Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 16, 2017, 9:56 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Best System Ever.

Topic closed. 36 replies. Last post 2 years ago by RJOh.

Page 3 of 3
2.86
PrintE-mailLink
aquariuslottery's avatar - AquariusLotteryLogo
Vancouver BC
Canada
Member #96078
August 22, 2010
115 Posts
Offline
Posted: July 1, 2015, 3:10 am - IP Logged

That's the problem with all systems - all lack consistency. Nothing wins forever, there are always ups and downs. The only solution for this I see is monitoring several prediction methods/systems, backtrack them, try different if options, if available, and pick the ones with the best CURRENT scores. Still no guarantee but chances for a winner should be increased, whatever the targeted winner is. That's the philosophy I subscribe to in any lottery - monitor many systems but play the current best performer. Worked for me in the past (to a degree, obviously).

......


    United States
    Member #166618
    May 30, 2015
    84 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: July 1, 2015, 4:19 am - IP Logged

    wait, what? lol.


      United States
      Member #166618
      May 30, 2015
      84 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: July 1, 2015, 4:21 am - IP Logged

      honestly every system is essentially using a dream system ( aka a random generated system ) by you in your head.

       

      its effective once you can seperate from personal digits. and be flowing with numbers you dont really "know"

       

      :)

        RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
        mid-Ohio
        United States
        Member #9
        March 24, 2001
        19891 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: July 1, 2015, 10:23 am - IP Logged

        That's the problem with all systems - all lack consistency. Nothing wins forever, there are always ups and downs. The only solution for this I see is monitoring several prediction methods/systems, backtrack them, try different if options, if available, and pick the ones with the best CURRENT scores. Still no guarantee but chances for a winner should be increased, whatever the targeted winner is. That's the philosophy I subscribe to in any lottery - monitor many systems but play the current best performer. Worked for me in the past (to a degree, obviously).

         "the problem with all systems - all lack consistency. Nothing wins forever"

        Consistency isn't the problem, winning one time is.  A system for a jackpot game only has to work once.  Brad Duke's system worked once and the rest is history.

        A system is in a constant state of change based on its performance during the last drawing.

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

          RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
          mid-Ohio
          United States
          Member #9
          March 24, 2001
          19891 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: July 2, 2015, 11:20 am - IP Logged

          Time to stop bragging and putting some of those great systems to work.

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

            aquariuslottery's avatar - AquariusLotteryLogo
            Vancouver BC
            Canada
            Member #96078
            August 22, 2010
            115 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: July 2, 2015, 11:47 am - IP Logged

             "the problem with all systems - all lack consistency. Nothing wins forever"

            Consistency isn't the problem, winning one time is.  A system for a jackpot game only has to work once.  Brad Duke's system worked once and the rest is history.

            A system is in a constant state of change based on its performance during the last drawing.

            And there are many QP systems that work all the time as well, according to lottery statistics and winners interviews. Brad Duke's system worked and gazillion of similar others didn't. Rabbit foot syndrom, I presume; as you said earlier a necessary ingredient for hitting the Big Jack.

            In jackpot games I concentrate less on a jackpot as too dependent on the rabbit foot and pay more attention to smaller prizes with much better odds of winning, for the best ROI I can get. For this I need consistency and since no single system will provide it I monitor and use many to have a choice. Incidentally, I don't believe this reduces my chances for Big Jack, rabbit foot or not. For me ROI takes precedence in any type of lottery and if you want to play in a pool (which I did) providing best ROI under circumstances is the necessary ingredient to recruit and maintain its members. Show me the money method works everywhere.

            Therefore, it depends on strategy you adopt in playing. If you concentrate exclusively on jackpot even QP will do. But I also add ROI as an additional goal and this makes it a different ball game.

            From what you say in the last sentence Brad Duke subscribes to the same philosophy as I do - in lottery only the latest trends count, the rest is history. Because selection of numbers is based only on short term trends and nothing else. The trick is to identify these trends as they constantly fluctuate.

            ......

              RJOh's avatar - chipmunk
              mid-Ohio
              United States
              Member #9
              March 24, 2001
              19891 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: July 2, 2015, 3:06 pm - IP Logged

              Why don't you re-write you program in other language? Plenty of choices these days and syntax is quite often similar. Once you learn logic of programming, syntax and porting from language to another is a peanut. I started my lottery programs with interpreted Basic (don't even remember its version), then moved to compiled C, then to C# and now Android. Only the last 2 are now supported and I love C# but had to move to Android because this is where the future of computing is. So, if your program had a potential based on past performance why do you give it up? Even if you don't plan to distribute it it may help you to hit something. Designer of the system knows the best what it can potentially do.

              I was thinking about your suggestion when I read some other members posts about VesaBet and Gail Howard old programs which are still for sale on the Internet and I started wondering why hadn't they done that.  After all their customers are depending on them.

              Both vendors put a lot in their websites and I would think they had at least as much resources as I do and yet they've done nothing to made their programs run in the newer versions of Windows.  They both post notices that the consumers need to invest in an emulation program that will run programs that ran in older versions of Windows or Dos.

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