New Systems Forum just based on real stats and facts!Prev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

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

Yes

[ 107 ]

[ 81.1% ]

[ 16 ]

[ 12.1% ]

VooDoo,dreams, reading entrials

[ 4 ]

[ 3.0% ]

Feelings

[ 5 ]

[ 3.8% ]

Total valid votes

[ 132 ]

Discarded votes

[ 8 ]

Lucky Loser

Texas
United States
Member #86,149
January 30, 2010
1,890 Posts
Offline

Oct 3, 2014, 12:20 pm

Quote: Originally posted by PeerGynt on Oct 2, 2014
Jimmy, do you distinguish between the terms SYSTEM, and METHOD?...

Sure, any foolproof SYSTEM, is probably not. There's no foolproof SYSTEM for anything - anything that can go wrong will go wrong, as Murphy once coined.

But surely you can't be so foolish as to say there aren't perfectly working and profitable METHODS to playing various lottery games?...

How could you possibly know, with certainty, that no working METHODS exist?

And can't one teach a METHOD to someone else?

Because don't METHODs have rules, too?

Are you just being semantic with all this?

There's no foolproof SYSTEM for anything - anything that can go wrong will go wrong

Absolutely no doubt here. In terms of a good lottery system/method/approach, it may not be the system's fault in the case of loss, or, the operator's fault. It can also simply be that the draw simply didn't produce what was expected after carefully tracking it. I still maintain that pre-tests have definite say in the end.

But surely you can't be so foolish as to say there aren't perfectly working and profitable METHODS to playing various lottery games?...

Pick 3 and Pick 4 are the best candidates for a profitable method.

How could you possibly know, with certainty, that no working METHODS exist?

Can't know. Anyone that does have an approach that works isn't going to be here posting it, either. Even a person that is very well versed in 'reading' numbers could identify with what particular method a player is using. I can. Let me clarify what I personally mean by a 'working system.' When a player is able to consistently play over a period of time and still come out ahead, profit-wise with losses figured in, then this is a working method. So many people think that one must win all the time for their system to be working. Not so...not so at all. This game is about averages and remaining ahead from a dollar perspective.

And can't one teach a METHOD to someone else?

Absolutely.

Because don't METHODs have rules, too?

They most certainly do...and my best rules are patience and timing.

L.L.

Small games, frequent wins, and regular payouts 'cause.....

There are seven days in the week...'Someday' isn't one of them.

#lotto-4-a-living
garyo1954

Texas
United States
Member #4,549
May 2, 2004
4,387 Posts
Offline

Oct 3, 2014, 2:28 pm

Quote: Originally posted by WIN D on Oct 3, 2014
Hope Jimmy will always hangs around. I think he gives the joint class.

I think I know where he is coming from. He's got too much on the ball not to eventually see some distinct value in these "exercises." We're not actually here trying to change or improve the " walking treadmill machine" itself. The focus is something else. Something all together different. Some of the side effects include .... fun and entertainment.

Some where along the way he will morph into a ready, steady asset ....he sort of already is. LOL

“There is remedy for all things... except death" - Don Quixote De La Mancha”

“I come in a world of iron...to make a world of gold”

Yes, I know he was mad. LOL

Agree with you. Jimmy brings a certain perspective to LP. Quite uncommon actually.

I'd be as well received visiting a Womens Issues forum posting pics of my colonoscopy.

And a Don Catlin link. Because everything you read on the internet is true. And Don Catlin is a Scientologist.

G

I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain.
RL-RANDOMLOGIC

United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 12:06 am

I guess I am not smart enough to comprehend the definition of the word "system." Merriam-Webster defines

system as "a group of related parts that move or work together" Concerning the lottery, the word "winning"

and "system" should never be used together. At best, every lottery method or system is nothing more than a

series of tools or suggestions that if guessed correctly will produce better than the odds suggest.

Anyone who thinks that they can predict any level of random consistently suffers from delusions. Weathermen

have the best tools that can be designed for predicting weather but they often miss. The weather prediction tools

they use often produce more than one model and the real prediction comes when the weatherman chooses which

model to use. If the person chooses the wrong model then it's not the system that is wrong but the person who

makes the choice/decision of which model to go with.

Any person who starts a topic with something like "I cracked the lottery" or the word "guaranteed winning" I just skip

over. There is not, nor will there ever be a method or system that can produce 100% and if you find one it will be due

to a defect in the drawing machine or the operator is corrupt. I think the only qualification a lottery software must meet

is that it must produce accurate data the user can analyze to make an informed choice and then provided the choices are

correct, produce a winning set. The best systems require the user to make the fewest choices to reach his/her play limit.

The end

RL

....
adobea78

United States
Member #116,337
September 8, 2011
5,144 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:06 am

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on Oct 4, 2014
I guess I am not smart enough to comprehend the definition of the word "system." Merriam-Webster defines

system as "a group of related parts that move or work together" Concerning the lottery, the word "winning"

and "system" should never be used together. At best, every lottery method or system is nothing more than a

series of tools or suggestions that if guessed correctly will produce better than the odds suggest.

Anyone who thinks that they can predict any level of random consistently suffers from delusions. Weathermen

have the best tools that can be designed for predicting weather but they often miss. The weather prediction tools

they use often produce more than one model and the real prediction comes when the weatherman chooses which

model to use. If the person chooses the wrong model then it's not the system that is wrong but the person who

makes the choice/decision of which model to go with.

Any person who starts a topic with something like "I cracked the lottery" or the word "guaranteed winning" I just skip

over. There is not, nor will there ever be a method or system that can produce 100% and if you find one it will be due

to a defect in the drawing machine or the operator is corrupt. I think the only qualification a lottery software must meet

is that it must produce accurate data the user can analyze to make an informed choice and then provided the choices are

correct, produce a winning set. The best systems require the user to make the fewest choices to reach his/her play limit.

The end

RL

Well said, my take on this is 'do not be too analytical in random setting', less logic , more intuition. I found out that, staying clear from mathematical algorithms and focusing on the concepts behind a mathematical formula enhances my intuition. Lets take for example , the ideal of confidence interval, the formula deals with standard deviations and mean of sampled data, my approach is more on ideal behind the FORMULA. kudos to statisticians , the stress of tracking parameters is too much for me.
WIN D

Stone Mountain*Georgia
United States
Member #828
November 2, 2002
10,491 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:12 am

RL.....there are several sorts of games being played here at the same time.....and not all of them have anything to do with "prediction" or"systems."

Many of them are just experienced reactions to familiar situations. As one example.

Reactions built on years of observation, opportunistic traps using things based on good ODDS and good probabilities.

Some work fast and some work slowly. With any luck some work the next day .....then it looks like it was a prediction all along. LOL

P.S.

" The Law of large Numbers" ...is a curse to players.

But, there are several things in between.

The only real failure .....is the failure to try.

Luck is a very rare thing....... Odds not so much.

Odds never change .....but probability does.

Win d
PeerGynt

Simi Valley, CA
United States
Member #156,931
July 4, 2014
823 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:26 am

Quote: Originally posted by RL-RANDOMLOGIC on Oct 4, 2014
I guess I am not smart enough to comprehend the definition of the word "system." Merriam-Webster defines

system as "a group of related parts that move or work together" Concerning the lottery, the word "winning"

and "system" should never be used together. At best, every lottery method or system is nothing more than a

series of tools or suggestions that if guessed correctly will produce better than the odds suggest.

Anyone who thinks that they can predict any level of random consistently suffers from delusions. Weathermen

have the best tools that can be designed for predicting weather but they often miss. The weather prediction tools

they use often produce more than one model and the real prediction comes when the weatherman chooses which

model to use. If the person chooses the wrong model then it's not the system that is wrong but the person who

makes the choice/decision of which model to go with.

Any person who starts a topic with something like "I cracked the lottery" or the word "guaranteed winning" I just skip

over. There is not, nor will there ever be a method or system that can produce 100% and if you find one it will be due

to a defect in the drawing machine or the operator is corrupt. I think the only qualification a lottery software must meet

is that it must produce accurate data the user can analyze to make an informed choice and then provided the choices are

correct, produce a winning set. The best systems require the user to make the fewest choices to reach his/her play limit.

The end

RL

Any person who starts a topic with something like "I cracked the lottery" or the word "guaranteed winning" I just skip

over. There is not, nor will there ever be a method or system that can produce 100% and if you find one it will be due

to a defect in the drawing machine or the operator is corrupt.

But RL, these two claims are not mutually exclusive.

One can "crack" a lottery; AND one can with that cracked system, method, formula, whatever you want to call it, still not win 100% of the time.

I had a rule of my own when I first approached learning how to play the D3; or should I say, there's a maxim I just believe in general in life, which I apply as a rule to playing this game: "Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists." I think this rule has helped me learn much about the game, and see much of what's going on... but like anything that requires tremendous skill, I've not won all the time (ha! hardly!), and especially because much of it still takes some luck and timing and whatnot. AND, pattern perceiving.

Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists. Where did it come from? Is it a real pattern, or a fake pattern? Is it just an accident of numbers and math? Is it a corruption of the machine? Is it a secret backdoor? Is it a mere illusion I am perceiving as a "pattern"? All these questions are irrelevant: all that matters is the rule, to me. Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists.

Patterns can be exploited, because... they are patterns.

Methods, exploit patterns.

And series of methods, fall under the category "systems."

Right?

We have no dreams at all, or interesting ones. We should learn to be awake the same way—not at all, or in an interesting manner. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
PeerGynt

Simi Valley, CA
United States
Member #156,931
July 4, 2014
823 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:32 am

Quote: Originally posted by adobea78 on Oct 4, 2014
Well said, my take on this is 'do not be too analytical in random setting', less logic , more intuition. I found out that, staying clear from mathematical algorithms and focusing on the concepts behind a mathematical formula enhances my intuition. Lets take for example , the ideal of confidence interval, the formula deals with standard deviations and mean of sampled data, my approach is more on ideal behind the FORMULA. kudos to statisticians , the stress of tracking parameters is too much for me.

Adobea, using a symbol here or metaphor, I think of your approach to the game - it makes me picture the spinning wheels in a lottery machine: rather than the metaphor of falling balls, or casting dice, or a computer digitally selecting numbers between one and one thousand.

Each wheel spins round, ten numbers; clicking, clacking, landing on a side; then the next wheel; then the next.

I'm not saying this is what you are doing, or anything like that. I'm just saying, your approach to the game, immediately brings this to my own mind.

And it makes me imagine other approaches to the game - whole new ways of imagining it - I've not perceived before....

We have no dreams at all, or interesting ones. We should learn to be awake the same way—not at all, or in an interesting manner. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
WIN D

Stone Mountain*Georgia
United States
Member #828
November 2, 2002
10,491 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:44 am

Well done peer.

Here's a prediction.About the word "pattern."

After years here on LP.... If you mention perception of "pattern"...and random together this will happen.

Someone is going to get a cold chill running up their leg...and run into the street yelling, " Man has always seen patterns where none exist!" LOL

After lots of time and back n forth.... it always ends with someone like me saying," Yes, and sometimes Man actually does see patterns because sometimes they are actually there."

Then it fades away after a while... and you can resume your subject. LOL

The only real failure .....is the failure to try.

Luck is a very rare thing....... Odds not so much.

Odds never change .....but probability does.

Win d
adobea78

United States
Member #116,337
September 8, 2011
5,144 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 2:05 am

PeeGynt

I was in high school in early 70's, I recalled my math teacher during statistics class telling us not memorize formulas, but rather the ideal behind the formulation, this serves two things, 1) you may forget the formula, but the concept will take you there (foundation), 2/ the concept may help you to interpret the formula in a different way or even question a formula. Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity was part logic from assumed concepts and intuition (He kept writing and re-writing his formula, it was intuition he had on train that formalize the final equation). Intuition is innate, is your best tool.
jimmy4164

United States
Member #93,941
July 10, 2010
2,180 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 2:38 am

Quote: Originally posted by WIN D on Oct 4, 2014
Well done peer.

Here's a prediction.About the word "pattern."

After years here on LP.... If you mention perception of "pattern"...and random together this will happen.

Someone is going to get a cold chill running up their leg...and run into the street yelling, " Man has always seen patterns where none exist!" LOL

After lots of time and back n forth.... it always ends with someone like me saying," Yes, and sometimes Man actually does see patterns because sometimes they are actually there."

Then it fades away after a while... and you can resume your subject. LOL

There You Go Again Win D...
adobea78

United States
Member #116,337
September 8, 2011
5,144 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 2:40 am

Quote: Originally posted by PeerGynt on Oct 4, 2014
Any person who starts a topic with something like "I cracked the lottery" or the word "guaranteed winning" I just skip

over. There is not, nor will there ever be a method or system that can produce 100% and if you find one it will be due

to a defect in the drawing machine or the operator is corrupt.

But RL, these two claims are not mutually exclusive.

One can "crack" a lottery; AND one can with that cracked system, method, formula, whatever you want to call it, still not win 100% of the time.

I had a rule of my own when I first approached learning how to play the D3; or should I say, there's a maxim I just believe in general in life, which I apply as a rule to playing this game: "Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists." I think this rule has helped me learn much about the game, and see much of what's going on... but like anything that requires tremendous skill, I've not won all the time (ha! hardly!), and especially because much of it still takes some luck and timing and whatnot. AND, pattern perceiving.

Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists. Where did it come from? Is it a real pattern, or a fake pattern? Is it just an accident of numbers and math? Is it a corruption of the machine? Is it a secret backdoor? Is it a mere illusion I am perceiving as a "pattern"? All these questions are irrelevant: all that matters is the rule, to me. Wherever you find a pattern, a pattern exists.

Patterns can be exploited, because... they are patterns.

Methods, exploit patterns.

And series of methods, fall under the category "systems."

Right?

Patterns> In statistics, there two types of error in data sampling, type 1 deals with the identification of false patterns in a data, this type may yield false-positive in testing situations, sure you may find a pattern, how do you differentiate between type1 error and type 2, the suggested solution will be the null hypothesis, if you can interpret this hypothesis in a very simple way, then certain 'patterns' can be nullify- this will be hard in a random setting.
RL-RANDOMLOGIC

United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 5:46 am

Guys

What I was trying to say is just play whatever works for you. I still work on prediction tools but

more for fun than anything else. If the patterns I have found in the past would have proved to

be dependable then I would be rich. My problem is getting all the little jewels to participate in

the same draw. Systems are not winners or losers, that title belongs to the person using them.

Have Fun, it's a game.

RL

....
WIN D

Stone Mountain*Georgia
United States
Member #828
November 2, 2002
10,491 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:10 pm

Please indulge me...to do a little hijack backward.

No digits 4,,or 5 has hit in 18 straight draws!

NewMexico midday

......that of course means ...the same group of 488 straights or 48% of the chart has not hit in .......18 draws!

Heads/Tails right? So, effectively you could say that would be18 coin flips of HEADS in a row. Even Gilligan can see that's special.

I can't predict the next draw ...... but I can predict with100% accuracy ....the very NEXT filter I will start with today! LOL

The only real failure .....is the failure to try.

Luck is a very rare thing....... Odds not so much.

Odds never change .....but probability does.

Win d
WIN D

Stone Mountain*Georgia
United States
Member #828
November 2, 2002
10,491 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 1:45 pm

For the sake of time. Now I have to follow my own standing advice and next play an insurance filter bet:

36 box doublers cost 9 bucks.

055, 244, 334, 488, 155, 335, 344, 588, 255, 444,

499, 355, 445, 599, 004, 446, 455, 005, 447, 555,

114, 448, 466, 556, 115, 449, 557, 566, 044, 224, 477, 558, 144, 225, 559, 577

Now that we've done that insurance filter business ....we can slow down for the next filter.

Now we can take our time....and look over the 104 STRAIGHT($25) versions for the WEAK and Stragglers and try to separate them from the heard. LOL

Any left over play monies....? Fire for effect on some straight singles. NM midday is only about 6 months old. Time filters are pretty much useless right now.

At any rate..AT This POINT IN TIME ......this is one of the BEST/MOST RARE .......top rated ODDS/PROBABILITY wagers in PICK 3 to "play AT".

Use your best.... "#3 DAY Window Bet Strategies" right now if understand the opportunities. $$$$$

P.S.

If this does somehow make it till Monday....suggest you call the "NM Gaming Commission" and the Cops. Not sure if you shouldn't do right now in fact. LOL

The only real failure .....is the failure to try.

Luck is a very rare thing....... Odds not so much.

Odds never change .....but probability does.

Win d

adobea78

United States
Member #116,337
September 8, 2011
5,144 Posts
Offline

Oct 4, 2014, 6:03 pm

Quote: Originally posted by PeerGynt on Oct 4, 2014

Adobea, using a symbol here or metaphor, I think of your approach to the game - it makes me picture the spinning wheels in a lottery machine: rather than the metaphor of falling balls, or casting dice, or a computer digitally selecting numbers between one and one thousand.

Each wheel spins round, ten numbers; clicking, clacking, landing on a side; then the next wheel; then the next.

I'm not saying this is what you are doing, or anything like that. I'm just saying, your approach to the game, immediately brings this to my own mind.

And it makes me imagine other approaches to the game - whole new ways of imagining it - I've not perceived before....

Pick 3		Pick 4
Midday	Evening	Midday	Evening
Sat, Oct 4, 2014	0-2-2	8-2-3-2
Fri, Oct 3, 2014	9-2-4	3-5-5	6-7-1-2	2-1-1-8
Thu, Oct 2, 2014	9-0-6	8-7-0	2-5-2-0	0-7-9-3
Wed, Oct 1, 2014	6-4-5	6-2-0	1-6-6-5	2-2-5-4
Tue, Sep 30, 2014	4-6-4	3-2-6	3-1-7-3	7-4-0-1
Mon, Sep 29, 2014	9-8-5	3-2-7	4-1-5-7	2-8-0-8
Sun, Sep 28, 2014	3-0-3	3-4-6	5-6-0-0	4-3-0-7
Sat, Sep 27, 2014	2-9-5	0-4-3	4-7-2-0	2-5-3-1
Fri, Sep 26, 2014	4-9-4	7-2-8	0-5-8-8	0-1-0-0
Thu, Sep 25, 2014	1-0-6	7-5-0	3-1-5-1	3-7-3-5

Lets say I have four different samples of a data(pool 0,1,2...... 9), I can't be certain of trending sample based on just back-testing.

Consider the workout of the draw set 750 , my samples A,B,C,D yields different sets totaling 256 picks.

418

501

963

885 > this sample A will yield 4*4*4>64 picks for str bets> hits 985

527

306

133

992>Sample B > hits 303(+5), 327(+8),326(+10),906(+13)> 4 str8 hits within 13 draws> you may think this sample is the current trend but random may prove you wrong, your best bet to recover your cost, is to stretch the span of play by one prize tag/ # picks > 500/ 64 picks >8 draws span(flexible if you wage .25 online), lets continue with sample C.

573

868

994

085>sample C> hits 985(+7)

500

288

166

822>sample D>xxxx

Now which of these samples are trending?, logic tells you Sample B with four hits is on, you could be wrong , why? you're back-testing, rather than forward-testing(if your data is based on history). Let's assume the data was generated based purely on the POOL (members 0 thru 9 with size 10) through simulation or extrapolation, there is no way to differentiate trending sample even by null hypothesis, sample B could be a fluke, my best option is to compress samples A to D using a SET counter for reduced picks. Total picks for the four samples will be 64x 4(256 sets), the counter will separate identical sets for reduced picks

New Topic New Poll

Subscribe to this topic

New Systems Forum just based on real stats and facts!Prev TopicNext Topic

New Systems Forum just based on real stats and facts!Prev Topic Next Topic