I have developed a method to play Jackpot Games.Prev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 5:10 am

Quote: Originally posted by adamcustom on Jun 17, 2018
Igor

You seem to be confusing seriousness with irony.

sorry... forgot to type )))))))))....

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
bobby623

San Angelo, Texas
United States
Member #1,097
January 31, 2003
1,648 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 11:25 am

Regarding your question about why some people are allergic to arithmetic.

Speaking on behalf of myself, it's impossible to have any kind of rationale lottery history analysis system/workout/strategy/method (take your pick) without the use of arithmetic.

Folks who want to try my way of analyzing game draw history using the power of substitution must be able to count to 16, or, in a few instances, 24.

In event there is a question, my ideas (not ideals) are not repeat not about 'predicting' anything.

What I do is gather together tracking data according to a systematic plan and then use my intellect to choose, repeat, choose, digits/numbers I believe have the best chance of being in the next winning permutation/combination.
No mathematical formulae, no odds, no probability, no statistics or other mathematically-based data sets.
If this makes me an idiot, so be it!!!

Yes, the drawings are random.

But the reality is, as you have no doubt come to realize, that some tracking charts can use randomness to generate useful information.
In other words, as JADELottery believes, we can use the lottery's randomness to further our own ends, so to speak.

I think I know what you are proposing. I did some of that in my early days of lottery history analysis.
If you have found a way to make it work - Bravo!!

Personally, I found a better way.

Time permitting, I intend to provide more samples of my non-mathematical tracking charts in the Systems Forum and then show how I bring all the information together to CHOOSE what I believe are the best answers to the What's Next questions.

Thanks for your interest.
LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 1:19 pm

Quote: Originally posted by bobby623 on Jun 17, 2018
Regarding your question about why some people are allergic to arithmetic.

Speaking on behalf of myself, it's impossible to have any kind of rationale lottery history analysis system/workout/strategy/method (take your pick) without the use of arithmetic.

Folks who want to try my way of analyzing game draw history using the power of substitution must be able to count to 16, or, in a few instances, 24.

In event there is a question, my ideas (not ideals) are not repeat not about 'predicting' anything.

What I do is gather together tracking data according to a systematic plan and then use my intellect to choose, repeat, choose, digits/numbers I believe have the best chance of being in the next winning permutation/combination.
No mathematical formulae, no odds, no probability, no statistics or other mathematically-based data sets.
If this makes me an idiot, so be it!!!

Yes, the drawings are random.

But the reality is, as you have no doubt come to realize, that some tracking charts can use randomness to generate useful information.
In other words, as JADELottery believes, we can use the lottery's randomness to further our own ends, so to speak.

I think I know what you are proposing. I did some of that in my early days of lottery history analysis.
If you have found a way to make it work - Bravo!!

Personally, I found a better way.

Time permitting, I intend to provide more samples of my non-mathematical tracking charts in the Systems Forum and then show how I bring all the information together to CHOOSE what I believe are the best answers to the What's Next questions.

Thanks for your interest.

you seem to be "inventing a bicycle"... what you're trying to figure out on the intuitive level has already been done before on the mathematical... "Probability Theory" is the science that studies randomness... and by now it has achieved some quite impressive results... so, if to continue using this analogy, your "bicycle invention" just doesn't make sense because it has already been invented by others long ago, the factories for producing those "bicycles" have been built and their products a nearby wallmart offers for sale to the public on a regular basis... but you just don't know about it and when some neighbor of yours ( like me, for instance) is trying to point out at this very fact you just don't believe him thus denying the obvious... from my point of view what you're doing is a waste of time and efforts, because your garage creation will never ever be able to compete with what the manufactures already produce in great quantities and of a great quality, but if the process of reinventing something makes you feel better and entertains you, then it's fine with me as well...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
bobby623

San Angelo, Texas
United States
Member #1,097
January 31, 2003
1,648 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 1:24 pm

Sorry, but you just don't get it.
Good Luck with your Book.
Happy Father's Day!
LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 1:49 pm

Quote: Originally posted by bobby623 on Jun 17, 2018
Sorry, but you just don't get it.
Good Luck with your Book.
Happy Father's Day!

I'm afraid that it's you who don't understand... ok, lets' take some quote from your previous post about "some tracking charts use randomness to generate useful information"... you've got to be kidding me!!!.. of course they do!... and there is a legit science that does exactly just that... it's called "statistics"... and instead of of bringing into this discussion some personal beliefs and opinions of some unknown to me JADElottery I can offer you the real works of some of the great mathematicians of all times such as Gauss and Laplace whom had already proved the very same thing about 200 years ago... and unlike your friend JADE they did it on a solid scientific ground... though, I bet you have never heard of them and are not familiar with their studies and achievements... otherwise you wouldn't do what you're doing now... your ignorance is not a blessing, like perhaps you might think... it's a curse...

btw the magic chart you're currently looking for has already been built by those two quys Gauss and Laplace 200 years ago... this function is well known, widely used today in lots of practical applications in lots of different ways in economy, finance, sociology and many other practical studies... this chart is called "statistical density distribution"... google it up... though I mentioned about it in the book...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
CARBOB

COLUMBUS,GA.
United States
Member #4,924
June 3, 2004
6,719 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 2:26 pm

Quote: Originally posted by LA Igrok on Jun 17, 2018
I'm afraid that it's you who don't understand... ok, lets' take some quote from your previous post about "some tracking charts use randomness to generate useful information"... you've got to be kidding me!!!.. of course they do!... and there is a legit science that does exactly just that... it's called "statistics"... and instead of of bringing into this discussion some personal beliefs and opinions of some unknown to me JADElottery I can offer you the real works of some of the great mathematicians of all times such as Gauss and Laplace whom had already proved the very same thing about 200 years ago... and unlike your friend JADE they did it on a solid scientific ground... though, I bet you have never heard of them and are not familiar with their studies and achievements... otherwise you wouldn't do what you're doing now... your ignorance is not a blessing, like perhaps you might think... it's a curse...

btw the magic chart you're currently looking for has already been built by those two quys Gauss and Laplace 200 years ago... this function is well known, widely used today in lots of practical applications in lots of different ways in economy, finance, sociology and many other practical studies... this chart is called "statistical density distribution"... google it up... though I mentioned about it in the book...

I remember using the LaPlace correction for transformation between the Ellipsoid and Geoid, 40 years ago. I had fogotten it until I read this post. LOL

https://app.box.com/s/88i8fxs1aaw16iy5ygyzdrh2e5yu3mer
winsumloosesum

Philadelpia/Pennsylvania
United States
Member #2,218
September 1, 2003
6,803 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 8:32 pm

California Fantasy 5/39 - Twins (AKA Consecutive Pairs)

Igor,

Below are the past 4 Rounds of your California 5/39 game. Draws current through Saturday, June 16, 2018.

Notice in the screen shot below that the Pair 8.9 is the only pair that has NOT hit in last 4 rounds.

Would the 8,9 be a pair that you would include in your selections?

Notice at the bottom that there are 26 Twins (Consecutive Pairs) that hit in the most recent 74 games. 13 @1, 12 @ 2, and 1 @ 3+
LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 9:38 pm

Quote: Originally posted by winsumloosesum on Jun 17, 2018
California Fantasy 5/39 - Twins (AKA Consecutive Pairs)

Igor,

Below are the past 4 Rounds of your California 5/39 game. Draws current through Saturday, June 16, 2018.

Notice in the screen shot below that the Pair 8.9 is the only pair that has NOT hit in last 4 rounds.

Would the 8,9 be a pair that you would include in your selections?

Notice at the bottom that there are 26 Twins (Consecutive Pairs) that hit in the most recent 74 games. 13 @1, 12 @ 2, and 1 @ 3+

of course I'm monitoring the situation constantly... though at this point the probability of this twin 8-9 to play some time near-term is kind of average... as you can see there are already 40 twins in total in the current round which is a bit too many.... also 12 twins played twice which is also too many... and only 1 twin played 3 times which is too little... though 8-9 twin is already alone and located in the 6-th round therefore is likely to play soon but how soon is hard to say as it's not even "hot" by any definition at the moment... therefore I think that some of the twins played twice in the current round have better chances to play first...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
Mr-B 216

Ohio
United States
Member #179,976
February 15, 2017
1,283 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 10:00 pm

As Igor mentioned, since there are way too many 002 twins and not enough 003 twins, it might be best to start there. I would look for 1 or 2 002 twins that meet the criteria to help get the data back on track to proper distribution. Don't neglect looking at the Singles and Repeats as well to see how the individual numbers within each twin are performing.

I like 20-21, 26-27 and maybe 06-07. I also wouldn't rule out a double twin hit soon, such as 20-21 and 26-27.

As for the 08-09 twin, it also shows promise, as it is the longest out twin (last hit 06/09/17) and CA is a bit short on 001 twins as well.

What goes around comes around.
LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 17, 2018, 10:15 pm

Quote: Originally posted by Mr-B 216 on Jun 17, 2018
As Igor mentioned, since there are way too many 002 twins and not enough 003 twins, it might be best to start there. I would look for 1 or 2 002 twins that meet the criteria to help get the data back on track to proper distribution. Don't neglect looking at the Singles and Repeats as well to see how the individual numbers within each twin are performing.

I like 20-21, 26-27 and maybe 06-07. I also wouldn't rule out a double twin hit soon, such as 20-21 and 26-27.

As for the 08-09 twin, it also shows promise, as it is the longest out twin (last hit 06/09/17) and CA is a bit short on 001 twins as well.

agree... but some shortage of 001 twins can be replenished by some expired 002 twins... there are 4 of those currently in line for expiration within the next 3 days: 27-28;6-7; 20-21 and 21-22... what's more important from my view is that there are already 40 twins in total in the current round as the expired today 22-23 was immediately replaced with 28-29...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
PoundHound

United Kingdom
Member #190,293
June 3, 2018
17 Posts
Offline

Jun 18, 2018, 1:51 pm

Here's my attempt at applying the concepts from the book. It's a work in progress! I play Euromillions (the HotPicks version), the UK National Lottery (again, just the HotPicks version) and the UK ThunderBall game. The odds seem to be the best for EuroMillions where if you Pick 5 and match them all, you win £1 Million! There are smaller prizes for the smaller picks (from Pick 1 to Pick 4, in addition to Pick 5).

The 2/3 rule is definitely spot on and I'm grateful to Igrok for making this known to us.

The image below shows things as they stand in preparation for tomorrow's draw. I'll try and post an image of the structures analysis a bit later.
PoundHound

United Kingdom
Member #190,293
June 3, 2018
17 Posts
Offline

Jun 18, 2018, 2:16 pm

Top-performing structures for EuroMillions:
PoundHound

United Kingdom
Member #190,293
June 3, 2018
17 Posts
Offline

Jun 18, 2018, 3:29 pm

Apologies...some of the numbers in the EuroMillions snapshot posted earlier had some numbers in Round 1 without the appropriate colour for "Doubles"

Here's the corrected image...
LA Igrok

Los Angeles, CA
United States
Member #189,390
April 17, 2018
316 Posts
Offline

Jun 18, 2018, 3:43 pm

Quote: Originally posted by PoundHound on Jun 18, 2018
Top-performing structures for EuroMillions:

I guess your calculations are incorrect... in order to collect all the available rounds' statistics regarding the structures it would be wrong just to divide the existing number of the draws by ten ( in your case)... there are 10 times more actual rounds because after collecting the data from the first round, which includes draws from 1 to 10, the next round will include the draws from 2 to 11, the following one will be from 3 to 12 and so on... to calculate all of them one draw has to be detached from the bottom of the previous round and one more added to the top in order to get to the next round data... and this way it should go all the way up to the most recent draw...

"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." Eleanor Rousevelt
PoundHound

United Kingdom
Member #190,293
June 3, 2018
17 Posts
Offline

Jun 18, 2018, 4:07 pm

Quote: Originally posted by LA Igrok on Jun 18, 2018
I guess your calculations are incorrect... in order to collect all the available rounds' statistics regarding the structures it would be wrong just to divide the existing number of the draws by ten ( in your case)... there are 10 times more actual rounds because after collecting the data from the first round, which includes draws from 1 to 10, the next round will include the draws from 2 to 11, the following one will be from 3 to 12 and so on... to calculate all of them one draw has to be detached from the bottom of the previous round and one more added to the top in order to get to the next round data... and this way it should go all the way up to the most recent draw...

Hi Igrok,

I'm fairly certain I've done the right thing....here's an image that illustrates how I keep moving the set of 10 draws for working out the structure.

New Topic New Poll

Subscribe to this topic

I have developed a method to play Jackpot Games.Prev TopicNext Topic

I have developed a method to play Jackpot Games.Prev Topic Next Topic