Kentucky United States
Member #32,651
February 14, 2006
10,302 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Ronnie316 on Dec 28, 2012
We have those machines too and yesterday I stood behind a guy with a handful of scratch-offs he apparently got out the trash can. Took him 10 minutes to discover they were all losing tickets. My New Years prediction is several states will offer all their online games via Internet this time next year.
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Dec 28, 2012
We have those machines too and yesterday I stood behind a guy with a handful of scratch-offs he apparently got out the trash can. Took him 10 minutes to discover they were all losing tickets. My New Years prediction is several states will offer all their online games via Internet this time next year.
I would think JP games could offer wheels and boxing online without having to fill out slips. But I dodnt see how a touchy feely game like scratchers could be sold online?
New Jersey United States
Member #99,028
October 18, 2010
1,439 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Ronnie316 on Dec 28, 2012
You write posts that require lengthy responses and I'm not going that direction with you Boney.
You are wrong that Im using arbitrary predictions, if you had been paying attention instead of incessantly skeptical would know that my developing premise is that humans can pick BETTER than RNG numbers can. \
There is also recently drawn numbers that have BETTER ODDS.
That's why I said "(what are actually)" because I realize you don't believe they are arbitrary.
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on Dec 28, 2012
You are not looking for a new way, though, you're just picking numbers based on (what are actually) arbitrary predictions and wheeling them in different ways.
Plenty of people have done that. And they've done just as bad, as on average of their wagers vs. winnings, as everyone else.
You offer nothing to the table, really. And you have seemed to refuse to realize the significance in statistical tests to determine Confidence Intervals, to determine how confident you can be that the anomoly is actually non random, or "your prediction system worked"
You saying you are not debating is like how you say you have better odds. You must define things differently than the rest of the world, b/c the post I'm quoting was part of a DEBATE between you and me. You can't just claim things and have them be true, Ronnie. That's not how the world works. You have been debating for quite some time, even if in between you've posted other things.
Besides, just because we know things and "understand" things dopes not make them infallible.
By searching and experimenting I am looking for a BETTER way regardless if you think so or not.
Some number combination DO have BETTER ODDS.
Stack showed us that a group of 28 number can and does hit 5 o5 5 as many as 10 draws in a row.
This is an observation, not a debate for you Boney.
New Jersey United States
Member #99,028
October 18, 2010
1,439 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Dec 28, 2012
"While these issues regarding political electorats is interesting to me, and sucks for a conservative who like me, it is completely off topic here so I'll stop talking about that...."
Just don't bring up the Republican Party's position on Internet gambling and you'll be fine.
Don't get me started on that. Although hopefully the Governor Christie signs the online gambling bill in NJ. I'm a generally conservative guy but I'm not really loyal to the Republican Party. If I don't like the candidate, they don't get my vote, so I don't vote for too many Republicans (just that Democrats are far less likely to get my vote.)
I'm actually a Conservative leaning Libertarian, but again that's getting off topic.
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Factual observations are not really debatable Boney, yet you insist on making lengthy debates over things that are merely observations. Like the night I was playing with 10 BETTER odds than you for the $588 million.
New Jersey United States
Member #99,028
October 18, 2010
1,439 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Ronnie316 on Dec 28, 2012
Factual observations are not really debatable Boney, yet you insist on making lengthy debates over things that are merely observations. Like the night I was playing with 10 BETTER odds than you for the $588 million.
I'm laughing my ass off at the insane logical inconsistencies in your claims.
You claim it's an experiment to see if you can get better odds, then claim that it's fact that you have better odds.
You try to refute a point, then claim you're not debating.
It's like saying that this, right here, is not a sentence made of words.
You seem to be telling us that on the nights that you win, you have BETTER ODDS of winning.
Is this correct?
And to think that for all these years I've been living with the belief that the ODDS of all games are constants, based on the rules of the games, on ALL nights, regardless of whether I win or lose.
We obviously have a different understanding of such things.
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Dec 28, 2012
You seem to be telling us that on the nights that you win, you have BETTER ODDS of winning.
Is this correct?
And to think that for all these years I've been living with the belief that the ODDS of all games are constants, based on the rules of the games, on ALL nights, regardless of whether I win or lose.
We obviously have a different understanding of such things.