Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 6, 2016, 4:15 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Megamillions and Powerball Games

Topic closed. 205 replies. Last post 3 years ago by SergeM.

Page 8 of 14
54
PrintE-mailLink

Which Play is the Best Bet?

Powerball [ 9 ]  [24.32%]
Powerball with Powerplay [ 4 ]  [10.81%]
Megamillions [ 12 ]  [32.43%]
Megamillions with Megaplier [ 12 ]  [32.43%]
Total Valid Votes [ 37 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 7 ]  
RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

United States
Member #59354
March 13, 2008
3966 Posts
Offline
Posted: April 2, 2014, 11:29 am - IP Logged

The question doesn't work well on me, I would answer yes or no, leaving the person asking with a maybe wrong answer, because he just was forcing one. I won't go further into language, logic or psychology.

For some the question always is, when do we eat?

SergeM

If you look at the content of the question then yes or no are the only options.   The real question here is

"Do pseudo random selections mimic the population and distribution of the matrix?"  If so, why?  These

are the things jimbo should be looking at.

 

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 #93947
    July 10, 2010
    2180 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: April 2, 2014, 5:05 pm - IP Logged

    The question doesn't work well on me, I would answer yes or no, leaving the person asking with a maybe wrong answer, because he just was forcing one. I won't go further into language, logic or psychology.

    For some the question always is, when do we eat?

    Sergem,
    Questions, questions, questions.  Lots of questions, very few answers.  I responded to RL-RANDOMLOGIC's loaded question, just not to his satisfaction.  In my reply I also asked him if he believed single digit numbers in the Pick-3 were less likely to be drawn than the vast majority containing 2 or 3 digits.  Since he has already confirmed that he believes certain subsets of a Pick-5, based on digit frequencies, are more likely to produce Jackpot wins than others, my question, when directed at him, is not loaded.  (Read the Loaded Question Wiki again)  Note that he has not answered it.

    RL-RANDOMLOGIC believes that the "real" question here is, "Do pseudo random selections mimic the population and distribution of the matrix?"   In fact, this question is irrelevant.  Of course these expected distributions are going to be produced by any good RNG.  What he fails to see is that sets drawn from these subsets (E.G., 5 or 6 digits, high frequency sums, etc) are no more likely to match the draws than any other sets.  Don Catlin explained this well in his piece, Lottery Nonsense.   This is the crux of his innumeracy.  His digit counts and sums are not the only measures of "population and distribution" that can be observed in Lotto combinations.  However, since the Lottery only pays when your numerical selections match their draws to some degree or another, with no bonuses for sums, or digit frequencies, etc., considering them in your betting is a complete waste of time.  RL-RANDOMLOGIC did suggest one intelligent betting strategy above when he advised against betting on combinations that are known to be bet on heavily in parimutuel games.  Perhaps there is hope for him.

    Earlier in this thread, RL-RANDOMLOGIC said, "I have my own tools and have ran thousands of simulations over the years but just for you I ran the one you linked above and it perty much agrees with my own observations."  But since he previously told us that (Pick-5) sets containing 5-6 digits are more likely to win jackpots than the others, his statement must be false.  Why?  Because the Powerball/Magamillions simulator he refers to (See beginning of this thread) clearly debunks that proposition.  Try it.  If his own "thousands" of simulations also "perty much agree" with his false conclusions, either he is a very incompetent simulation programmer, handicapped in his interpretation of his results by his Innumeracy, OR, he is a barefaced (fill in the blank.)  Let's hope it's not the latter.

    --Jimmy4164

      RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

      United States
      Member #59354
      March 13, 2008
      3966 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: April 2, 2014, 6:18 pm - IP Logged

      jimbo

      Who's being mean now,  must of really struck a nerve.  The data is there, take a look for yourself.   Saying

      it's a loaded question makes no sense.  When I mentioned the little tool you linked to I was just simply stating

      that it perty much functioned as expected.  The person puts in a set of numbers and then the simple little

      program generates pseudo random sets of numbers and checks them one against the other.  If this is what you

      consider an advanced simulation, you need your head checked.  If I don't include the front-end code for this little

      tool I would say it would take less than five minutes and entire program maybe an hour. 

       

      I won't bother you anymore as I got the answer I was looking for.  One more thing before I go, it's not much fun

      to have someone always poking their nose in uninvited is it?  And one more thing, remember your first PM to me,

      you know the one where you wanted me to help you write stock forecasting software, the answer is still NO. 

       

      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 #93947
        July 10, 2010
        2180 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: April 2, 2014, 8:18 pm - IP Logged

        RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

        "I won't bother you anymore as I got the answer I was looking for.  One more thing before I go, it's not much fun to have someone always poking their nose in uninvited is it?  And one more thing, remember your first PM to me, you know the one where you wanted me to help you write stock forecasting software, the answer is still NO."

        I think I remember suggesting your talents would be better utilized writing programs for the stock market. There is no way I would have seriously asked you to help me write stock forecasting software.  Anyone reading this thread with any critical thinking skills should easily see that you are cornered, and rather than bow out, you resort to underhanded tactics designed to weasel out of your untenable position.  I don't feel sorry for you any more; I feel sorry for anyone who has to deal with you personally and/or daily.  Your problems go far beyond Innumeracy.

        Here you CAN use historical data to help predict the Future.


        --Jimmy4164

        P.S. https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/273424/3550048 

          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

          United States
          Member #59354
          March 13, 2008
          3966 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: April 3, 2014, 1:12 am - IP Logged

          Jimbo

          When you said that the draws do mimic the matrix, I took it as a yes to my question.  Since you agree then

          you know what I say about betting is also true.  As for the second part about asking me to help you write

          software, come on, don't be a liar. 

          I guess you will also say that you did not PM me asking me not to post picks of my tickets after I finally agreed

          to meet your challenge on another post.  Your hypocrisies know no bounds.   Go ahead and twist things around

          so that they don't have anything to do with what I actually said.  Calling me stupid is just a your way of trying to

          dig your way out of the hole I put you in.

          DUMB-ASS

          I only have so much time set aside for suffering of fools and it has just ran out. 

          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  

            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

            United States
            Member #59354
            March 13, 2008
            3966 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: April 3, 2014, 1:11 pm - IP Logged

            Hi all except jimbo

            I had a little time this morning so I thought I would work on a simulator that means something.

            This one will do about the same thing as the one linked by that other guy but adds a method

            to the mix which should tell the truth.  It has 2 RNG's one of which simulates the player picks and

            the other simulates the drawing.  I chose two different RNG's just to make the simulation fair.

            This program has shows side by side random picks, QP's  vs filtered sets.  It does not track the prize

            amounts because that's not the focus of the simulator, another reason is  because I built it so that it

            can handle any Pick-4,  5 or 6 number game up to 99 numbers and the payouts are different for about

            every game.  I still have to add the filter code but thinking of uploading it if anyone is interested, I

            say anyone but what I really mean is anyone but that other guy because he already knows the outcome.

            Anyway, here is a pic of the program. 

            RL

             

            rl's simulator

            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  

              Kola's avatar - image
              Blundering Time Traveler

              United States
              Member #28945
              December 25, 2005
              1527 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: April 4, 2014, 10:58 am - IP Logged

              I went back and read this. I sometime wonder why G-d sends us on a journey and puts people in our path. I can't /wont elaborate too much but I do have a system that worked so well I got hacked  so you CAN win a lot of money. The answers are right there in front of noses using basic math. Yes I said BASIC math. If you can add 1+1=2 you can master the lottery. The nay Sayers are here to discourage us to quit   Laws of Attraction is where it's at. BTW , I now use a computer with no modem lol

               

              RL keep on trucking until you get it. I've only been at almost a year and most weeks I only miss 1 to 2 balls no matter what fame I play. Now , some weeks I miss them all

              SkyLine69, you said,

              "The answers are right there in front of noses using basic math. Yes I said BASIC math. If you can add 1+1=2 you can master the lottery."

              Plainly and well said!

              Good luck to you...

              Kola

              Legend says that The Craggy One was once asked about the Lottery Circle and the aged Lottery LoreKeeper whispered in his gravelly eloquence,"It is known among our kind that 2 successive draws are in reality the 2 center-points of 2 intersecting circles that share a common radius - a Root Center. This Vesica Piscis is the creative womb for all numbers, the Still Point from which two draws will unite & a new one is born. This "perfect" space is a wormhole through Time(Change). Master its proportions & your numerical predictions will not falter". 

                Kola's avatar - image
                Blundering Time Traveler

                United States
                Member #28945
                December 25, 2005
                1527 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: April 4, 2014, 1:29 pm - IP Logged

                SergeM

                If you look at the content of the question then yes or no are the only options.   The real question here is

                "Do pseudo random selections mimic the population and distribution of the matrix?"  If so, why?  These

                are the things jimbo should be looking at.

                 

                RL

                RL-RANDOMLOGIC, at various points along this thread you've said,

                "It's not the odds for the game that are questioned here  but how one chooses to play the game."

                "My points are valid as you must  know that evolution defies statistical logic in more ways than I care to point out."

                "If it's not truly random then it also must not be impossible to  improve ones outcome....If I believed that the drawings were truly random then I would not be working on systems,"

                "I have no problems with probability theory, it's just your interpretation of it."

                "It is true that any set of numbers can and will hit if the game is allowed to continue but having a 1 in 575757 chance is infinitely larger than zero chance."

                I wholeheartedly share your sentiments above. And in regards to your last quote...While the odds are such that they look formidable to most, the odds say nothing about you not routinely being that very "1" in 575757, especially if you are using methods not based on randomness. For some people, odds are such that to look upon them implies great difficulty.  I think they more accurately imply a "road less travelled".

                Travel well!

                Kola

                Legend says that The Craggy One was once asked about the Lottery Circle and the aged Lottery LoreKeeper whispered in his gravelly eloquence,"It is known among our kind that 2 successive draws are in reality the 2 center-points of 2 intersecting circles that share a common radius - a Root Center. This Vesica Piscis is the creative womb for all numbers, the Still Point from which two draws will unite & a new one is born. This "perfect" space is a wormhole through Time(Change). Master its proportions & your numerical predictions will not falter". 


                  United States
                  Member #93947
                  July 10, 2010
                  2180 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: April 5, 2014, 5:06 am - IP Logged

                  jimbe

                  Why have you not answered one of my first questions concerning evolution.  The question is

                  really not about evolution in general it's about the odds.  Evolution is mathematically equivalent to

                  winning the lottery every day for thousands of years without a single miss.  Your a pick and choose

                  sort of guy which is why I will never take you serious.  Same thing when you mock my digit system,

                  you pick out the part which agrees with the expected odds but ignore the human element of being

                  able to pick a couple digits from a list of 7.  As I have said many times if I can't predict or guess the

                  correct digits to add to the base digits then the system fails.  However when I do select the correct

                  couple digits then I have trapped the 5of5 in sometimes less than 100 lines.   Maybe I am just good

                  at guessing or maybe it's chance.  The truth is that you can't tell the difference.  Crap is crap, I call

                  it like it is.   I just hope others see you for what you really are, looser.

                  RL

                  RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                  Evolution?  Read The Blind Watchmaker.

                  "...but [you] ignore the human element of being able to pick a couple digits from a list of 7.  As I have said many times if I can't predict or guess the correct digits to add to the base digits then the system fails.  However when I do select the correct couple digits then I have trapped the 5of5 in sometimes less than 100 lines."

                  Correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying here that IF you can correctly pick 2 digits from a list of 7, you can win a 5of5 jackpot by buying as little as 100 combinations.  Let's see what that would cost to play and what returns you could expect.  I'll assume the Missouri Show Me Cash game and give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming 200 lines per draw would be required to win.

                  There are 21 combinations of 7 digits taken 2 at a time.  Since lines are $0.50 each, buying 200 for each of the 2 digit guesses would be $2100.  Since the game pays a minimun of $50,000, you should win at least $47,900 every time you play.  Sounds like a good deal to me!

                  I have an idea for how you can get backers for the initial $2100, which you might not have on hand.  Calculate the 4200 lines you would buy for the next drawing and post them right here. We'll check your results for you.  Make these 4200 line "pretend" buys at least 10 times.  If you do this, I'm sure you will be swamped with investors begging you to let them in on the action.  Just imagine, $47,900 per day will be about $1,437,000 per month!  It won't take long and you'll up there with the one percenters!  :-)

                  GO FOR IT!  (I'm surprized you've never tried this.)

                  --Jimmy4164

                  P.S.  I assumed you meant 2 when you said "a couple."  If you meant 3 instead, the daily cost will increase from $2100 to $3500.  No big deal when the payoff is $50,000.


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: April 7, 2014, 2:00 am - IP Logged

                    Voters,

                    Well, it looks like the man from Missouri has tired of defending his process of splitting base 10 numbers into their component digits, so maybe we can get back to this poll.  I'm curious what others' reasons are for their choices.  It looks like Megamillions with Megaplier has edged out the others, but not by that much.  I chose that one because the simulator tells me its return for each $ spent is highest, assuming you never hit a big prize.  There really is no "correct" answer since the overall Expected Values of all 4 are probably very close to each other.  The difference is in the distribution of the winnings.

                    So what did you vote for and why?

                    --Jimmy4164


                      United States
                      Member #93947
                      July 10, 2010
                      2180 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: April 9, 2014, 6:02 am - IP Logged

                      RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                      Recently you said, "When I mentioned the little tool you linked to I was just simply stating that it perty much functioned as expected.  The person puts in a set of numbers and then the simple little program generates pseudo random sets of numbers and checks them one against the other.  If this is what you consider an advanced simulation, you need your head checked.  If I don't include the front-end code for this little tool I would say it would take less than five minutes and entire program maybe an hour."

                      First of all, neither I nor anyone else described the simulator linked to in this thread as "Advanced."  I called it the Best I had seen, referring primarily to it's interface.  Anyone who understands the math behind these simple lottery games doesn't need you to tell them that an "Advanced" computer simulation is not necessary to demonstrate prize distributions over time.  In fact, your description of what the "simple little program" does is correct. It displays the typical results of what happens twice a week when 70-80% of the Powerball and Megamillions players purchase their Quick Picks!

                      But you're going to give us an "Advanced" simulator.  You're going to take the "simple little program" and add a filter to the production of the player's sets, one that throws out all random sets that fail your tests for "High Quality," the kinds of tests that Don Catlin calls "Nonsense."

                      So here we sit, with a screen shot of a FACADE of what you claimed could be programmed in an hour.  You're right that these kinds of programs are not Rocket Science, IF they are written HONESTLY, using the simple math that underlies the Lottery. However, it's not so simple when someone like yourself tries to (hopefully) honestly apply his filters in a simulator and finds out that IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE WHAT SETS HE THROWS OUT, THE RESULTS ARE THE SAME!

                      Since anyone with half a brain should reject any computer code you produce which shows an advantage to using only sets that pass through your filters, the only valid way to put one or more of your ideas to a REAL test is to apply them to a game which has been in existence long enough that ALL possible Draws have been made at least once, and are publicly available.  Here is a SIMPLE way to do that:

                      The Pennsylvania Pick-3 game (evening) has been running for about 35 years, or around 12,775 Draws.  The 1,000 Straight possibilities in the 000-999 game should, on average, have appeared around 12-13 times. Now, YOU tell us that sets whose unique digit counts are more numerous than others will be winners more often that the average, ostensibly because the random lottery draws will also produce more of them.

                      OK, in the Pick-3 the breakdown is as follows:

                      # Unique Digits     #Sets Containing this many digits
                            1                              10

                            2                            270

                            3                            720


                      So, according to your theory, we should clearly bet only on numbers containing 3 digits.

                      To Anyone who would like to test this idea:


                      RL-RANDOMLOGIC won't try this because he already knows what to expect.  Go to this web page:

                      http://www.palottery.state.pa.us/Games/Has-My-Number-Ever-Won.aspx?id=2

                      Be sure to UNcheck the Box Hits option, this post applies to Straight bets only.  Then type in numbers from the 3 groups above and see if there is any signigicant difference in how often they've hit over 35 years.

                      Have Fun!

                      --Jimmy4164

                        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                        United States
                        Member #59354
                        March 13, 2008
                        3966 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: April 9, 2014, 10:34 am - IP Logged

                        Jimbo, jimbo, jimbo

                        I noticed that you had to revert to single digit games to make your point.  I also see that no one

                        wants to give you the time of day so let me help you out.  I bet your mom had to tie a bone around

                        your neck to get the dog to play with you.

                        I did not post the little program because I did not see any interest, just like the rest of your post.

                        Here are a few pics of the final version that I went with.  First of all I removed the bonus ball option

                        as we are dealing with the set and I don't calculate it into my analysis.

                        pic1

                         

                        pic2

                         

                        pic3

                         

                        Notice that I swaped the sets around so that your horse got to run on both tracks.  I did play around with the

                        rng's and finally got the results a little closer but I had to kind of cheat a little.  All you know is the odds and I

                        see that you have never studied random.  These simulations are 10x the number of sets in the entire 5-39

                        matrix.  Over 5 million which if one played 10 lines each and every day then were talking over 15 thousand

                        years. 

                        P.S. I removed the filter option and no filters were used in these simulations. Your horse came in last every time.

                        These are just a few of the test ran.

                        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  

                          RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                          United States
                          Member #59354
                          March 13, 2008
                          3966 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: April 9, 2014, 10:48 am - IP Logged

                          Final note!

                          It's a total waste of time to argue with you.  You believe whatever you want, I will go with what I know.

                          The End.

                          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  

                            RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

                            United States
                            Member #59354
                            March 13, 2008
                            3966 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: April 9, 2014, 11:34 am - IP Logged

                            One more.

                            Notice the first two simulations are set to static. I switched jimbo's set 1-2-11-12-21 with my set so that

                            they were used in both the left and right side simulators.  In the third pic I ran the left in Q-Pick mode and

                            in the right my set.  The set I chose is what I consider a optimized set for my 5-39 but could have used many

                            others. 

                            Below is a pic of a simulation that I ran this morning using the Q-Pick option for both left and right simulators. 

                            The simulator uses two pairs of identical RNG's.  Both the left and right simulators have two RNG's. The first

                            one picks the set that is displayed on top and the second is displayed as the bottom set.  Both top and both

                            bottom RNG's have the exact same code.  I wrote it this way so that both sides are equal.  The numbers generated

                            will be different because of the time difference between one ending and the next starting. 

                             

                            Q-Pick vs Q-Pick just to show they are evenly matched

                            sim pic

                            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 #93947
                              July 10, 2010
                              2180 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: April 10, 2014, 3:55 am - IP Logged

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC,

                              Recently you said, "When I mentioned the little tool you linked to I was just simply stating that it perty much functioned as expected.  The person puts in a set of numbers and then the simple little program generates pseudo random sets of numbers and checks them one against the other.  If this is what you consider an advanced simulation, you need your head checked.  If I don't include the front-end code for this little tool I would say it would take less than five minutes and entire program maybe an hour."

                              First of all, neither I nor anyone else described the simulator linked to in this thread as "Advanced."  I called it the Best I had seen, referring primarily to it's interface.  Anyone who understands the math behind these simple lottery games doesn't need you to tell them that an "Advanced" computer simulation is not necessary to demonstrate prize distributions over time.  In fact, your description of what the "simple little program" does is correct. It displays the typical results of what happens twice a week when 70-80% of the Powerball and Megamillions players purchase their Quick Picks!

                              But you're going to give us an "Advanced" simulator.  You're going to take the "simple little program" and add a filter to the production of the player's sets, one that throws out all random sets that fail your tests for "High Quality," the kinds of tests that Don Catlin calls "Nonsense."

                              So here we sit, with a screen shot of a FACADE of what you claimed could be programmed in an hour.  You're right that these kinds of programs are not Rocket Science, IF they are written HONESTLY, using the simple math that underlies the Lottery. However, it's not so simple when someone like yourself tries to (hopefully) honestly apply his filters in a simulator and finds out that IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE WHAT SETS HE THROWS OUT, THE RESULTS ARE THE SAME!

                              Since anyone with half a brain should reject any computer code you produce which shows an advantage to using only sets that pass through your filters, the only valid way to put one or more of your ideas to a REAL test is to apply them to a game which has been in existence long enough that ALL possible Draws have been made at least once, and are publicly available.  Here is a SIMPLE way to do that:

                              The Pennsylvania Pick-3 game (evening) has been running for about 35 years, or around 12,775 Draws.  The 1,000 Straight possibilities in the 000-999 game should, on average, have appeared around 12-13 times. Now, YOU tell us that sets whose unique digit counts are more numerous than others will be winners more often that the average, ostensibly because the random lottery draws will also produce more of them.

                              OK, in the Pick-3 the breakdown is as follows:

                              # Unique Digits     #Sets Containing this many digits
                                    1                              10

                                    2                            270

                                    3                            720


                              So, according to your theory, we should clearly bet only on numbers containing 3 digits.

                              To Anyone who would like to test this idea:


                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC won't try this because he already knows what to expect.  Go to this web page:

                              http://www.palottery.state.pa.us/Games/Has-My-Number-Ever-Won.aspx?id=2

                              Be sure to UNcheck the Box Hits option, this post applies to Straight bets only.  Then type in numbers from the 3 groups above and see if there is any signigicant difference in how often they've hit over 35 years.

                              Have Fun!

                              --Jimmy4164

                              To Anyone Tempted to Believe RL-RANDOMLOGIC's Last 3 Posts

                              All he has proved with these postings is that he knows how to produce screen shots, the kind that software developers send to publishers when trying to get an advance to develop a program.  His results are contrived and illogical. He wasn’t even careful enough to make sure they were plausible. More accurately, they are laughable.

                              Ask yourself WHY "My Horse," the set [1,2,11,12,21] performs so poorly in his simulator but his favorite, [2,8,15,24,32], does miraculously well, in the Jackpot category only. Although he claims to take great pains to ensure his multiple Random Number Generators are tip top performers, they [appear to] produce fantastic results for his Static choice in the 5/5 (Jackpot) rows, but strangely enough, they’re right in line with probability in all the lower tier prizes. Does it seem a little odd to you that [2,8,15,24,32] wins Jackpots way beyond expected in multiple runs while the small variations in the lower tier prizes clearly indicate [there was an attempt to make it appear] there were different RNG seeds?  If you believe him, you should be out buying all the tickets you can afford with these numbers on them!  These screen shots are like evidence that’s been tampered with at a murder scene, where the tip-off is the attempt to make it appear the victim was fully clothed is botched by putting their shoes on the wrong feet!

                              To be sure his alleged simulation output in his last 3 posts is what he claims it is, you would need to read the source code, compile it yourself on your computer, and run it to see for yourself.  RL-RANDOMLOGIC will never allow this because he can't.  He either programmed biases into the program logic, or more than likely,just produced pretty pictures with a display generator, as I suggested above.

                              RL-RANDOMLOGIC’s last 3 posts are nothing more than a smoke screen to draw your attention away from my last post, which I've quoted above.  His theory that sets chosen from subsets based on criteria like unique digit frequencies, or sums, are more likely to win, is easily tested as I outlined above.  Of course, he will now try to convince you that Pick-3 is an exception.  The real reason he wants to avoid Pick-3 is because sufficient actual historical draw data is available and easily accessible which proves that he is full of you know what!

                              Do yourself a favor - follow the simple instructions in my above quoted post and visit the PALottery website...

                              http://www.palottery.state.pa.us/Games/Has-My-Number-Ever-Won.aspx?id=2

                              When I see evidence that at least a few of you are profiting from what I've been writing here, I might be willing to address some of the hilarious details of the last 3 posts.

                              --Jimmy4164

                              P.S.  If you're still tempted to believe in his theories after doing what I suggested above, go back and re-read this earlier post of mine that he has comnpletely ignored...

                              https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/273424/3553656

                                 
                                Page 8 of 14