Welcome Guest
You last visited December 6, 2016, 9:00 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Substitution Works - Pick 3

Topic closed. 34 replies. Last post 1 year ago by MrProgrammer.

 Page 3 of 3
Dallas, Texas
United States
Member #4549
May 2, 2004
1689 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 6, 2015, 9:59 pm - IP Logged

Some FINAL responses to garyo1954's above (included) earlier response, all in terms of the discussion of "random", and one kudo for Adobe78:

Gary, to your last question, why would adobe78 be posting here in the systems forum?  Easy, 2 reasons.  First, his methods are not to build a system to predict randomness, he knows this, as you.  He is trying to build a system not to predict randomness, but to profit via a method that depends on it.  Second, he is trying to teach you something about the lottery and it being truly random.  But, he being nice enough (at times) to attempt to help you out (advance your mental abilities), was in vain again, since you have a completely closed mind.  So he did not respond to your response.

Secondly, in regards to "each and every other sentence" in your above (included) post, gary and everyone else, please read them now.  They all (except for the one about the same digit coming out in the same position each time it hits), are "short term - short vision" examples of proof for randomness in the lottery (or coin flipping).  You are wrong on each one, reality has/will prove you wrong on all those.  Why it has not so far, it is because the lottery is truly random.  Why some have so far (but you have not seen)?  It is because the lottery is truly random.  Why, for the ones you have not "seen" occur will someday, for you or others?  It is because the lottery is truly random.

Thirdly, on the same digit coming out in the same position each time it hits, randomness does not say that is possible it all.  Such an event, "each time it hits", would be a "pattern", the opposite of true randomness.  Why did you throw that one in there? Loose your mind for a moment?  Oh, I see, you must have meant like 20 times in a row, or 200 times in a row, not "each and every time".  But then again, that would be like your other claims, all proven wrong by true randomness.

Finally, a few pieces of advice for everyone, I really hope this helps everyone, it is meant to.  The lottery is truly random.  If you are one of those that throws in those comments "make sure it works for your state", you are delusional.  It just does NOT work that way.  All sets of numbers drawn for every state are truly random.  Any "number guessing system" (or new system or way of anything), will work less in some states versus others, only due to the true randomness of the lottery, nothing else, nothing to do with that state's numbers.  Quit wasting time on "your state" thoughts.  Move to how to best create an self-understandable, consistent way of betting that takes advance of randomness, or better said, relies on it.  Prediction of numbers in a short period of time is not possible.  Or in a specific draw in the future, not possible.  But it IS possible to have a system that relies on randomness, and IS profitable.  Even off-line.

Adobe78's method is one of a few that I have seen that is built around the only consistent thing with the lottery, randomness.  I have seen a few others around also.  But none, including Adobe78's, is consistently profitable, off-line or not.  No matter what he claims, I have programmed a system to prove it.  It can work sometimes, but not consistently.   But I admire his (and others) their intelligence for knowing which way to look in search of the answer (system), a system that relies on true randomness.  Which is what all lotteries are, 100% of the time, without exception.  However, to them, I offer this.  You are stuck in "the box", also, just at a higher level than the others.  You HAVE to expand your options on what is possible with betting strategies and the game you are playing.  Imagine a box, and you are just inside the left-most line.  You need to be WAY out left of the box to find what you seek.  I may decide to give you more hints in the future, if you appear to make progress in this area via your postings, either via adjustments to the systems are posting or via clear and consistent lines of thinking to that area.  You know who you are, other than Adobe78, and I do too.  First hint - for any system you have that it trying to beat a game, stop doing that, the answer is it is more than that.  It is MORE THAN THAT.

Final note, Gary, please don't try to argue back on the random thing, the FACTS on how randomness works overrides your arguments on any of your above examples, or any future ones you try to debate.  I won't respond to such questions/arguments, all answers are above.  Other topics/questions you have I may get involved.

Thanks all, and good luck to everyone.

Need a dozen hounds, an old sock, and some kind of powerful searchlight to find you in that fog.

Its elementary Dr. Watson. Even you should make googly eyes and draw air circles around your temple when someone says: Its all random, no solution and then gives you a "solution" to the same problem they declared unsolvable.

I would think most people here got through elementary, but that may be asking too much in some cases.

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!"

ORLANDO, FLORIDA
United States
Member #4924
June 3, 2004
5896 Posts
Online
 Posted: October 7, 2015, 3:02 pm - IP Logged

Some FINAL responses to garyo1954's above (included) earlier response, all in terms of the discussion of "random", and one kudo for Adobe78:

Gary, to your last question, why would adobe78 be posting here in the systems forum?  Easy, 2 reasons.  First, his methods are not to build a system to predict randomness, he knows this, as you.  He is trying to build a system not to predict randomness, but to profit via a method that depends on it.  Second, he is trying to teach you something about the lottery and it being truly random.  But, he being nice enough (at times) to attempt to help you out (advance your mental abilities), was in vain again, since you have a completely closed mind.  So he did not respond to your response.

Secondly, in regards to "each and every other sentence" in your above (included) post, gary and everyone else, please read them now.  They all (except for the one about the same digit coming out in the same position each time it hits), are "short term - short vision" examples of proof for randomness in the lottery (or coin flipping).  You are wrong on each one, reality has/will prove you wrong on all those.  Why it has not so far, it is because the lottery is truly random.  Why some have so far (but you have not seen)?  It is because the lottery is truly random.  Why, for the ones you have not "seen" occur will someday, for you or others?  It is because the lottery is truly random.

Thirdly, on the same digit coming out in the same position each time it hits, randomness does not say that is possible it all.  Such an event, "each time it hits", would be a "pattern", the opposite of true randomness.  Why did you throw that one in there? Loose your mind for a moment?  Oh, I see, you must have meant like 20 times in a row, or 200 times in a row, not "each and every time".  But then again, that would be like your other claims, all proven wrong by true randomness.

Finally, a few pieces of advice for everyone, I really hope this helps everyone, it is meant to.  The lottery is truly random.  If you are one of those that throws in those comments "make sure it works for your state", you are delusional.  It just does NOT work that way.  All sets of numbers drawn for every state are truly random.  Any "number guessing system" (or new system or way of anything), will work less in some states versus others, only due to the true randomness of the lottery, nothing else, nothing to do with that state's numbers.  Quit wasting time on "your state" thoughts.  Move to how to best create an self-understandable, consistent way of betting that takes advance of randomness, or better said, relies on it.  Prediction of numbers in a short period of time is not possible.  Or in a specific draw in the future, not possible.  But it IS possible to have a system that relies on randomness, and IS profitable.  Even off-line.

Adobe78's method is one of a few that I have seen that is built around the only consistent thing with the lottery, randomness.  I have seen a few others around also.  But none, including Adobe78's, is consistently profitable, off-line or not.  No matter what he claims, I have programmed a system to prove it.  It can work sometimes, but not consistently.   But I admire his (and others) their intelligence for knowing which way to look in search of the answer (system), a system that relies on true randomness.  Which is what all lotteries are, 100% of the time, without exception.  However, to them, I offer this.  You are stuck in "the box", also, just at a higher level than the others.  You HAVE to expand your options on what is possible with betting strategies and the game you are playing.  Imagine a box, and you are just inside the left-most line.  You need to be WAY out left of the box to find what you seek.  I may decide to give you more hints in the future, if you appear to make progress in this area via your postings, either via adjustments to the systems are posting or via clear and consistent lines of thinking to that area.  You know who you are, other than Adobe78, and I do too.  First hint - for any system you have that it trying to beat a game, stop doing that, the answer is it is more than that.  It is MORE THAN THAT.

Final note, Gary, please don't try to argue back on the random thing, the FACTS on how randomness works overrides your arguments on any of your above examples, or any future ones you try to debate.  I won't respond to such questions/arguments, all answers are above.  Other topics/questions you have I may get involved.

Thanks all, and good luck to everyone.

If you really believe the lottery is random, why so many pre-post test draws? Here is a suggestion, take the Florida Eve draws, pre 5/19/08, before the Mid draws began. Find the number of times a combo repeated, within 10 draws. Compare the results with the combined draws, since Jan, 2015.

United States
Member #161388
November 28, 2014
83 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 9, 2015, 2:02 pm - IP Logged

If you really believe the lottery is random, why so many pre-post test draws? Here is a suggestion, take the Florida Eve draws, pre 5/19/08, before the Mid draws began. Find the number of times a combo repeated, within 10 draws. Compare the results with the combined draws, since Jan, 2015.

Define "combo repeated", please.

MrProgrammer

Member #90040
April 20, 2010
473 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 9, 2015, 11:57 pm - IP Logged

Randomness in lottery is limited. Lottery companies know that and they work hard to make it random as much as possible. Limited randomness comes from no perfect mechanical, electronics or software devices. Lotteries try to change them very often and make them more random in various ways including pre-drawings, changing balls, doing a mechanical drawings in the morning and software drawings in the evening etc.

The main reason for limited randomness is the number of digits. That's why P3 and P4 are the most popular.

I don't see any reason for spending money on other lotteries besides P3 at least until you make some money. If you cannot make money with P3, you'd better enjoy life without any lottery.

I believe a lottery can be beaten regularly but smart guys don't share their methods.
You can't be extra smart and stupid at the same time to cut a branch you're sitting on.

United States
Member #161388
November 28, 2014
83 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 1, 2015, 10:30 am - IP Logged

Need a dozen hounds, an old sock, and some kind of powerful searchlight to find you in that fog.

Its elementary Dr. Watson. Even you should make googly eyes and draw air circles around your temple when someone says: Its all random, no solution and then gives you a "solution" to the same problem they declared unsolvable.

I would think most people here got through elementary, but that may be asking too much in some cases.

I did say it is all random.  I did not ever say random was unsolvable.

MrProgrammer

 Page 3 of 3