Texas United States
Member #4,549
May 2, 2004
4,230 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by cottoneyedjoe on Sep 7, 2022
It's a perfectly good experiment to compare two methods. It doesn't matter if one of the things being compared is static and the other is dynamic, because that is exactly what he wants to compare.
You can of course design other experiments comparing two dynamics. Or two even statics, like, how does 1-2-3-4-5 compare to your five lucky numbers? To each experimenter their own.
As you say, to each his own. I'll admit you have a good point inasmuch as he did test a static against dynamic.
Perhaps there would be more more value in the results had he used the static set as a control, picked a new self pick each draw and got a quick pick?
G
I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain.
Baton Rouge, LA United States
Member #4,602
May 7, 2004
1,197 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by cottoneyedjoe on Sep 7, 2022
It's a perfectly good experiment to compare two methods. It doesn't matter if one of the things being compared is static and the other is dynamic, because that is exactly what he wants to compare.
You can of course design other experiments comparing two dynamics. Or two even statics, like, how does 1-2-3-4-5 compare to your five lucky numbers? To each experimenter their own.
Thanks! You understand exactly what I was doing. Some people play the same set of numbers drawing after drawing while others just use quick picks from the terminal. I was trying to see what would match more numbers over multiple drawings, a static set of numbers or a different quick pick every drawing. The quick picks did do a little better and some of them actually won money, but the average number of matches wasn't much different between the two.
I've done this experiment with Louisiana Lotto, Powerball, and MegaMillions and got similar results, with quick picks doing better than playing a static set of numbers every drawing. the differences weren't significant, but the quick picks did do a little better.
Right now, I'm doing another experiment like this. What I'm doing is playing a quick pick from the quick pick generator here at Lottery Post and a quick pick from the terminal on Louisiana Lotto. It's only been 7 drawings, but the Lottery Post quick picks have done better than the terminal with each one matching at least one number, and 2 winning $3. I have 13 more drawings to go to see what the final results are.
What I'm testing are different methods of picking numbers. I've done tests with static and dynamic, and now I'm testing with two different dynamic methods. The reason I test against terminal quick picks is that is how most people pick their numbers and I'm trying to see if other methods work better. I guess what I'm trying to determine is if it's worth it to use another method besides quick picks.
Baton Rouge, LA United States
Member #4,602
May 7, 2004
1,197 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by PrisonerSix on Sep 7, 2022
Thanks! You understand exactly what I was doing. Some people play the same set of numbers drawing after drawing while others just use quick picks from the terminal. I was trying to see what would match more numbers over multiple drawings, a static set of numbers or a different quick pick every drawing. The quick picks did do a little better and some of them actually won money, but the average number of matches wasn't much different between the two.
I've done this experiment with Louisiana Lotto, Powerball, and MegaMillions and got similar results, with quick picks doing better than playing a static set of numbers every drawing. the differences weren't significant, but the quick picks did do a little better.
Right now, I'm doing another experiment like this. What I'm doing is playing a quick pick from the quick pick generator here at Lottery Post and a quick pick from the terminal on Louisiana Lotto. It's only been 7 drawings, but the Lottery Post quick picks have done better than the terminal with each one matching at least one number, and 2 winning $3. I have 13 more drawings to go to see what the final results are.
What I'm testing are different methods of picking numbers. I've done tests with static and dynamic, and now I'm testing with two different dynamic methods. The reason I test against terminal quick picks is that is how most people pick their numbers and I'm trying to see if other methods work better. I guess what I'm trying to determine is if it's worth it to use another method besides quick picks.
That is an interesting idea too. Picking a different set of numbers each week and playing it against a quick pick, like doing a quick pick out of my head or some other method and using a terminal quick pick, then adding a static pick for every drawing to see what the differences are. It would be interesting to see how all three methods compare.
I didn't do a static control, but I am looking forward to seeing how well in the long run Lottery Post quick picks do against the lottery terminal. It will be interesting to say the least.
Ontario Canada
Member #109,238
April 9, 2011
60,904 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Wendy777 on Sep 6, 2022
Thanks, picktowin, for sharing your method. I notice the last 10 Quick Picks I have purchased here in Indiana are drawn in other states 1-2 days later.
Wendy
I Know A Lot Of Members Post Their Picks On Their States P3/P4 Threads.
Do You Post Your Quick Picks On The Indiana P3 Thread At All?
Do Your Picks Hit In Certain States In Particular Or In Random States?
