United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Ronnie316 on Jan 2, 2013
Here are my 12 losing numbers for tonight's PB draw.
01 08 11 12 15 21 24 44 45 48 51 59
Ronnie316,
Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE. When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you! And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.
Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?
--Jimmy4164
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jan 2, 2013
Ronnie316,
Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE. When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you! And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.
Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?
--Jimmy4164
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
United States
Member #116,263
September 7, 2011
20,243 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jan 2, 2013
Ronnie316,
Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE. When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you! And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.
Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?
--Jimmy4164
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
50%? You have sold me short Jimmy. Using 28 numbers has a 2.6% success rate, but because I can get 5 times BETTER ODDS with my extreme predictive abilities the 5 of 5 match will occur around every 8 draws.
United States
Member #124,487
March 14, 2012
7,021 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on Jan 2, 2013
This can't be right. I think I've seen you do this before accurately, so I'm guessing you coped and pasted the wrong thing or something, but I'm saying that it can't be right that there b/c you posted one winning combo when you use 12 numbers, when there should be 12*11*10*9*8/120=792.
Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today - the odds of eliminating 12 numbers succesfully should be calculated as (44/56)*(43/55)*(42/54)*(41/53)*(40/52) or .03482.
RJOh, can you tell me if/where I made an error? Because I'm getting about a 3.5% chance of eliminating 12 numbers succefully.
Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today
What are the odds of droney making a mistake?
I was going to pick lottery numbers today, but I decided not to because I haven't had my wheaties yet.
I also like to have a three course meal of baked clams, chicken parmigiana with linguine, and some new york cheescake before I do my extreme rounding.
Maybe those three course meals is why I have become extremely rounded?
Kentucky United States
Member #32,651
February 14, 2006
10,302 Posts Online
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jan 2, 2013
Ronnie316,
Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE. When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you! And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.
Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?
--Jimmy4164
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
"Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you andStack47"
We're using the same probability Boney used with standard deviation and you used in your simulation. Are you saying it's impossible for thousands of groups of 28 numbers to have a five number match in the last and in the next 5 consecutive drawings?
"When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!"
You still haven't learned your simulations aren't even close to abnormal play (25,000 players buying $5 pick-3 QPs a day for five years). You'll have to ask one of the jackpot winners if they feel they beat the house edge or ask some of the LP members if they're trying to beat the edge or win a jackpot. Thrifty and explain it to you.
United States
Member #124,487
March 14, 2012
7,021 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on Jan 2, 2013
Ronnie316,
Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you and Stack47 should really look into the 400 opportunities currently available HERE. When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you! And if you can recruit Old Uncle Craig to apply too, they might let you apply as a research team, to expand work on Digit Theories, as they apply to lotteries.
Since you are well aware that you might have to wait a "WHILE" for your big hit, why not get payed well in the meantime?
--Jimmy4164
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
P.S. I should warn you that it might not be a good idea to tell them you are currently a member of a team of attack "Badgers."
United States
Member #93,943
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on Jan 2, 2013
"Since you've possibly discovered a revolutionary new theory of probability, you andStack47"
We're using the same probability Boney used with standard deviation and you used in your simulation. Are you saying it's impossible for thousands of groups of 28 numbers to have a five number match in the last and in the next 5 consecutive drawings?
"When they learn you can beat lotteries with a 50% edge, I think they will be VERY, VERY interested in you!"
You still haven't learned your simulations aren't even close to abnormal play (25,000 players buying $5 pick-3 QPs a day for five years). You'll have to ask one of the jackpot winners if they feel they beat the house edge or ask some of the LP members if they're trying to beat the edge or win a jackpot. Thrifty and explain it to you.
Stack47,
Your responses to both of the clips you quoted from my post are very telling. And in a way, they're puzzling. Look above. In response to me encouraging you to present your potentially revolutionary ideas to a premier mathematical software publisher, instead of thanking me and making inquiries at Mathworks, you go on the defensive and make statements clearly indicating you are not confident in your beliefs. Perhaps you feel your ideas need to be peer reviewed before presenting them to a potential employer or publisher. If that's the case, why not prepare an article for one of the math or science journals? A more modest approach might be to establish an account at Wikipedia and present your ideas there.
New Jersey United States
Member #99,028
October 18, 2010
1,439 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by LottoBoner on Jan 2, 2013
Unless I'm making a mistake - which could be the case cuz I haven't eaten yet today
What are the odds of droney making a mistake?
I was going to pick lottery numbers today, but I decided not to because I haven't had my wheaties yet.
I also like to have a three course meal of baked clams, chicken parmigiana with linguine, and some new york cheescake before I do my extreme rounding.
Maybe those three course meals is why I have become extremely rounded?
Get a grip bro.
I was trying to ask him if I made an error in my math, or if he did. Calm down. I had a busy morning and hadn't gotten to eating yet, so I was a bit tired.
New Jersey United States
Member #99,028
October 18, 2010
1,439 Posts
Offline
RJOh,
I'm still confident that there is an error in your analysis.
Like I said, using the formula (44/56)*(43/55)*(42/54)*(41/53)*(40/52) I get roughly 1 in 28 against your eliminating 12 numbers sucessfully, rather than 1 in 487. The formula being the product of the odds of each indivdual balling NOT hitting one of those 12.
I see the math you did to get 1 in 487 but I'm pretty sure the logic is wrong.