Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 5, 2016, 11:30 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

New Systems Forum just based on real stats and facts!

Topic closed. 378 replies. Last post 2 years ago by WIN D.

Page 17 of 26
4.421
PrintE-mailLink

How about a new Systems forum based on just "facts"

Yes [ 107 ]  [81.06%]
No [ 16 ]  [12.12%]
VooDoo,dreams, reading entrials [ 4 ]  [3.03%]
Feelings [ 5 ]  [3.79%]
Total Valid Votes [ 132 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 8 ]  
Avatar
Kentucky
United States
Member #32652
February 14, 2006
7302 Posts
Offline
Posted: September 28, 2014, 1:31 pm - IP Logged

While everything you say is true, if you're a system player winning a free ticket isn't worth the same as winning a dollar.  Winning the jackpot isn't likely no matter which game you play so short of that winning back as much as you paid to play is the next best goal for a system.

I use stats to evaluate systems and if they must outperform probability, but if the system must win the top prize to barely break even, the system is useless. Playing a 14 number wheel, I could expect to expect to match 5 numbers once a year (with a probability of 1:288, plus or minus standard deviation) so breaking even waiting isn't a bad idea if one could devote that many days of filling out new play slips for every drawing. And of course there is no guarantee when one does match 5 of 14 numbers, all 5 numbers will be on the same line.

The "good for all states" 50 line predictions require 12 straight wins ever day just to break even. I have no idea exactly how many of the 1000 possible outcomes are including in three short sums "good for the next 3 days", but the cost of play could be at least $1800.

Only the full wheels are designed to win the jackpot when the system works at 100%. It depends on how many numbers and combinations are used to win when the systems works less than 100%.

    Avatar
    Kentucky
    United States
    Member #32652
    February 14, 2006
    7302 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: September 28, 2014, 2:09 pm - IP Logged

    The one thing that bugs me about people who quote stats......

    EVERY STAT THEY QUOTE COMES FROM SOMEONE ANAL ENOUGH TO SIT DOWN AND DETERMINE THE ODDS.

    Statistically speaking, the "You're Gonna Lose Stat" is the most posted stat on this site.

    But here's a clue:

    YOU'RE NEVER GETTING RID OF STATS.

    Every video game you ever played is based on stats.

    Want a new road? Leave it to the stats to say you need it.

    Look at a utility bill. Stats on the average number of kilowatts or water you use.

    Ever heard of baseball? Look at those stats. Do you think a batter goes into a game thinking "I'm hitting .333 so all I need is one hit every third at bat." Do you think after he gets that hit he quits trying?

    Football? You think those guys remind themselves every time they walk into a ball park, "We have a 50% chance of losing?" Think Peyton Manning quits trying to complete passes if he hits 8 out 10?

    What's the average number of macaroni's in a box of MacNCheese? How many M&M's in a bag?  Know the average number if straws in a boom? Hairs on your head?

    Ever been to a business that don't keeps stats on inventory, and projected losses?

    Insurance is based on stats. Ever heard of crime stats?

    Do you get on an airplane, saying, "God I wish I booked Qantas!"

    People go to casinos to GAMBLE knowing the stats say are going to LOSE.

    Would kill yourself if your doctor said you only had a 1% of living?

    Imagine how useless a stat is when people IGNORE IT. (Bet someone has a stat on people who ignore stats.)

    But does posting "You're Gonna Lose Stat" make it more true? Do you think one person reads it and says, "Okay, That's it.  I'm never playing lottery again?" Does it make you feel awesomer?

    Because people on the whole are not fatalist. They drive (even when they are drinking!!!), they fly, they go outside in a thunderstorm, they don't go out expecting to get mugged, they don't pet a strange dog thinking "I'm gonna get bit," and they don't buy a lottery ticket thinking "I'm gonna lose."

    Unless they are a fatalist.

    G

    "But does posting "You're Gonna Lose Stat" make it more true?"

    Even if the Lottery web sites posted "You're probably gonna lose", there would still be a large number of players because most of the sites show actual winners holding over sized checks; "Someone is going to win, it might as well be you".

    Stats like "only one out every 31.8 PB tickets win anything" and "only one out of those 5,510,173 tickets will win the jackpot" has no effect on the LP "how will you spend your winnings" threads. Besides many of them had one of those 31.8 tickets and it's only a matter of time until their ticket is matches the jackpot numbers.

      RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
      mid-Ohio
      United States
      Member #9
      March 24, 2001
      19824 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: September 28, 2014, 4:56 pm - IP Logged

      I use stats to evaluate systems and if they must outperform probability, but if the system must win the top prize to barely break even, the system is useless. Playing a 14 number wheel, I could expect to expect to match 5 numbers once a year (with a probability of 1:288, plus or minus standard deviation) so breaking even waiting isn't a bad idea if one could devote that many days of filling out new play slips for every drawing. And of course there is no guarantee when one does match 5 of 14 numbers, all 5 numbers will be on the same line.

      The "good for all states" 50 line predictions require 12 straight wins ever day just to break even. I have no idea exactly how many of the 1000 possible outcomes are including in three short sums "good for the next 3 days", but the cost of play could be at least $1800.

      Only the full wheels are designed to win the jackpot when the system works at 100%. It depends on how many numbers and combinations are used to win when the systems works less than 100%.

      The most effective system is playing every possible combination and they gets less effective down from there. 

      Even playing every possible combination is a losing scheme unless some very unusual circumstances exits.  Fore example if all 575757 possible combination of Ohio's RC5 were played, you would have all 65621 combinations that won something for $166940 plus the jackpot. Even then to get back all $57575 you spent for tickets you would have to be the only winner of a $408817 jackpot which seldom happens.  Ohio has seen to it that no system will ever beat this game because the payouts are about 10% of the cost to buy the amount of tickets to reach a particular prize level, they expect to sell ten tickets for every dollar they pay out.

      The most system designers can truthfully claim is a system will win when a bunch of certain conditions exist and you're lucky.  Players get upset when systems don't win under the conditions they choose to play and they don't get lucky.

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

        RL-RANDOMLOGIC's avatar - usafce

        United States
        Member #59354
        March 13, 2008
        3964 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: September 28, 2014, 5:24 pm - IP Logged

        This pic says it all, good shots don't always win.

        Stats

         

        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: September 28, 2014, 7:01 pm - IP Logged

          The most effective system is playing every possible combination and they gets less effective down from there. 

          Even playing every possible combination is a losing scheme unless some very unusual circumstances exits.  Fore example if all 575757 possible combination of Ohio's RC5 were played, you would have all 65621 combinations that won something for $166940 plus the jackpot. Even then to get back all $57575 you spent for tickets you would have to be the only winner of a $408817 jackpot which seldom happens.  Ohio has seen to it that no system will ever beat this game because the payouts are about 10% of the cost to buy the amount of tickets to reach a particular prize level, they expect to sell ten tickets for every dollar they pay out.

          The most system designers can truthfully claim is a system will win when a bunch of certain conditions exist and you're lucky.  Players get upset when systems don't win under the conditions they choose to play and they don't get lucky.


          Except for the unusual circumstances or conditions you allude to, you seem to be getting closer to the truth...
          This might help you get closer...
          I hope your unusual conditions don't have anything to do with previous draws. Smile

            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
            mid-Ohio
            United States
            Member #9
            March 24, 2001
            19824 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: September 28, 2014, 9:11 pm - IP Logged


            Except for the unusual circumstances or conditions you allude to, you seem to be getting closer to the truth...
            This might help you get closer...
            I hope your unusual conditions don't have anything to do with previous draws. Smile

            Every thing I have observed is based on previous drawings, I have no reasons to think future drawings results will be any different if the parameters stay the same.

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

              garyo1954's avatar - garyo
              Dallas, Texas
              United States
              Member #4549
              May 2, 2004
              1679 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: September 28, 2014, 10:04 pm - IP Logged

              "But does posting "You're Gonna Lose Stat" make it more true?"

              Even if the Lottery web sites posted "You're probably gonna lose", there would still be a large number of players because most of the sites show actual winners holding over sized checks; "Someone is going to win, it might as well be you".

              Stats like "only one out every 31.8 PB tickets win anything" and "only one out of those 5,510,173 tickets will win the jackpot" has no effect on the LP "how will you spend your winnings" threads. Besides many of them had one of those 31.8 tickets and it's only a matter of time until their ticket is matches the jackpot numbers.

              Quite an obtuse response. Not a single word about a real system, or a real stat with any proof. Rather wave the right hand while pointing to the advertising which has nothing to do with actual game play. Its meant to sell tickets.

              And discussion fo has nothing to do with game play. Anybody can post a "HOW MANY CHICKENS WOULD YOU BUY IF YOU WON MEGAMILLIONS?" thread. Same as it has always been, a place for general chitchat.

              Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those.

              Before you offer your general fluff, we'll agree there are weaknesses in every system. The idea of a system is to explore and exploit the advantages. Not to be flawless.

              Here's an example, in Texas 2Step, 18 draws have landed outside the norm and some are not merely outside the norm, they are combinations that have a single way they can hit, and they did.

              Does this mean the system is worthless? Is it an expected deviation? Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

              G

              My greatest accomplishment is teaching cats about Vienna Sausage. When I need a friend, all I need do is walk outside, pop open a can, and every little critter in the neighborhood drops by to say "Hi!"

                RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                mid-Ohio
                United States
                Member #9
                March 24, 2001
                19824 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: September 29, 2014, 11:41 am - IP Logged

                Quite an obtuse response. Not a single word about a real system, or a real stat with any proof. Rather wave the right hand while pointing to the advertising which has nothing to do with actual game play. Its meant to sell tickets.

                And discussion fo has nothing to do with game play. Anybody can post a "HOW MANY CHICKENS WOULD YOU BUY IF YOU WON MEGAMILLIONS?" thread. Same as it has always been, a place for general chitchat.

                Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those.

                Before you offer your general fluff, we'll agree there are weaknesses in every system. The idea of a system is to explore and exploit the advantages. Not to be flawless.

                Here's an example, in Texas 2Step, 18 draws have landed outside the norm and some are not merely outside the norm, they are combinations that have a single way they can hit, and they did.

                Does this mean the system is worthless? Is it an expected deviation? Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

                G

                "Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those."

                So what else is new, players are constantly using systems that don't get the results they want.  Would  members doing a better job of bashing systems posted by other members really be helpful?  Maybe it would be better if members posting systems explained their strategies and the conditions that have to exist for their systems to work, that way others can evaluate for themselves if one of these systems can work for them.

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

                  garyo1954's avatar - garyo
                  Dallas, Texas
                  United States
                  Member #4549
                  May 2, 2004
                  1679 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: September 29, 2014, 4:34 pm - IP Logged

                  "Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those."

                  So what else is new, players are constantly using systems that don't get the results they want.  Would  members doing a better job of bashing systems posted by other members really be helpful?  Maybe it would be better if members posting systems explained their strategies and the conditions that have to exist for their systems to work, that way others can evaluate for themselves if one of these systems can work for them.

                  RJOH,

                  I'm not advocating criticism of other members. Criticizing the player and system, totally different things.

                  Still you make a good point that criticizing a system could lead to personal attacks. So rather, the thread should be, "Why Systems Don't Work."

                  Which leads to, "Why Systems Do Work" and "How to Improve Your System," with various posts like, "99 things A System Should Do," and, "Dirty Dozen System Killers."

                  Now, Stack has claimed for years he evaluates systems. I'm asking he share this valuable information with the rest of us because there is a HUGE difference in not liking something because it's not perfect, and not liking something due to major flaws.

                  Yes, perfection is an unreal expectation. Systems are not "100% guaranteed never lose again" plans. That System does not exist.

                  Remember some years ago someone pointed out that Vtracs track two digits and only show when the last one hit. Didn't stop Vtracs from getting its own section. So yes, a system can be evaluated honestly, can be flawed, and still be usable. All without attacking the person. 

                  And for the most part, people will admit a system is not perfect. Same with football. Half the NFL has a great strategy and a perfect game plan, every week. Half the NFL loses, every week.

                  And as far as explaining the strategies and conditions, I'm guilty. I don't take notes or make outlines before I post. I try to be thorough, but some days I go back, read, and ask myself, "How did I forget to mention that?"

                  I'm human.

                  All in all, I maintain that when you enter a thread about statistics claiming to be an evaluator of systems, and are asked to post some of the knowledge you've acquired, and your next post is some fluff about advertising and topics in the discussion forum, you look suspect.

                  G

                  My greatest accomplishment is teaching cats about Vienna Sausage. When I need a friend, all I need do is walk outside, pop open a can, and every little critter in the neighborhood drops by to say "Hi!"

                    Avatar
                    Kentucky
                    United States
                    Member #32652
                    February 14, 2006
                    7302 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: September 29, 2014, 5:02 pm - IP Logged

                    Quite an obtuse response. Not a single word about a real system, or a real stat with any proof. Rather wave the right hand while pointing to the advertising which has nothing to do with actual game play. Its meant to sell tickets.

                    And discussion fo has nothing to do with game play. Anybody can post a "HOW MANY CHICKENS WOULD YOU BUY IF YOU WON MEGAMILLIONS?" thread. Same as it has always been, a place for general chitchat.

                    Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those.

                    Before you offer your general fluff, we'll agree there are weaknesses in every system. The idea of a system is to explore and exploit the advantages. Not to be flawless.

                    Here's an example, in Texas 2Step, 18 draws have landed outside the norm and some are not merely outside the norm, they are combinations that have a single way they can hit, and they did.

                    Does this mean the system is worthless? Is it an expected deviation? Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

                    G

                    "Not a single word about a real system, or a real stat with any proof."

                    You asked "does posting "You're Gonna Lose Stat" make it more true?", making it appear there is absolutely no chance of anybody winning. I assumed you meant someone else posting that absolute and gave the benefit of doubt by suggesting even if the Lottery web sites posted "You're probably gonna lose", there would still be a large number of players because most of the sites show actual winners holding over sized checks. And many use slogans like "Someone is going to win, it might as well be you".

                    If I posted the stats proving only a tiny percentage of players will ever win a MM or PB jackpot, it will also prove somebody has won and someone is going to win in the future. Some people believe posting something untrue multiple times will eventually make lots of people believe it's true and because it was never true, it can never be "more true".

                    "The idea of a system is to explore and exploit the advantages. Not to be flawless."

                    When somebody says "One of these three short sums is going to hit in the next six pick-3 drawings" and while based on their system results and likely true, it would cost more than $600 to play just two drawings with only $500 as the highest win potential if it misses the first drawing. I really don't need any stats for proof when someone says they travel to the future to see the results and then post 40 possible outcomes.

                    "Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems,"

                    I was speaking about the "50 three digit numbers, good for all states" predictions that many LP members brag about. The only evaluation are of the gullible people who congratulate the predictors. Who wouldn't book that action?

                    "Here's an example, in Texas 2Step, 18 draws have landed outside the norm and some are not merely outside the norm, they are combinations that have a single way they can hit, and they did."

                    It looks like you found a statistical anomaly and possibly something you could exploit.

                    "Does this mean the system is worthless?"

                    I don't see a system.

                      garyo1954's avatar - garyo
                      Dallas, Texas
                      United States
                      Member #4549
                      May 2, 2004
                      1679 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: September 29, 2014, 5:55 pm - IP Logged

                      "Not a single word about a real system, or a real stat with any proof."

                      You asked "does posting "You're Gonna Lose Stat" make it more true?", making it appear there is absolutely no chance of anybody winning. I assumed you meant someone else posting that absolute and gave the benefit of doubt by suggesting even if the Lottery web sites posted "You're probably gonna lose", there would still be a large number of players because most of the sites show actual winners holding over sized checks. And many use slogans like "Someone is going to win, it might as well be you".

                      If I posted the stats proving only a tiny percentage of players will ever win a MM or PB jackpot, it will also prove somebody has won and someone is going to win in the future. Some people believe posting something untrue multiple times will eventually make lots of people believe it's true and because it was never true, it can never be "more true".

                      "The idea of a system is to explore and exploit the advantages. Not to be flawless."

                      When somebody says "One of these three short sums is going to hit in the next six pick-3 drawings" and while based on their system results and likely true, it would cost more than $600 to play just two drawings with only $500 as the highest win potential if it misses the first drawing. I really don't need any stats for proof when someone says they travel to the future to see the results and then post 40 possible outcomes.

                      "Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems,"

                      I was speaking about the "50 three digit numbers, good for all states" predictions that many LP members brag about. The only evaluation are of the gullible people who congratulate the predictors. Who wouldn't book that action?

                      "Here's an example, in Texas 2Step, 18 draws have landed outside the norm and some are not merely outside the norm, they are combinations that have a single way they can hit, and they did."

                      It looks like you found a statistical anomaly and possibly something you could exploit.

                      "Does this mean the system is worthless?"

                      I don't see a system.

                      Fluff, pocket lint, and backtracking.

                      Be Direct! If you are talking about a specific system say so. None of us are mind readers. Maybe some  are, but they can't read minds across the internet.

                      Count me among the people who don't agree with the All States predictions. I feel the same way about any system where the majority of the ten digits are wheeled and in play. It's a given anytime you wheel 6 or 7 digits and play those across 50 states, you are going to get some hits.  BTW, I wouldn't agree these are even systems.

                      Thank you for agreeing on the anomaly! I write it off as one. It's one of those "If I play these numbers and they do hit, I won't have to share it with anyone ideas."

                      Truth: It does happen. FACT: 18 times in 6990 draws; 61 years at 104 draws per year. Not something I would play for; maybe the odd QP I'd get and say, "What?????" but the clerks here have gotten to where they get the money before you see the tickets. Guess the owner has become a stickler about them paying for unwanted tickets.

                      I do appreciate your taking the time to clarify.

                      Thanks!

                      G

                      My greatest accomplishment is teaching cats about Vienna Sausage. When I need a friend, all I need do is walk outside, pop open a can, and every little critter in the neighborhood drops by to say "Hi!"

                        Avatar
                        Kentucky
                        United States
                        Member #32652
                        February 14, 2006
                        7302 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: September 29, 2014, 8:42 pm - IP Logged

                        RJOH,

                        I'm not advocating criticism of other members. Criticizing the player and system, totally different things.

                        Still you make a good point that criticizing a system could lead to personal attacks. So rather, the thread should be, "Why Systems Don't Work."

                        Which leads to, "Why Systems Do Work" and "How to Improve Your System," with various posts like, "99 things A System Should Do," and, "Dirty Dozen System Killers."

                        Now, Stack has claimed for years he evaluates systems. I'm asking he share this valuable information with the rest of us because there is a HUGE difference in not liking something because it's not perfect, and not liking something due to major flaws.

                        Yes, perfection is an unreal expectation. Systems are not "100% guaranteed never lose again" plans. That System does not exist.

                        Remember some years ago someone pointed out that Vtracs track two digits and only show when the last one hit. Didn't stop Vtracs from getting its own section. So yes, a system can be evaluated honestly, can be flawed, and still be usable. All without attacking the person. 

                        And for the most part, people will admit a system is not perfect. Same with football. Half the NFL has a great strategy and a perfect game plan, every week. Half the NFL loses, every week.

                        And as far as explaining the strategies and conditions, I'm guilty. I don't take notes or make outlines before I post. I try to be thorough, but some days I go back, read, and ask myself, "How did I forget to mention that?"

                        I'm human.

                        All in all, I maintain that when you enter a thread about statistics claiming to be an evaluator of systems, and are asked to post some of the knowledge you've acquired, and your next post is some fluff about advertising and topics in the discussion forum, you look suspect.

                        G

                        All I said was "I use stats to evaluate systems and if they must outperform probability, but if the system must win the top prize to barely break even, the system is useless." and it should be obvious I didn't take the time to proof read.

                        "Now, Stack has claimed for years he evaluates systems. I'm asking he share this valuable information with the rest of us because there is a HUGE difference in not liking something because it's not perfect, and not liking something due to major flaws."

                        I know of no other way to see if a system is outperforming probability, than to look at the stats and if the system is performing at 100% and barely breaking even, it's not like it can be tweaked and perform at "125%". We don't usually see system stats and I'm not sure if "short sum" means Sum Last Digit, Root Sum, or something else. But I know there are 9 Root Sums and 10 Sum Last Digit and each sum probably represents about 100 three digit numbers. It has nothing to do with liking or disliking a method of predicting, but asking how could it possibly make a profit when it might take up to six drawings to produce a hit and it cost more to play two drawings than can be won.

                        Let's add 1 to each digit, use the same digits, subtract 1, and use the VTrac digits and create 64 three digit numbers. If that doesn't produce a hit, we can box them and play a possible 384 three digit numbers. If there is any valuable info to share about that method, I can't think of it.


                          United States
                          Member #93947
                          July 10, 2010
                          2180 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: September 29, 2014, 9:02 pm - IP Logged

                          "Seems a waste, all this time you invest in evaluating systems, and you don't start a post "SYSTEMS THAT DON'T WORK" thread posting stats and reasons why we should avoid those."

                          So what else is new, players are constantly using systems that don't get the results they want.  Would  members doing a better job of bashing systems posted by other members really be helpful?  Maybe it would be better if members posting systems explained their strategies and the conditions that have to exist for their systems to work, that way others can evaluate for themselves if one of these systems can work for them.


                          When was the last time a "system" was presented in these forums that was found to "work?"

                          If this has ever happened, does it still "work?"

                          What was it?

                            RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
                            mid-Ohio
                            United States
                            Member #9
                            March 24, 2001
                            19824 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: September 29, 2014, 9:33 pm - IP Logged


                            When was the last time a "system" was presented in these forums that was found to "work?"

                            If this has ever happened, does it still "work?"

                            What was it?

                            All such claims I've ever noticed were in the Pick3 and Pick4 forum but since I don't play those games I never checked them out.  If you're are really interested you would probably has to do a search and ask the members who made such claims.

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

                              Avatar
                              Kentucky
                              United States
                              Member #32652
                              February 14, 2006
                              7302 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: September 29, 2014, 9:35 pm - IP Logged

                              Fluff, pocket lint, and backtracking.

                              Be Direct! If you are talking about a specific system say so. None of us are mind readers. Maybe some  are, but they can't read minds across the internet.

                              Count me among the people who don't agree with the All States predictions. I feel the same way about any system where the majority of the ten digits are wheeled and in play. It's a given anytime you wheel 6 or 7 digits and play those across 50 states, you are going to get some hits.  BTW, I wouldn't agree these are even systems.

                              Thank you for agreeing on the anomaly! I write it off as one. It's one of those "If I play these numbers and they do hit, I won't have to share it with anyone ideas."

                              Truth: It does happen. FACT: 18 times in 6990 draws; 61 years at 104 draws per year. Not something I would play for; maybe the odd QP I'd get and say, "What?????" but the clerks here have gotten to where they get the money before you see the tickets. Guess the owner has become a stickler about them paying for unwanted tickets.

                              I do appreciate your taking the time to clarify.

                              Thanks!

                              G

                              "Be Direct! If you are talking about a specific system say so. None of us are mind readers. Maybe some are, but they can't read minds across the internet."

                              I wasn't taking about any specific system and certainly not one of yours.

                              Most of the topics called "systems" are nothing more than crude pick-3 RNGs and why a new Forum was suggested. I have nothing against any ideas on how to play lottery games better, but I don't think it's fair that a few members fill this Forum with predictions, pushing other ideas back to page 2.

                                 
                                Page 17 of 26