United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: January 11, 2013, 8:04 pm - IP Logged

Lotto System Development Simplified

A lot of energy is expended here trying to design a system that might help a player win a Lotto Jackpot. The problem is that the dimensions of the state games are such that designers must deal with very LARGE numbers of combinations and very SMALL probabilities. Very often, the designer's ideas become obscured by complicated and tedious calculations. This thread is an attempt to provide a Lotto game model of scaled down dimensions to allow people to focus on system theories, rather than boring calculations. So, let's take a look at an arbitrary scaled down version of a Lotto game. Although I know of no Lotto game, state sanctioned or otherwise, that has these dimensions,it should be clear that any system designed for it can be extrapolated to a game with a larger matrix. For this purpose, I've designed a (5,2) Lotto game. It will be much easier to understand a betting system when it's applied to a (5,2) game as opposed to say, a (56,5) game!

(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)

Remember now, we're playing Lotto, not Pick-2. Initially, there are 5 Balls in the drawing machine, numbered 1 through 5. The first selection is made from these 5, and the second is drawn from the 4 remaining. The order they are drawn is not significant so we will list the results for each draw in ascending order, left to right.

(1,2) (2,4)

(1,3) (2,5) OK, in a (5,2) Lotto game,

(1,4) (3,4) here are the possible outcomes.

(1,5) (3,5)

(2,3) (4,5)

That's a total of Ten (10) possibilities. In a (56,5) game, this number would be 3,819,816. I think our scaled down game will be a little easier to work with! In this simplified model, ODDS and PAYOFFS will be easy to determine by inspection. Look at the list of 10 winning ticket possibilites and convince yourself that the theoretical chance of matching both numbers you select is one in ten, or 1:10, or 1/10, or 0.1, or 10%, however you like to express it. This is our Jackpot. Our 2nd tier prize will be awarded for correctly selecting 1 number on your ticket. By inspection, you should see above that the chance of matching one of the two numbers you select is four in ten, or 4:10, or 2/5, or 0.4, or 40%. Consequently, to ensure the Expected Value of this game is 0.50, the typical state lottery case, our $1 tickets will pay $4.00 for matching both numbers (the Jackpot,) and 25 Cents for a one number match. So, ON AVERAGE, for each set of 10 tickets we purchase, we can expect to match one number four times, and both numbers one time, for a return of $5.00 on our $10 investment, our desired ROI.

Since some people in another Forum have been studying subsets of the total number field, I thought I would do some of the setup that will help them use this (5,2) game in their research. They have been looking at a subset of 28 of the Megamillions total of 56. They observe that IF they could select a subset of the 56 number field that contains the 5 numbers that are ultimately drawn, Then they would have better odds of winning a Jackpot. So, let's see how we can partition our (5,2) game in an analogous way. If we eliminate one of the five numbers from play, we would only have to deal with four, so...

(1,2,3,4)

(1,2,3,5) ...here are the partitions of our

(1,2,4,5) 5 numbers taken 4 at a time.

(1,3,4,5) Note that each set is missing

(2,3,4,5) one of the five numbers.

Hint to the subset researchers:

Each of the 10 winning (Jackpot) pairs of numbers in our first list above appears in 3 of the 5 possible subsets of 5 numbers taken 4 at a time. I'll leave speculation on the probabilities and other implications of this model for a later post.

Perhaps someone has a system they would like to present using this simple model.

United States Member #116344 September 8, 2011 3941 Posts Offline

Posted: January 11, 2013, 9:35 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on January 11, 2013

Lotto System Development Simplified

A lot of energy is expended here trying to design a system that might help a player win a Lotto Jackpot. The problem is that the dimensions of the state games are such that designers must deal with very LARGE numbers of combinations and very SMALL probabilities. Very often, the designer's ideas become obscured by complicated and tedious calculations. This thread is an attempt to provide a Lotto game model of scaled down dimensions to allow people to focus on system theories, rather than boring calculations. So, let's take a look at an arbitrary scaled down version of a Lotto game. Although I know of no Lotto game, state sanctioned or otherwise, that has these dimensions,it should be clear that any system designed for it can be extrapolated to a game with a larger matrix. For this purpose, I've designed a (5,2) Lotto game. It will be much easier to understand a betting system when it's applied to a (5,2) game as opposed to say, a (56,5) game!

(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)

Remember now, we're playing Lotto, not Pick-2. Initially, there are 5 Balls in the drawing machine, numbered 1 through 5. The first selection is made from these 5, and the second is drawn from the 4 remaining. The order they are drawn is not significant so we will list the results for each draw in ascending order, left to right.

(1,2) (2,4)

(1,3) (2,5) OK, in a (5,2) Lotto game,

(1,4) (3,4) here are the possible outcomes.

(1,5) (3,5)

(2,3) (4,5)

That's a total of Ten (10) possibilities. In a (56,5) game, this number would be 3,819,816. I think our scaled down game will be a little easier to work with! In this simplified model, ODDS and PAYOFFS will be easy to determine by inspection. Look at the list of 10 winning ticket possibilites and convince yourself that the theoretical chance of matching both numbers you select is one in ten, or 1:10, or 1/10, or 0.1, or 10%, however you like to express it. This is our Jackpot. Our 2nd tier prize will be awarded for correctly selecting 1 number on your ticket. By inspection, you should see above that the chance of matching one of the two numbers you select is four in ten, or 4:10, or 2/5, or 0.4, or 40%. Consequently, to ensure the Expected Value of this game is 0.50, the typical state lottery case, our $1 tickets will pay $4.00 for matching both numbers (the Jackpot,) and 25 Cents for a one number match. So, ON AVERAGE, for each set of 10 tickets we purchase, we can expect to match one number four times, and both numbers one time, for a return of $5.00 on our $10 investment, our desired ROI.

Since some people in another Forum have been studying subsets of the total number field, I thought I would do some of the setup that will help them use this (5,2) game in their research. They have been looking at a subset of 28 of the Megamillions total of 56. They observe that IF they could select a subset of the 56 number field that contains the 5 numbers that are ultimately drawn, Then they would have better odds of winning a Jackpot. So, let's see how we can partition our (5,2) game in an analogous way. If we eliminate one of the five numbers from play, we would only have to deal with four, so...

(1,2,3,4)

(1,2,3,5) ...here are the partitions of our

(1,2,4,5) 5 numbers taken 4 at a time.

(1,3,4,5) Note that each set is missing

(2,3,4,5) one of the five numbers.

Hint to the subset researchers:

Each of the 10 winning (Jackpot) pairs of numbers in our first list above appears in 3 of the 5 possible subsets of 5 numbers taken 4 at a time. I'll leave speculation on the probabilities and other implications of this model for a later post.

Perhaps someone has a system they would like to present using this simple model.

--Jimmy4164

Very logical, but so far as we work within the confines of lottery parameters or rules(why should pool size or field be 0-9 for p3,p4, why 5/31, 6/49 for lotto), we can't be part of 0.1 ratio winners where the money is made. I thought every lottery/lotto format started with a model which was then extrapulated into this astranomical odds, so the reverse is also true, one need to scale down for laser targeting. Just take any lottery/lotto , look at the range of drawn numbers for a month, it could be 5/17 for 5/34 lotto, it could be 0-7 field for pick3 ,pick 4. Is best to build your system/method on reduced field /pool with this in mind " less hits but big payout".

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: January 13, 2013, 2:35 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by adobea78 on January 11, 2013

Very logical, but so far as we work within the confines of lottery parameters or rules(why should pool size or field be 0-9 for p3,p4, why 5/31, 6/49 for lotto), we can't be part of 0.1 ratio winners where the money is made. I thought every lottery/lotto format started with a model which was then extrapulated into this astranomical odds, so the reverse is also true, one need to scale down for laser targeting. Just take any lottery/lotto , look at the range of drawn numbers for a month, it could be 5/17 for 5/34 lotto, it could be 0-7 field for pick3 ,pick 4. Is best to build your system/method on reduced field /pool with this in mind " less hits but big payout".

Adobea78,

In light of your views on a scaled down look at games, what do you think of Ronnie316, Stack47, and Lottoboner's ideas in this thread?

stay on track, is the right approach, hard to get people out of comfort zones, ideals or concept posed are never addressed, but reason the concept is flawed abounds. Got pm from many members in line with the concept so do your thing!

United States Member #5599 July 13, 2004 1192 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 2:46 am - IP Logged

Hi,

Just to throw another point of view into the mix....

Scaling methods are valid and important as far as they go. The problem is that number shuffling is only part of a much bigger picture.

Imagine moving Scabble tiles around in the most effective way, but not having a vocabulary to spell out the words. In other words, without having good number indicators for your base sets, you will probably end up with a very expensive system with a low yield of wins (by coincidence).

I think the primary battle that most are fighting is in generating good base numbers to play in our sets. Then secondly, figuring out the best number shuffle.

United States Member #116344 September 8, 2011 3941 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 1:31 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by JKING on January 14, 2013

Hi,

Just to throw another point of view into the mix....

Scaling methods are valid and important as far as they go. The problem is that number shuffling is only part of a much bigger picture.

Imagine moving Scabble tiles around in the most effective way, but not having a vocabulary to spell out the words. In other words, without having good number indicators for your base sets, you will probably end up with a very expensive system with a low yield of wins (by coincidence).

I think the primary battle that most are fighting is in generating good base numbers to play in our sets. Then secondly, figuring out the best number shuffle.

'without having good number indicators for your base sets' , I like this statement, inadvertently you hit the nail right on the head. I think I have the triggers for my subsets.

New Mexico United States Member #86099 January 29, 2010 11162 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 1:43 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on January 11, 2013

Lotto System Development Simplified

A lot of energy is expended here trying to design a system that might help a player win a Lotto Jackpot. The problem is that the dimensions of the state games are such that designers must deal with very LARGE numbers of combinations and very SMALL probabilities. Very often, the designer's ideas become obscured by complicated and tedious calculations. This thread is an attempt to provide a Lotto game model of scaled down dimensions to allow people to focus on system theories, rather than boring calculations. So, let's take a look at an arbitrary scaled down version of a Lotto game. Although I know of no Lotto game, state sanctioned or otherwise, that has these dimensions,it should be clear that any system designed for it can be extrapolated to a game with a larger matrix. For this purpose, I've designed a (5,2) Lotto game. It will be much easier to understand a betting system when it's applied to a (5,2) game as opposed to say, a (56,5) game!

(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)

Remember now, we're playing Lotto, not Pick-2. Initially, there are 5 Balls in the drawing machine, numbered 1 through 5. The first selection is made from these 5, and the second is drawn from the 4 remaining. The order they are drawn is not significant so we will list the results for each draw in ascending order, left to right.

(1,2) (2,4)

(1,3) (2,5) OK, in a (5,2) Lotto game,

(1,4) (3,4) here are the possible outcomes.

(1,5) (3,5)

(2,3) (4,5)

That's a total of Ten (10) possibilities. In a (56,5) game, this number would be 3,819,816. I think our scaled down game will be a little easier to work with! In this simplified model, ODDS and PAYOFFS will be easy to determine by inspection. Look at the list of 10 winning ticket possibilites and convince yourself that the theoretical chance of matching both numbers you select is one in ten, or 1:10, or 1/10, or 0.1, or 10%, however you like to express it. This is our Jackpot. Our 2nd tier prize will be awarded for correctly selecting 1 number on your ticket. By inspection, you should see above that the chance of matching one of the two numbers you select is four in ten, or 4:10, or 2/5, or 0.4, or 40%. Consequently, to ensure the Expected Value of this game is 0.50, the typical state lottery case, our $1 tickets will pay $4.00 for matching both numbers (the Jackpot,) and 25 Cents for a one number match. So, ON AVERAGE, for each set of 10 tickets we purchase, we can expect to match one number four times, and both numbers one time, for a return of $5.00 on our $10 investment, our desired ROI.

Since some people in another Forum have been studying subsets of the total number field, I thought I would do some of the setup that will help them use this (5,2) game in their research. They have been looking at a subset of 28 of the Megamillions total of 56. They observe that IF they could select a subset of the 56 number field that contains the 5 numbers that are ultimately drawn, Then they would have better odds of winning a Jackpot. So, let's see how we can partition our (5,2) game in an analogous way. If we eliminate one of the five numbers from play, we would only have to deal with four, so...

(1,2,3,4)

(1,2,3,5) ...here are the partitions of our

(1,2,4,5) 5 numbers taken 4 at a time.

(1,3,4,5) Note that each set is missing

(2,3,4,5) one of the five numbers.

Hint to the subset researchers:

Each of the 10 winning (Jackpot) pairs of numbers in our first list above appears in 3 of the 5 possible subsets of 5 numbers taken 4 at a time. I'll leave speculation on the probabilities and other implications of this model for a later post.

Perhaps someone has a system they would like to present using this simple model.

--Jimmy4164

Can you use the powerball or megamillions as an example of what you are showing? This seems interesting but all the verbage is taking away from your great ideas.

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 4:51 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by lakerben on January 14, 2013

Can you use the powerball or megamillions as an example of what you are showing? This seems interesting but all the verbage is taking away from your great ideas.

Lakerben,

I want to stick with this simple (5,2) model until the probabilities of winning with subset selection can be compared to the obvious one in ten chance of a "Jackpot" when 2 numbers for a ticket are chosen purely at random. I'm still waiting for someone else to do it, preferably someone who believes the subset approach will be superior.

United States Member #116344 September 8, 2011 3941 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 5:34 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on January 14, 2013

Lakerben,

I want to stick with this simple (5,2) model until the probabilities of winning with subset selection can be compared to the obvious one in ten chance of a "Jackpot" when 2 numbers for a ticket are chosen purely at random. I'm still waiting for someone else to do it, preferably someone who believes the subset approach will be superior.

--Jimmy4164

This topic should be in math forum, but I want you define Probability. There's no singular definition when it comes to its interpretation. Check the two major interpretations(theoritical and practical) of probabilty, how the concept of probabilty evolved. The simple model (5,2) of larger matrix is left to how one interprets probabilty. Don't get stuck with 'odds and impossibility' but rather ' why the scale-down' can work. You don't need someone to come with the subset approach, you draw your conclusion by detailed definition of probability. Good luck in research, we need a win!

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: January 14, 2013, 6:44 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by adobea78 on January 14, 2013

This topic should be in math forum, but I want you define Probability. There's no singular definition when it comes to its interpretation. Check the two major interpretations(theoritical and practical) of probabilty, how the concept of probabilty evolved. The simple model (5,2) of larger matrix is left to how one interprets probabilty. Don't get stuck with 'odds and impossibility' but rather ' why the scale-down' can work. You don't need someone to come with the subset approach, you draw your conclusion by detailed definition of probability. Good luck in research, we need a win!

I put this Topic in the Systems Forum because it was motivated by the theory put forth in Discussion that subsets of Lotto fields could be systematically chosen to improve a player's odds of winning.

mid-Ohio United States Member #9 March 24, 2001 19898 Posts Offline

Posted: January 15, 2013, 1:41 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by lakerben on January 14, 2013

Can you use the powerball or megamillions as an example of what you are showing? This seems interesting but all the verbage is taking away from your great ideas.

You're talking about the real world, this 2/5 stuff is make believe and for conversation only.

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

Whiskey Island United States Member #90216 April 24, 2010 12808 Posts Offline

Posted: January 15, 2013, 2:23 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by jimmy4164 on January 14, 2013

I put this Topic in the Systems Forum because it was motivated by the theory put forth in Discussion that subsets of Lotto fields could be systematically chosen to improve a player's odds of winning.

Just show us some real Predictions with some Wins !!! With your System , Method or Theory with a say about 7 to 25 Predictions Lines for NY Take 5 its should be easy the game is a Mech. Draw . All this Probability and Theory are meaningless !! Just real Predictions from a persons System , Methods or Theories that works consistently is the only proof needed .

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: January 15, 2013, 3:16 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by CajunWin4 on January 15, 2013

jimmy4164 ,

Just show us some real Predictions with some Wins !!! With your System , Method or Theory with a say about 7 to 25 Predictions Lines for NY Take 5 its should be easy the game is a Mech. Draw . All this Probability and Theory are meaningless !! Just real Predictions from a persons System , Methods or Theories that works consistently is the only proof needed .

CW4

"All this Probability and Theory are meaningless."

I'm sorry you feel this way CajunWin4. It doesn't bode well for your chances of success in the endeavors suggested in this post...