Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 3, 2016, 8:36 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

is anyone making an income from lottery

Topic closed. 629 replies. Last post 4 years ago by Stack47.

Page 32 of 42
4.76
PrintE-mailLink
Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
New Jersey
United States
Member #99032
October 18, 2010
1439 Posts
Offline
Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:06 pm - IP Logged

That's how I usually react to little kids who just don't get it. The only difference is that I can't physically take bonehead by the ear and lock him in his room for a time out for being such a dumbass.

I didn't lose anything. Both of you, especially you with your rediculous attempt at how Peter is raking in thousands every month, have yet to explain satisfactorily how he's accomplishing this. You say he's selling a book, waiting five years or more before he's publishing it, and bonehead says he's an avid gambler who is wasting tens of thousands every year for five years. No one in their right mind would do either of those two scenarios.

You both need to be in a mental institution. And you call yourselves critical thinkers? Laughable at best.

How in the world can either of you really believe someone, anyone, would spend 5 years wasting huge amounts of money money just because they're a bad gambler? He'd have to be the most inept gambler on planet earth. Even the dumbest gambler losing thousands a month would surely give up after about 2 or 3 months, TOPS!   Or, end up like most, by losing their house, cars, family members, and probably end up as an alcoholic living the streets, maybe get help and starting over. On the other hand, Peter must so rich that he has nothing better to do with his life than to literally throw hundreds of thousands down the toilet, when he could be doing other things with that money. People don't become that rich without some kind of disciplne which made them rich to begin with. If Peter is that freaking rich, he wouldn't need to make money. Do you see how rediculous all these scenarios are?

Surely rich people and celebrities go to casinos and blow a few grand from time to time. They're not there to make money, but to have fun, especially in Vegas. But they don't stay in Vegas for five years blowing thousand every month, THEY FREAKING LEAVE, AND GO BACK HOME.

Or, how in the world can either of you claim anyone would wait 5 plus freaking years making questionable transactions by buying winning tickets, then claiming them as theirs, all the while dealing with all the hassles of this red tape, hard work, just to sell some "how to" book some 5 plus years later. Then the cost of a huge advertising campaign that would have to cover the costs of paying the taxes on those tickets he purchased, and all this work involved just to sell books to a few lottery enthusiasts who MAY buy the book. You two must be on drugs, OR, need to go on medication. Seriously, get help.

Is there a doctor in the house?

I guarantee that if I show irrefutable proof that I was making 5 grand a month free and clear, you two clowns would still try to discount my claims. If I uploaded a pic of my winning tickets, you'd claim they were photo shopped. If I siad I said I have proof of my wins by public records at the lottery office listing me as a winner, you'd say I was purchasing winning tickets to sell books 5 years from now. Or, you'd come up with another dumbass reason like, I bribed the lottery official at my local office, and pay him royalties from my book 5 years from now. If I showed you my bank account deposits, you'd say, well, you have a rich uncle and it's not really your money, just that you've convinced your uncle to go through with this charade just to prove to those two clowns on LP that you're really making money, that'll show em !

Both of your egos are so high up your anally tight asses, that nothing will convince you. Just because the math doesn't seem to allow a human to win may be true, but what you two have to do to get your heads out of your asses is to wake up and realize that someone, or a handful have found a way to beat the lottery, NOT by beating the math, but by leveraging their bets coupled with strategies UNKNOWN to you and me, in such a way as to consitently win. When I say consistently, I don't mean everytime, but enough to stay out of the red, and occasionally bet really heavy when certain indicators directs them to, and make a living off of it. You say it's impossible, but as Stack said, you haven't proved it. The math alone is NOT proof by itself. The proof is that neither you or bonehead has seen the system that Peter has, so you can't  examine it and DISPROVE it's worth. Until then, your math is just that, math.

What I propose, is that no matter how unbeatable something seems to be, you ALWAYShave to leave wiggle room. YOU HAVE TO! There is no black and white in life. No human knows what everything there is to know, and how it is, or it's make up. NO ONE, NOT YOU, NOT ME, NOT BONEHEAD, OR THE POPE.

How many people in history have said "IT CAN"T BE DONE"? I can write a book on just that alone. And how many of them were WRONG?

So get off your high horses and realize you don't know everything, you haven't met every gambler in the world, and you are not some Super human with super abilities who KNOWS for a FACT that someone, just even one person out there hasn't done it. THERE IS NO WAY YOU COULD POSSIBLY KNOW. PERIOD!

You say simple math shows it's impossible for someone to beat the p-4 and p-3 on a regular basis. And simple math shows a Bee can't fly either, but when advanced math is used, the Bee is able to fly. So much for your basic math. Get over yourselves, you are not geniuses. You don't know every single person on this planet personally, so there is NO WAY you know.

Bang Head

"That's how I usually react to little kids who just don't get it. The only difference is that I can't physically take bonehead by the ear and lock him in his room for a time out for being such a dumbass."

 

I really hope you don't have children.  LMAO, "hey, I got an A on my math test!"  "GO TO YOUR ROOM!  YOU DON'T GET THIS LIFE THING!!!"

 

And I love your point that I haven't seen every single gambler and so I can't know that nobody is winning against the Pick 3, but you can know that nobody has lost a lot of money.  Because you know, you just know that nobody could lose that much.

 

"wake up and realize that someone, or a handful have found a way to beat the lottery, NOT by beating the math, but by leveraging their bets coupled with strategies UNKNOWN to you and me, in such a way as to consitently win"

 

Nobody has done that - and if they have - they aren't talking about it.  But i know that, because by very definition you'd never be able to consitantly win.  There is no human who will live long enough to get that sample size, which would prove me right, so the point is moot.  Sure there's a handful of people who are FAR ahead, but that's because they won't live long enough to lose it back....  But of course, if you say they have, they must have, because there's no double standard between me and you.  I just would have to see every gambler everywhere in order to have input, but you don't have to.

    RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

    United States
    Member #59354
    March 13, 2008
    3962 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:09 pm - IP Logged

    Hi all

    And the wheel goes round and round.  Systems are nothing more than betting strategies and believe it or

    not, lottery games can be exploited to the level that includes making a living playing them.  Pick-3, pick-4

    games are the easiest  to exploit but all games provided you have the money to invest can provide some

    nice returns.

     

     

    Power ball and mega millions can set a person up for life with a JP win but that is not what I am talking about.

    Making 1 to 10K a week is possible playing P-3 / P-4.  Some will say prove it first and they will believe but I don't

    need anyone else to believe me, I know it to be true.

     

    The calculated odds for a game define the possible outcomes one can expect choosing at random but one can

    also expect to do much better or even much worse.   Many games of chance have fallen to betting strategies in

    the past of which blackjack is only one.  Some may argue that the lottery is a different animal all together and

    they are correct but this does not mean that it's impossible to win more than one looses.

     

    If a betting strategy or system does exist which was capable of providing a living playing these games then it's

    in the best interest of the holder of such a strategy to keep it too him/her self.

     

    RL

    Working on my Ph.D.  "University of hard Knocks"

    I will consider the opinion that my winnings are a product of chance if you are willing to consider

    they are not.  Many great discoveries come while searching for something else

    USAF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Base_Engineer_Emergency_Force

      US Flag Trump / 2016 & 2020  


      United States
      Member #128790
      June 2, 2012
      5431 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:22 pm - IP Logged

      Imagine what the video I'm about to show you has to do with the lottery, cause it truly does.

       

      Math is one thing, and timing, intuition, and many factors influence the outcome. One simple example is when you purchase a QP. Had you gone in the store 1 minute earlier, or later, the QP's numbers would definitely be different, save a couple of duplicate numbers that the RNG may include as it's protocol would suggest.

       

      That was a simplistic example, but there are many more that I've experienced in my long lifetime. Knock on plastic.lol

       

      The example below is something that will hopefully show how it's possible for synchronization of events to provide the seeker of order within disorder, a way to enhance their prediction stats. Remember, this is just one of many.

       

      Skip to the 7:20 mark. Then checkout what I wrote earlier in this thread. The link to what I said is below the video.

       

      http://www.lotterypost.com/thread/259455/3051097

      Or, how in the world can either of you claim anyone would wait 5 plus freaking years making questionable transactions by buying winning tickets, then claiming them as theirs, all the while dealing with all the hassles of this red tape, hard work, just to sell some "how to" book some 5 plus years later. Then the cost of a huge advertising campaign that would have to cover the costs of paying the taxes on those tickets he purchased, and all this work involved just to sell books to a few lottery enthusiasts who MAY buy the book. You two must be on drugs, OR, need to go on medication. Seriously, get help.

      Is there a doctor in the house?

       

       

      So you see, reality isn't always prompt. The odds of this occurence goes astronomical. What are the odds that I would write this and a few hours later as I'm watching this video, Dr. Greer sayas the exact same line word for word?

      This sort of synchronicity can and will happen if you look for them. Negative thoughts brews a soup of limited possibilities and inhibits growth.

      Things happen for a reason whether we're aware of them or not. Math is like the framework, and Intuition is like the plaster.


        United States
        Member #128790
        June 2, 2012
        5431 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:34 pm - IP Logged

        "That's how I usually react to little kids who just don't get it. The only difference is that I can't physically take bonehead by the ear and lock him in his room for a time out for being such a dumbass."

         

        I really hope you don't have children.  LMAO, "hey, I got an A on my math test!"  "GO TO YOUR ROOM!  YOU DON'T GET THIS LIFE THING!!!"

         

        And I love your point that I haven't seen every single gambler and so I can't know that nobody is winning against the Pick 3, but you can know that nobody has lost a lot of money.  Because you know, you just know that nobody could lose that much.

         

        "wake up and realize that someone, or a handful have found a way to beat the lottery, NOT by beating the math, but by leveraging their bets coupled with strategies UNKNOWN to you and me, in such a way as to consitently win"

         

        Nobody has done that - and if they have - they aren't talking about it.  But i know that, because by very definition you'd never be able to consitantly win.  There is no human who will live long enough to get that sample size, which would prove me right, so the point is moot.  Sure there's a handful of people who are FAR ahead, but that's because they won't live long enough to lose it back....  But of course, if you say they have, they must have, because there's no double standard between me and you.  I just would have to see every gambler everywhere in order to have input, but you don't have to.

        And I love your point that I haven't seen every single gambler and so I can't know that nobody is winning against the Pick 3, but you can know that nobody has lost a lot of money.  Because you know, you just know that nobody could lose that much.

        This is why I call you names.

        Would you continue spending money after losing month after month? it's a yes or no answer.


          United States
          Member #93947
          July 10, 2010
          2180 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:35 pm - IP Logged

          The Digit Man speaks:

          RL-RANDOMLOGIC says, "Making 1 to 10K a week is possible playing P-3 / P-4.  Some will say prove it first and they will believe but I don't need anyone else to believe me, I know it to be true."

          So, it looks like he's been holding out on us, and all of his disciples who put so much energy into his abandoned enterprise.

          I hope he has good security surrounding his money maker - who knows what lengths some people might go to to learn more about his $1K to $10K per week Pick-3/4 system.


            United States
            Member #128790
            June 2, 2012
            5431 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:39 pm - IP Logged

            "That's how I usually react to little kids who just don't get it. The only difference is that I can't physically take bonehead by the ear and lock him in his room for a time out for being such a dumbass."

             

            I really hope you don't have children.  LMAO, "hey, I got an A on my math test!"  "GO TO YOUR ROOM!  YOU DON'T GET THIS LIFE THING!!!"

             

            And I love your point that I haven't seen every single gambler and so I can't know that nobody is winning against the Pick 3, but you can know that nobody has lost a lot of money.  Because you know, you just know that nobody could lose that much.

             

            "wake up and realize that someone, or a handful have found a way to beat the lottery, NOT by beating the math, but by leveraging their bets coupled with strategies UNKNOWN to you and me, in such a way as to consitently win"

             

            Nobody has done that - and if they have - they aren't talking about it.  But i know that, because by very definition you'd never be able to consitantly win.  There is no human who will live long enough to get that sample size, which would prove me right, so the point is moot.  Sure there's a handful of people who are FAR ahead, but that's because they won't live long enough to lose it back....  But of course, if you say they have, they must have, because there's no double standard between me and you.  I just would have to see every gambler everywhere in order to have input, but you don't have to.

            "wake up and realize that someone, or a handful have found a way to beat the lottery, NOT by beating the math, but by leveraging their bets coupled with strategies UNKNOWN to you and me, in such a way as to consitently win"

             

            Nobody has done that - and if they have - they aren't talking about it.  But i know that, because by very definition you'd never be able to consitantly win.  There is no human who will live long enough to get that sample size, which would prove me right, so the point is moot.  Sure there's a handful of people who are FAR ahead, but that's because they won't live long enough to lose it back....  But of course, if you say they have, they must have, because there's no double standard between me and you.  I just would have to see every gambler everywhere in order to have input, but you don't have to.

             i just would have to see every gambler everywhere in order to have input, but you don't have to.

             

            I don't have to because I know for a fact that I have to leave some room for the unexpected. You're the one saying it's impossible, based on simple math, and I say, wait a minute, how can you come to a conclusion based on something as rigid as math?

            Reality is debatable my friend. I didn't just learn this yesterday. Reality is permeable my friend, and that's all I have to say on this.


              United States
              Member #93947
              July 10, 2010
              2180 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:40 pm - IP Logged

              OnlyMoney,

              So you think that the possibility our planet has been visited by aliens proves there is a way to mathematically defeat the state lotteries' Pick3-4 games.  What's your opinion on Perpetual Motion Machines?

              --Jimmy4164


                United States
                Member #128790
                June 2, 2012
                5431 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:44 pm - IP Logged

                Hi all

                And the wheel goes round and round.  Systems are nothing more than betting strategies and believe it or

                not, lottery games can be exploited to the level that includes making a living playing them.  Pick-3, pick-4

                games are the easiest  to exploit but all games provided you have the money to invest can provide some

                nice returns.

                 

                 

                Power ball and mega millions can set a person up for life with a JP win but that is not what I am talking about.

                Making 1 to 10K a week is possible playing P-3 / P-4.  Some will say prove it first and they will believe but I don't

                need anyone else to believe me, I know it to be true.

                 

                The calculated odds for a game define the possible outcomes one can expect choosing at random but one can

                also expect to do much better or even much worse.   Many games of chance have fallen to betting strategies in

                the past of which blackjack is only one.  Some may argue that the lottery is a different animal all together and

                they are correct but this does not mean that it's impossible to win more than one looses.

                 

                If a betting strategy or system does exist which was capable of providing a living playing these games then it's

                in the best interest of the holder of such a strategy to keep it too him/her self.

                 

                RL

                If a betting strategy or system does exist which was capable of providing a living playing these games then it's

                in the best interest of the holder of such a strategy to keep it too him/her self.

                 

                Finally, someone other than Stack47 with a working brain.

                And I'm sure Jimmy and Boney have interviewed those few are keeping those secrets. Oh wait...they don't even believe those types of people exist in the first place, cause we all know Jimmy and Boney have the the last word on all possible possibilities right? Green laugh

                  Elizabeth03's avatar - cat anm.gif
                  Nova Scotia
                  Canada
                  Member #9934
                  December 27, 2004
                  884 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:55 pm - IP Logged

                  If my intuition was better with the lottery numbers- I'd be a multimillionaire right now!"


                    United States
                    Member #128790
                    June 2, 2012
                    5431 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: May 5, 2013, 7:58 pm - IP Logged

                    OnlyMoney,

                    So you think that the possibility our planet has been visited by aliens proves there is a way to mathematically defeat the state lotteries' Pick3-4 games.  What's your opinion on Perpetual Motion Machines?

                    --Jimmy4164

                    No, I was trying to make a point that synchronicities have a major role in predicting numbers, so the rigid math doesn't fill in the gaps so to speak. The math is the exoskeleton, and the Intuition is the plaster.

                    The video could've been about any subject other than Aliens visiting. I just happened to be watching the disclosure video when this synchronicity occured.

                     

                    Perpetual motion? Well, based on our contemporary knowledge on physics, there can be no such machine because of friction. On the other hand, if you take the time to watch all 29 videos of which I posted one of, you'd see a clearer picture of how the information supression is leading the masses to believe oil, gas, and coal are the only choices we have, when In fact there is another dimension of reality that is being kept from us all that could liberate us from oil. Unfortunately the elite have a vested interested in the financial Macro-economical/power control. They've painted themselves into a corner with 50 plus years of denial. They'll never admit they've lied to us for that long.


                      United States
                      Member #128790
                      June 2, 2012
                      5431 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: May 5, 2013, 8:04 pm - IP Logged

                      If my intuition was better with the lottery numbers- I'd be a multimillionaire right now!"

                      Strange things happen when you allow a platform to accomodate the unknown.

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7295 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: May 5, 2013, 8:11 pm - IP Logged

                        Stack47,

                        "When did you prove there is no strategy that can produce an income from lottery winnings?"

                        Boney526 has done a great job of this on multiple occasions, but since you still don't seem to understand, I'll give it another shot.  In general, it's difficult to prove the NON-existence of something.  But in the case of simplistic models like well defined lottery games, it's more like asserting the OBVIOUS, than a proof.  E.G., the Expected Value of a straight $1 win ticket in a Pick-3 game in most states is $0.50.  This is true because the probability of winning is 1/1000 and the payoff if you win is $500.  The rules and payoff schedules of lottery games are all MOST people need as PROOF.

                        "You actually prove it's possible to bet $5 on five pick-3 QPs every drawing for five years and show a nice profit."

                        You are absolutely right - POSSIBLE.  Boney gave you all you SHOULD need to understand how the Variance of these random processes allows this to happen.  What you overlook is the fact that the handful of fictitious winners in my simulation found themselves winners through no effort of their own other than buying Random Tickets for the Random Drawings.  There was no strategy or method used.  Please read this paragraph again.

                        "You really need to find someone to help you with your Delusions of Grandeur."

                        If you're going to make the ludicrous claim that you are a licensed psychologist, you really should bone up on their terminology.  WHAT DO YOU OR DID YOU DO FOR A LIVING aside from hang out in casinos, use Pick-3 software since 1981 and since 2006 try to convince others here that mathematicians suffer from Delusions of Grandeur?

                        A simpler question might just be, "What is your purpose here?"

                        --Jimmy4164

                        "the Expected Value of a straight $1 win ticket in a Pick-3 game in most states is $0.50."

                        I get it, if I bet $10 on one of Keith Price's "six picks for a buck" and win, I should expect to win $10,000 and not the $5000 the lottery will pay me. Why would I expect to win $10,000 when the payoff is 500 to 1 and how does winning $4990 more than I bet prove I lost?

                        "This is true because the probability of winning is 1/1000 and the payoff if you win is $500."

                        Every state website shows how much a player can win for a $1 bet and believe it or not, when a player bets $1, they are betting they will win $500. I'm pretty sure 99.9% of them know there are 1000 possible outcomes, but thanks anyways for pointing that out. Does it make you feel better by pointing out what 99.9% of pick-3 players already know? 

                        "Boney gave you all you SHOULD need to understand how the Variance of these random processes allows this to happen."

                        You both showed you understand how to calculate a house edge and how over time with enough volume of play, the house should average that percentage in profits. When a state lottery averages $365 million a year in sales and keeps 50%, they are still paying out $182.5 million in prizes and neither of you proved how the winning prizes are distributed. Can you prove none of the players made a profit from the $182.5 million in prizes making it impossible for any one player to make a steady income from lottery winnings?

                        "What you overlook is the fact that the handful of fictitious winners in my simulation found themselves winners through no effort of their own other than buying Random Tickets for the Random Drawings."

                        You entered a value of 25,000, each with the same number of chances in each drawing as 5 and then added 1825 as the total number of drawings. Each winning chance was valued at $500 and 1/1000 of all the total chances won $500. The results showed some of 25,000 individual 9125 chances won more and proves because it's possible random chances can win in random drawings, self picks with exactly the same chances can win too.

                        Did you called them fictional players to distinguish between real players because you know real players would never make those very limited types of bets or did you do it to make your simulation more realistic to you?

                        "If you're going to make the ludicrous claim that you are a licensed psychologist, you really should bone up on their terminology."

                        I find the fact you added fictional players to the generic value of 25,000 fascinating and the fact you added thoughts and conclusions by the fictional players "fictitious winners in my simulation found themselves winners through no effort of their own." even more fascinating. Do you usually justify your actions by showing the actions of fictional people?

                        "use Pick-3 software since 1981"

                        The first Lottery software I saw was a Lotto program called Expert Lottery for Windows and Windows 3.1 wasn't introduced until 1992.

                        "and since 2006 try to convince others here that mathematicians suffer from Delusions of Grandeur?"

                        At best I've suggested that you suffer from Delusions of Grandeur. What compelled you to explain to me who you acknowledged played Pick-3 games since 1981, the payoff for accurately picking one of the 1000 possibilities is 500 to 1?

                        Compared to some of the mathematicians that post on LP, your math skills are about the same as the average eight grader. What should a licensed Psychologist conclude about you when you call a generic value "25,000 fictional players", added thoughts and conclusions made by your fictional players,  even named one "Uncle Craig", and compare your limited knowledge of math to renown mathematicians?

                          Avatar
                          Kentucky
                          United States
                          Member #32652
                          February 14, 2006
                          7295 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: May 5, 2013, 8:49 pm - IP Logged

                          Standard deviation.  It's easy to put words in my mouth and if you can ignore most of the stuff I've argued, now isn't it.

                           

                          I chose to leave it at that, because I've explained many times before how it is NOT like what you are describing me as saying.  So basically, you're lying about my arguement.  Or at very least, you are not reading it, and putting words in my mouth.

                           

                          I NEVER said anything like no player can win using a betting strategy, I said betting strategies don't change the house edge, they just change the risk you leverage.

                           

                          The assumption by many people is they can beat the edge by using betting systems.  I'm saying that's not true.

                           

                          Try not to read that as "it's impossible to win" because I never said that.  EVER.

                          "I NEVER said anything like no player can win using a betting strategy, I said betting strategies don't change the house edge, they just change the risk you leverage."

                          Are you now going to say there is a difference between a betting system and a betting strategy to make it look like you didn't say "It has been proven that no betting system outperforms the house edge."

                          "The assumption by many people is they can beat the edge by using betting systems.  I'm saying that's not true."

                          I said it possible that someone is using a betting strategy/system to make a steady income from lottery profits. And you can't prove it's not true.

                          "Try not to read that as "it's impossible to win" because I never said that.  EVER."

                          You said "The assumption by many people is they can beat the edge by using betting systems.  I'm saying that's not true. " and "It has been proven that no betting system outperforms the house edge." Are you asking me not to assume anything from what you post because you don't know what you're talking about?

                            Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                            New Jersey
                            United States
                            Member #99032
                            October 18, 2010
                            1439 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: May 5, 2013, 9:14 pm - IP Logged

                            I've mentioned standard deviation many times, and a couple months ago we had a lengthy discussion about it.

                             

                            I say that no betting system outperforms the house edge.  Because standard deviation (variance) applies, some people will win.  Those aren't contradictory claims, they are just different parts of the same mathemetical puzzle.

                             

                            If you define a betting strategy, a simulation can show the probabilities of different returns over time.  No system has ever performed better than the house edge over time, and shorter simulations show that they win just as often as the house edge and variance of the game dictate.  No betting system can change the edge, but they can change the variance.


                              United States
                              Member #128790
                              June 2, 2012
                              5431 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: May 5, 2013, 9:18 pm - IP Logged

                              I've mentioned standard deviation many times, and a couple months ago we had a lengthy discussion about it.

                               

                              I say that no betting system outperforms the house edge.  Because standard deviation (variance) applies, some people will win.  Those aren't contradictory claims, they are just different parts of the same mathemetical puzzle.

                               

                              If you define a betting strategy, a simulation can show the probabilities of different returns over time.  No system has ever performed better than the house edge over time, and shorter simulations show that they win just as often as the house edge and variance of the game dictate.  No betting system can change the edge, but they can change the variance.

                               No system has ever performed better than the house

                              Boney knows for a fact that NO system has performed. By some super-human knowledge he knows this to be a fact. Amazing. How do you accomplish such a feat?

                                 
                                Page 32 of 42