New Jersey United States Member #99032 October 18, 2010 1439 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 4:11 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on February 9, 2013

Probably because he doesn't like anyone applying odds conditionally or maybe because he wants to nit-pic the difference between saying 1 chance in 6 chances and 1 way to win and 5 ways to lose.

If you do all of the math related to conditional odds, you would realize that conditional odds end up being the exact same as normal odds.

But you guys do the math as if your conditions will be met 100% of the time. That's why I say you aren't beating the odds, because if you finished your homework you'd find out that you aren't.

United States Member #116268 September 7, 2011 20244 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 5:01 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on February 9, 2013

If you do all of the math related to conditional odds, you would realize that conditional odds end up being the exact same as normal odds.

But you guys do the math as if your conditions will be met 100% of the time. That's why I say you aren't beating the odds, because if you finished your homework you'd find out that you aren't.

How can boney say "you guys do the math as if", when we are not even doing any math.

There are several ways to get better odds on a given draw, one way is predictions that are accurate.

United States Member #116268 September 7, 2011 20244 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 5:13 pm - IP Logged

Boney insists that the lottery is not a game of skill, but then again boney has never tried to uses any of the built in skills that we all have. Such as perception, anticipation, prediction, intuition. Or what about the all seeing eye of the sixth sense, does boney have one of those, or has he had that surgically removed?

Yes, but I would have lost $50 in winning that $7. There are better methods to form your combinations out of a set of numbers than using wheels.

Ronnie thinks half the numbers is what is needed to capture all 5. My computer simulations show that 1/3 of the numbers can capture all 5 without that much of dropout from half. Once you go below 1/3 your success rate goes down at a higher rate but 1/4 of the numbers is still doable. So the optimal number set for MegaMillions in relation to cost to the player would be 19 but still doable with 14 with further refinement.

Maddogs challenge sets of 12 are well below the optimal number for the player so that is why I quit playing it.

The 1/3 number becomes more reasonable when your playing a 5/39 game which becomes 13 number sets. Those 13 numbers sets actually become 11 number sets for me because I throw out 2 numbers from the sets based on positional algorithms.

United States Member #116268 September 7, 2011 20244 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 5:32 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimjwright on February 9, 2013

Yes, but I would have lost $50 in winning that $7. There are better methods to form your combinations out of a set of numbers than using wheels.

Ronnie thinks half the numbers is what is needed to capture all 5. My computer simulations show that 1/3 of the numbers can capture all 5 without that much of dropout from half. Once you go below 1/3 your success rate goes down at a higher rate but 1/4 of the numbers is still doable. So the optimal number set for MegaMillions in relation to cost to the player would be 19 but still doable with 14 with further refinement.

Maddogs challenge sets of 12 are well below the optimal number for the player so that is why I quit playing it.

The 1/3 number becomes more reasonable when your playing a 5/39 game which becomes 13 number sets. Those 13 numbers sets actually become 11 number sets for me because I throw out 2 numbers from the sets based on positional algorithms.

Jimmy

I like the sound of 19 numbers, or even as few as 14 and I dont need to see the math in order to believe you. The main reason we ended up with 28 numbers is because it was easy to measure our ability to "beat the odds" as we only needed 39 draws to hit 5 of 5 once to match the lotteries stated "overall odds"

Park City, UT United States Member #69864 January 18, 2009 993 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 5:56 pm - IP Logged

Looks like you guys have done fairly well with the results. What is the algorithm you use to select your 28 numbers and how do you know it matches the short-term periodic rate for the game?

For instance Brad Dukes thinks the last 6 (mongth) or 52 draws will immediately predict the future. So I can only assume that he thinks the short-term peridocic rate to be something like 54 draws or 6 months and 1 week. I arrive at 54 because he is hoping that his 52 draws that he is using to predict from is still valid for say the next 1 or 2 draws before it morphs into something else.

Do you have a short-term periodic rate you are operating from when selecting your 28 numbers? If not then why not? If you have a variable short-term periodic rate then I could see you getting variable results with your system.

New Jersey United States Member #99032 October 18, 2010 1439 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 6:16 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Ronnie316 on February 9, 2013

Boney insists that the lottery is not a game of skill, but then again boney has never tried to uses any of the built in skills that we all have. Such as perception, anticipation, prediction, intuition. Or what about the all seeing eye of the sixth sense, does boney have one of those, or has he had that surgically removed?

I'd like to point out that you've also said it's not a game of skill.

And you've also said that it is.

So it seems like you don't know what you're even saying.

United States Member #116268 September 7, 2011 20244 Posts Offline

Posted: February 9, 2013, 6:18 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimjwright on February 9, 2013

Looks like you guys have done fairly well with the results. What is the algorithm you use to select your 28 numbers and how do you know it matches the short-term periodic rate for the game?

For instance Brad Dukes thinks the last 6 (mongth) or 52 draws will immediately predict the future. So I can only assume that he thinks the short-term peridocic rate to be something like 54 draws or 6 months and 1 week. I arrive at 54 because he is hoping that his 52 draws that he is using to predict from is still valid for say the next 1 or 2 draws before it morphs into something else.

Do you have a short-term periodic rate you are operating from when selecting your 28 numbers? If not then why not? If you have a variable short-term periodic rate then I could see you getting variable results with your system.

Jimmy

Those are all excellent questions. Much more so than anything boney has ever posted here....

I'm sorry to say I'm behind the curve on these things and only based my choices on raw instincts and gut feelings as the first was a selection of all even numbers and the second all odd numbers..... The next was the 5+1 hit (shown below) chosen from previously drawn numbers....

(I had played the same single bonus number for 18 draws)