Welcome Guest
You last visited December 4, 2016, 3:06 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Do some number combinations have better odds?

Topic closed. 5280 replies. Last post 4 years ago by rdgrnr.

 Page 279 of 353

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 1:55 pm - IP Logged

Don't be obtuse.  Playing the numbers isn't much of a strategy if you can't (or won't) figure out a way of arriving at those numbers.  Using "intuition" is just another way of saying "guess", which is just as random as buying a stack of Quick Picks.

Did you learn that grown up word watching Shawshank Redemption?

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 1:58 pm - IP Logged

How would ANYONE go about picking a group of 28 numbers?  If we're still hanging on to the fallacy that there's a point to this thread,  I would think that question is the frontrunner to fill that position.

To his credit, Ronnie started out with an idea on one way to pick the numbers, but he abandoned that fairly quickly and now seems to be fixated on "intuition".

Thank goodness everyone is NOT required to think what "you would think" lol. lol. lol. lol. lol. lol.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:06 pm - IP Logged

Mediabrat
I have a workout where past drawings are broken into specific groups and sequences to facilitate tracking and study.
I then analyze this  'how much and how often' data for clues on what might happen next.
Intuition is a major consideration when I choose specific digits to play.
Sure, guesswork is involved. That's life.
When folks buy quick picks they are at the mercy of the random number generator in the lottery terminal where they make a contribution to the state's monetary fund.  They have no say whatever. You get what you get, case closed.
So, I beg to differ - there is a difference between  educated guesswork and blind acceptance of quick picks.

QPs work the same way a slot machine works in that each and every line is subject to the overall odds no matter how many lines are played. mediabrat already proved that in a blog but refuses to talk about it.

The blogs QP lines couldn't seem to hit 5 of 5 if its life depended on it. Much less hitting 5+1 like X and myself hit in BETTER than 39 draws. Not to mention all the multiple 5 of 5 hit by other players hit in BETTER than 39.

United States
Member #124493
March 14, 2012
7023 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:14 pm - IP Logged

Thank goodness everyone is NOT required to think what "you would think" lol. lol. lol. lol. lol. lol.

Thank goodness everyone is not a slave of innumeracy.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:31 pm - IP Logged

No it's not, and it's true.

Anything can "sound absurd" but when I'm telling you all you have to do is a google search to find out and you still just interject with your opinion without looking up the facts, you're the one being ignorant.

And it's nothing like a poker game.  They are completely different.  It's more like saying that you have the same odds of being dealt AA in a 7 person game or heads up.  The odds of that AA holding up might be different, b/c of the additional players you have to beat, but in blackjack, the odds are the same because you only have to beat the dealer.  The other players are mathemetically ireelevant.

The other playres affect HOW the cards fall, but not the odds of how the cards may fall.  They are just as likely to hurt you as they are to help you.  But you can just use use google - but I know that you will choose instead to stay in blissful ignorance.

Ok boney, but most of your posts are based on the same premise that mediabrat is putting forward...... Which is that, "intuition is the same as guessing" The problem here is the fact that you are in a lottery players forum and people here don't have the same perspective or "think" like you or the med brat.

The second problem I see here is that you and the med "think" in terms of learned (schooled) thought instead of the practical experience kind of thought that only people with experience in the field have.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:33 pm - IP Logged

I'm sure you don't have ANY idea what I'm talking about boney, but here is an example: I repair peoples plumbing at their house when things break. I frequently get customers who want to tell me HOW to proceed in doing repairs because they are an Architect, or a Contractor, or a Engineer. Guess what? Because they have NO practical experience with with doing repairs they are only talking psychobabble and have no idea HOW to fix the problem and that why they called me in the first place. It never ceases to amaze me how much of a "WASTE OF TIME" they want to impose upon me trying to explain something they have ZERO experience with.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:34 pm - IP Logged

OH and congratulations on getting under my skin enough to prompt me to write a 6+ line post. Nice work.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:34 pm - IP Logged

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:35 pm - IP Logged

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:41 pm - IP Logged

Thank goodness everyone is not a slave of innumeracy.

lol. lol. lol. I think these people crawed out of a book somewhere and started point at everyone while screaming....................... nnumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy

United States
Member #124493
March 14, 2012
7023 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:50 pm - IP Logged

lol. lol. lol. I think these people crawed out of a book somewhere and started point at everyone while screaming....................... nnumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy.innumeracy

These guys go around with their ipads, and when they find something they dislike they pull up wikipedia and say, look you are wrong it says so here!

You cant count to 30 on your fingers and toes because that violates "innumeracy"

These people are not free thinkers, they like to regurgitate what somebody else said because it makes them feel superior.

None of these so called "math experts" have still addressed the situation of quantum fluctuations or brownian motion, or the mathematical formulas presented in physical chemistry.

These people are lottery amateurs and buzzkill professionals.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 2:54 pm - IP Logged

These guys go around with their ipads, and when they find something they dislike they pull up wikipedia and say, look you are wrong it says so here!

You cant count to 30 on your fingers and toes because that violates "innumeracy"

These people are not free thinkers, they like to regurgitate what somebody else said because it makes them feel superior.

None of these so called "math experts" have still addressed the situation of quantum fluctuations or brownian motion, or the mathematical formulas presented in physical chemistry.

These people are lottery amateurs and buzzkill professionals.

My "best guess" is that groups of self picks will BETTER QPs by a margin of 10 to 1.

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 3:06 pm - IP Logged

These guys go around with their ipads, and when they find something they dislike they pull up wikipedia and say, look you are wrong it says so here!

You cant count to 30 on your fingers and toes because that violates "innumeracy"

These people are not free thinkers, they like to regurgitate what somebody else said because it makes them feel superior.

None of these so called "math experts" have still addressed the situation of quantum fluctuations or brownian motion, or the mathematical formulas presented in physical chemistry.

These people are lottery amateurs and buzzkill professionals.

Perhaps you would like a real life example from the world of plumbing?

United States
Member #116268
September 7, 2011
20244 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 3:10 pm - IP Logged

RcbBuckeye,

You're right, there is a problem here. But the problem is not being created by Mediabrat, Yoho, Boney526, myself, and others who understand probability. The problem lies with those who refuse to face the facts and references that we present to them, and stubbornly persist in their illogical beliefs, most of them based in a blind faith in The Gambler's Fallacy. When you say,

... we have no choice but to show you that there is NO WAY to increase your overall winnings. If you consider this not useful information, it is your problem, not ours. If you read Paulos' book, Innumeracy, you will understand why I post what I do...

To stand by, and through silence, allow people to wallow around in ignorance, when our country is falling behind every year in math and science, is not acceptable.

In my own case, I have been contributing [what I consider to be] a VERY USEFUL insight into lottery play since the second week of my posting here, over 2 1/2 years ago. It is DEFINITELY TRUE that you CAN effect the DISTRIBUTION of your winnings by employing various betting strategies. For the most part, these methods are based on the simple idea of putting as many numbers into play as you can afford in one draw. What this does is increase your "NUMBER OF WINNING TICKETS," while at the same time decreasing the average value of these tickets. In the long run, your "Prize Ratio" will approach that of the people who choose numbers NOT RECENTLY SEEN (Gambler's Fallacy), numbers RECENTLY SEEN (Hot Hand Fallacy), or those who merely select random numbers.

For those who say I contribute nothing useful, if you check out one of my earliest posts, you will have to admit that I have at least been consistent. (See the link below)

Spend some time perusing the Prediction Boards here at LP, taking note of the Hit Ratios and Prize Ratios of predictors with at least tens of thousands of predictions in a given game. LotteryPost.com has the potential to increase math and science knowledge as well as provide a place for people to express their dreams, communicate, and have fun.

IMHO, to be successful, it does not need to propagate Innumeracy.

--Jimmy4164

.. we have no choice but to show you that there is NO WAY to increase your overall winnings.

Then how are people doing it, if there is NO WAY it can be done?

San Angelo, Texas
United States
Member #1097
January 31, 2003
1394 Posts
Offline
 Posted: February 3, 2013, 3:49 pm - IP Logged

Odds, what nots, dead ends, circular arguments, waste of time.

When I became an LP member 10 years ago,  I admit I didn't know much about lotteries and how
to choose winning numbers, or any numbers for that matter.

At the time, it seemed that everyday posters were serious players looking for an edge. Sure, there were some disagreements but there was a lot of sharing. One could ask for assistance and someone would step up and offer rationale ideas and solutions.

Then, as now, it was rather obvious that some visitors had ulterior motives. If they were not here looking for handouts or to steal, they took advantage of every opportunity to forment  discord.

But, there were many contributors  - folks who could define their methods, techniques, strategies, workouts in ways that were helpful.

I learned a lot. I really appreciate the help, guidance and support I've received.
I advanced from a player who didn't know crap to one that understands how the games are played. While I have spent  hours going down dead-end streets, it has been a learning experience that every serious player will go through at one time or another.

I've posted a lot of stuff over the years. Some good, some bad. In fact, if I had the power, I'd go back and delete some ideas that seemed worthwhile at the time but were really a waste of time - and money.

However, I have finally reached the end of the line, so to speak.
I've developed a workout that incorporates, to one extent or another, all the stuff I've learned or discovered on my own. There are no more versions possible. It's sink or swim. I hope I'm able to avoid drowning in future.

I've not won a jackpot, but  I've had some significant wins, given my income and ability to pay.
While my methods may not be completely understandable, they satisfy my needs. I win often enough to make all the work worthwhile, which is  about the best any player can hope to achieve.

I've posted my methods here at LP. But, they are not freebies. They require the user to apply as much 'brain power'  as he or she can muster.

'No work, no pay!'

Other members have posted their particular methods. They no doubt believe what they do, what they recommend, are the Holy Grails of lottery play.

But, in the final analysis, it's a 'to each his own' situation.

I've followed this thread on a regular basis.
It's interesting how recent comments and views match some of those that were  posted 10 years ago!

The same old 'circular' arguments, with no solutions on the horizon.
Sadly, it's a 'my way or the highway' situation.

And, as a result, a lot of experienced and helpful folks just don't come here anymore.
Take away the specific game postings and the predictions, there aren't many useful and enlightning discussions going on.

What a shame.

Despite the discord, I've learned a few things over the years.
First and foremost is the fact that the manner in which winning lottery combinations are generated is and will always be a 'random' process.
A hundred years of effort by thousands of participants from all walks of life has failed to produce a single workout that can accurately predict the next winning combination.

The chances of winning a game is and always will be a formidable task the difficulty of which varies according to the specific game. The larger the game matrix, ie. the more numbers, the harder it is to win.

While buying more tickets provides more chances of winning,  the more tickets to scan after a drawing, the odds always favor the 'house,' whether it be a State or a casino.

In my opinion, the endless argument about odds is just wasted words. They are what they are.

Winning is hard.

Whether 'personal picks' derived from some kind of organized and rationale strategy are superior to  random numbers from a machine is and always will be an individual decision.

Personally, I'd rather win or lose on my own, rather than allowing a machine in a convenience store to determine my fate; although I'll admit that the machines have a better win-loss ratio.

It's always good to have a playing partner.

My lottery number choices are based on analysis, evaluation, intuition and other factors.
Having a second set of eyes, a second brain, to provide a second opinion is greatly helpful when it comes to actually spending real money on a game of chance, even if it's just entertainment in lieu of movies, boozing, or whatever.

One other factor I've noticed recently is that many players are basically lazy. They
want to win but seem unwilling to do any work. They want to push a computer key and have breakfast served in bed, so to speak.

There is no public record of anyone every developing a computer program capable of generating winning numbers on a consistent basis.
I suggest folks who believe that such a program is possible go to a Bingo hall and observe how the winning numbers are chosen.

If they have a system or a laptop computer that can search thousands of cards and choose one or more that will match the  numbers that will be 'called' as the game progresses, they should keep it secret.

Of course, we know that no one can do that.

Lottery just like Bingo is a game of chance. Some folks win, most folks lose. And that's the way it is.

Good luck!

 Page 279 of 353