United States Member #164727 March 12, 2015 2687 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 2:03 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dddwww on January 23, 2016

I'd recommend you go over to the Predictions section of Lottery Post and note that anyone who posts a sufficient number of predictions sees their winnings regress to the mean, meaning they lose 1/2 their amount bet in a game where the house has a 50% edge. Take a note of how many people are in the Predictions list and then note that a small handful have net gains and each of those persons has a relatively small number of bets that included a substantial prize.

There is a reason for that, there is no system that beats the odds in a game of chance, none. While many make claims to the contrary, their claims are never backed with facts, meaning posting an actual method that can be tested or showing the results of such a test. What generally gets posted by people who promote systems are vague claims using voodoo math. For example, people post pyramids that generate 20+ unique combinations and then the next day tell you how many of those combinations would have been winners across every Pick 3 contest in the US. There are 71 such contests currently reported by Lottery Post. They don't do the math that show what the results would have been if a random selection of 20 unique combinations had been used instead.

A claim of a 65-70% "success rate" is vague. Do you define success as making money or buying a winning ticket on a particular day? Buy enough tickets and you can have whatever success rate you want, but you won't make money. Gamblers suffer from amnesia, they remember their $80 winning Pick-3 ticket, they don't remember the other 166 tickets that were worth $0.

Pyramid systems don't generate winning combinations any more often than chance, and that is a provable fact. I'd be happy to prove it to you. Tell me which pyramid scheme, what state (or states) you want to me to run it against, and I'll show you the results for some period. The same is true of vtrac, short sums, root sums and every other method. They all are provably failures to achieve results better than random chance much less twice as good, which is needed to actually make money.

Not understanding and misunderstanding the application of probabilities is rampant. You won't find any successful poker player who doesn't have an understanding of how to correctly apply probabilities to their game. You will see plenty of people standing around a roulette wheel waiting for some run of red to toss their money on black in the mistaken belief that black is "due" and you'll find no shortage of lottery players who think looking at statistics of picks will give them an edge. It won't, the house edge of 50% is too high and the number of draws is too low even if there were minute flaws in balls or picking methods.

You may not like hearing that but to the extent you think a "system" works as opposed to being something fun to do, you are wrong and not just maybe wrong but provably wrong.

I'm not sure why hearing factual information should keep other LP members from posting, this is a discussion forum and discussing should include fact based information. If you want to post that your new double helix lottery picking system is a lot of fun, have at it. If you want to claim it is a money maker then it is more than reasonable to both discuss that from a mathematical standpoint and put it to the test with verifiable results.

Mid Florida winner 705. Looks like I'll have to take my time when I look for matches. I missed the 705.

United States Member #171734 January 11, 2016 127 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 9:09 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by Coffo on January 23, 2016

the day/month/year i undwestand

wher do i get the other numbers from

w

From the Scientific Theorem of Pyramids. OK I made that up, the answer is it is completely arbitrary, you can make up whatever rules you want for your pyramid numbers and you'll get results equally as good. But in the case of the left hand triangle, the formulas are in the Excel spreadsheet.

United States Member #171734 January 11, 2016 127 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 9:47 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by adobea78 on January 23, 2016

So what's your point? People should stop playing lottery, then be explicit about it !

I think members of this community are of age and need no paternalistic advocate. Every member is conscious of the odds , so throwing this known fact ad nauseam does not help. You sound like a preacher telling people to repent of their sins--You're so absolute, because you have the FACTS !

Where did you get this ' edge in stone' FACT ? You derived this fact from the basic BINOMIAL theorem, where probabilities, odds etc are just derivatives. Statistics is not exact science, is mostly assumptions and hypothesis(Testing a concept), Data , on the hand, can be collected (See DATA SCIENCE vs STATISTICS). You seem to forget the nuances with statistics. Dwelling only on TOTAL DISTRIBUTION of a DATA is not the whole picture !

LEAVE folks to dwell in their stupidity or innumeracy, they may be having fun, what do you think?

I disagree, most players aren't aware of the odds, particularly with respect to systems.

I've never told people to not play the lottery and have always said if you enjoy playing, have fun, everyone needs a hobby.

Statistics is an exact science. The results from any particular set of random events is not exact. Probabilities is not mostly or even partially assumptions or hypothesis. The house edge is in stone, they are guaranteed to win by the rules of their game, if everyone picks 111 and the numbers come up 111 then guess what, they only pay out a portion of their take. In normal play the number of tickets is sufficiently randomly distributed to ensure the house will make very close to 50% on a game that has 50% payout of the true odds. Players you play sufficiently long will regress to the average, probability and statistics tells us that and it is a fact. How many plays it takes to get without 1 std deviation of that mean with a given confidence is easily computed.

I didn't derive anything from the binomial theorem but the math behind it and it's applicability to computing probabilities is accurate and well tested. I don't dwell at all on "total distribution of data", whatever that means. I dwell on the math behind lotteries and why a "system" simple can't beat a random game of chance. That is a fact, an immutable, scientific fact. That people keep coming up with the same nonsensical schemes, whether the game is roulette or lotteries, tells me that people really don't understand the reality behind how things work.

You are welcome to dwell wherever you wish, but you aren't everyone so I'll continue shedding some light where appropriate and you are free to dwell in your stupidty or innumeracy or wherever it is you might be.

I don't mind anyone having fun, but given the number of misleading posts claiming that this system or that "works" I think it is appropriate to investigate those claims so people aren't deceived. Do you not agree that people should understand clearly that systems claiming to pick winners in games of chance simply don't work?

United States Member #164727 March 12, 2015 2687 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 10:08 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dddwww on January 23, 2016

I disagree, most players aren't aware of the odds, particularly with respect to systems.

I've never told people to not play the lottery and have always said if you enjoy playing, have fun, everyone needs a hobby.

Statistics is an exact science. The results from any particular set of random events is not exact. Probabilities is not mostly or even partially assumptions or hypothesis. The house edge is in stone, they are guaranteed to win by the rules of their game, if everyone picks 111 and the numbers come up 111 then guess what, they only pay out a portion of their take. In normal play the number of tickets is sufficiently randomly distributed to ensure the house will make very close to 50% on a game that has 50% payout of the true odds. Players you play sufficiently long will regress to the average, probability and statistics tells us that and it is a fact. How many plays it takes to get without 1 std deviation of that mean with a given confidence is easily computed.

I didn't derive anything from the binomial theorem but the math behind it and it's applicability to computing probabilities is accurate and well tested. I don't dwell at all on "total distribution of data", whatever that means. I dwell on the math behind lotteries and why a "system" simple can't beat a random game of chance. That is a fact, an immutable, scientific fact. That people keep coming up with the same nonsensical schemes, whether the game is roulette or lotteries, tells me that people really don't understand the reality behind how things work.

You are welcome to dwell wherever you wish, but you aren't everyone so I'll continue shedding some light where appropriate and you are free to dwell in your stupidty or innumeracy or wherever it is you might be.

I don't mind anyone having fun, but given the number of misleading posts claiming that this system or that "works" I think it is appropriate to investigate those claims so people aren't deceived. Do you not agree that people should understand clearly that systems claiming to pick winners in games of chance simply don't work?

Statistics are only rigid in this reality. Science is my choice, but even Einstein talked about Spooky activity. Look it up.

Black Holes confuse the greatest minds on this Planet Earth. Time, space, and matter don't exist in a Black Hole. There goes the stats.

United States Member #171734 January 11, 2016 127 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 11:01 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by amber123 on January 23, 2016

Statistics are only rigid in this reality. Science is my choice, but even Einstein talked about Spooky activity. Look it up.

Black Holes confuse the greatest minds on this Planet Earth. Time, space, and matter don't exist in a Black Hole. There goes the stats.

Black holes and relativity don't affect lottery games.

But let me know when Florida starts holding a ball drawing near a black hole and we can reconsider.

Quantum effects would be important if the lottery was using rubberized balls the size of electrons. They aren't so we can disregard that and your spooky action at a distance. If they do start picking electrons out of a cloud of electrons we can reconsider that as well.

United States Member #164727 March 12, 2015 2687 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 11:36 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by dddwww on January 23, 2016

Black holes and relativity don't affect lottery games.

But let me know when Florida starts holding a ball drawing near a black hole and we can reconsider.

Quantum effects would be important if the lottery was using rubberized balls the size of electrons. They aren't so we can disregard that and your spooky action at a distance. If they do start picking electrons out of a cloud of electrons we can reconsider that as well.

Quantum effects would be important if the lottery was using rubberized balls the size of electrons.

Aren't rubber balls also made up of Electrons, Protons, and Neutrons? Look at the bigger picture high above the Picture puzzle.

United States Member #171734 January 11, 2016 127 Posts Offline

Posted: January 23, 2016, 11:59 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by amber123 on January 23, 2016

Quantum effects would be important if the lottery was using rubberized balls the size of electrons.

Aren't rubber balls also made up of Electrons, Protons, and Neutrons? Look at the bigger picture high above the Picture puzzle.

Objects the size of lottery balls exhibit classical behaviors. There is no need to look at the bigger picture as classical physics is the view of larger objects, what happens when you aggregate a large number of smaller objects that require quantum physics to describe is the equations of classical physics come out.

Not that where you'll find an electron in it's orbit can be predicted with a pyramid either, a probability distribution is used. Yeah, that nasty old probability stuff is still right there in Quantum physics too.

Now back to pyramids, by my count there are 131 sequences in an pyramid that need to be accounted for and duplicates (same digits, regardless of position) removed. No wonder people keep missing them. I'm working on some code that will just spit them out so we can run the outputs against a state pick 3 and see if in fact it does exactly what it should do, no better than random chance would do.