a very nice living in the process.

                I was trying to use it myself, but the pattern verification became too confusing, leading me to believe a computer program would work much smoother.

                If you'd like to read it let me know. I can send it to you in attachments.

                "You mean I have to buy the book?..." 

                It's in my local library and Barnes & Noble has comfy chairs where you can preview it.           

                "...show that no matter how much you believe that the 11th time the coin still has a 50/50 chance, WHAT WOULD YOU BET ON?..."

                I would flip a different coin, or go to  http://random.org  Smiley

                "He(Koycerin) blows the conventional random theories out of the water."

                If this is true, the scientific community has yet to hear of it since "Koycerin" doesn't appear anywhere in the literature, as far as I can tell.


                  United States
                  Member #75358
                  June 1, 2009
                  5345 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 7, 2011, 2:01 pm - IP Logged

                  "You mean I have to buy the book?..." 

                  It's in my local library and Barnes & Noble has comfy chairs where you can preview it.           

                  "...show that no matter how much you believe that the 11th time the coin still has a 50/50 chance, WHAT WOULD YOU BET ON?..."

                  I would flip a different coin, or go to  http://random.org  Smiley

                  "He(Koycerin) blows the conventional random theories out of the water."

                  If this is true, the scientific community has yet to hear of it since "Koycerin" doesn't appear anywhere in the literature, as far as I can tell.

                  Ok, let me put it another way. You're at a roulette table and it's been red for 15 times in a row. What would you bet for the 16th spin? Are you going to tell me that it still has a 50/50 chance, and bet red, or bet black?

                  Koycerin states that only the very first bet at the beginning of a cycle will truly be 50/50. If we take the coin example as head or tails, and the first toss was heads, second was heads, it will always tends to correct itself by striving to blance itself out. Regardless of whether it's 10 times in a row, what would the bettor choose, heads or tails? You can have all the theories in the world but the when you factor in the human factor into the equation, the most logical bet would be tails.

                   

                  koy

                  koy

                  koy

                  koy


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 7, 2011, 2:18 pm - IP Logged

                    Ok, let me put it another way. You're at a roulette table and it's been red for 15 times in a row. What would you bet for the 16th spin? Are you going to tell me that it still has a 50/50 chance, and bet red, or bet black?

                    Koycerin states that only the very first bet at the beginning of a cycle will truly be 50/50. If we take the coin example as head or tails, and the first toss was heads, second was heads, it will always tends to correct itself by striving to blance itself out. Regardless of whether it's 10 times in a row, what would the bettor choose, heads or tails? You can have all the theories in the world but the when you factor in the human factor into the equation, the most logical bet would be tails.

                     

                    koy

                    koy

                    koy

                    koy

                    "Ok, let me put it another way. You're at a roulette table and it's been red for 15 times in a row. What would you bet for the 16th spin? Are you going to tell me that it still has a 50/50 chance, and bet red, or bet black? " 

                    YES!

                    Reading the above explains why Koycerin's name doesn't appear anywhere in the scientific literature.  He is telling you what you want to hear, that it is possible to beat lotteries and casinos.  In games like Blackjack, the player still has a slim chance of beating the house, but only through the  arduous efforts of those with prodigiuous skills!

                    This is still the best way to make a 50/50 random decision:

                    http://www.random.org/coins/?num=1&cur=20-novelty.voting-2004

                      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                      mid-Ohio
                      United States
                      Member #9
                      March 24, 2001
                      19900 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 7, 2011, 2:53 pm - IP Logged

                      Koycerin states that only the very first bet at the beginning of a cycle will truly be 50/50. If we take the coin example as head or tails, and the first toss was heads, second was heads, it will always tends to correct itself by striving to blance itself out. Regardless of whether it's 10 times in a row, what would the bettor choose, heads or tails? You can have all the theories in the world but the when you factor in the human factor into the equation, the most logical bet would be tails.

                      Seldom in the real world of lottery games does a player have to make a 50/50 choice but rather a 1/39 choice like picking the Red Ball in the PowerBall game.  The RB28 hasn't hit in the 270 PB drawings since its last matrix change and yet there are players who still believe the chances of RB28 coming up in the next drawing are 1/39 and is simply over due so they continue to lose money betting on RB28 in spite of the obvious.  As you say, you can have all kinds of theories about proabilities and when you factor in the human factor an illogical bet is the likely results.

                      If and when RB28 does come up, it will never show a 1/39 chance of ever coming up for this matrix even if it's doesn't change for a couple of years.  Sometimes even an obvious pattern does effect how lottery players pick their numbers.

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

                        Avatar
                        bgonçalves
                        Brasil
                        Member #92564
                        June 9, 2010
                        2134 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 7, 2011, 5:47 pm - IP Logged

                        hello, jking=

                        Estatística – Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre

                        pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estatística -

                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 7, 2011, 8:47 pm - IP Logged

                          Koycerin states that only the very first bet at the beginning of a cycle will truly be 50/50. If we take the coin example as head or tails, and the first toss was heads, second was heads, it will always tends to correct itself by striving to blance itself out. Regardless of whether it's 10 times in a row, what would the bettor choose, heads or tails? You can have all the theories in the world but the when you factor in the human factor into the equation, the most logical bet would be tails.

                          Seldom in the real world of lottery games does a player have to make a 50/50 choice but rather a 1/39 choice like picking the Red Ball in the PowerBall game.  The RB28 hasn't hit in the 270 PB drawings since its last matrix change and yet there are players who still believe the chances of RB28 coming up in the next drawing are 1/39 and is simply over due so they continue to lose money betting on RB28 in spite of the obvious.  As you say, you can have all kinds of theories about proabilities and when you factor in the human factor an illogical bet is the likely results.

                          If and when RB28 does come up, it will never show a 1/39 chance of ever coming up for this matrix even if it's doesn't change for a couple of years.  Sometimes even an obvious pattern does effect how lottery players pick their numbers.

                          "If and when RB28 does come up, it will never show a 1/39 chance of ever coming up for this matrix even if it's doesn't change for a couple of years.  Sometimes even an obvious pattern does effect how lottery players pick their numbers."

                          These kinds of observations lend support to what I've been repeatedly saying, and that is that you CAN affect the DISTRIBUTION of your winnings through your selections AND, in Parimutuel payoff games, you can actually increase your odds [a little] by avoiding popular choices!

                          By the way, RB28 will ALWAYS have a 1/39 chance of coming up.  (Unless it's weighted down!)


                            United States
                            Member #93947
                            July 10, 2010
                            2180 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 7, 2011, 8:53 pm - IP Logged

                            hello, jking=

                            Estatística – Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre

                            pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estatística -

                            dr san,

                            Are your sure your first link above resolves to the second one?

                            --Jimmy4164

                              JKING's avatar - Kaleidoscope 3.gif

                              United States
                              Member #5599
                              July 13, 2004
                              1192 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 7, 2011, 8:53 pm - IP Logged

                              HI,

                                It's a bad link on this end.

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

                              Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.

                                 
                                Page 4 of 46