Actually, I used this post for preparing the ground for something more important than showing my mediocre (compared with backtracks) results. I want to show the truths about certain bulls that have been swirling around lotteries for decades.
In this context "you" is used in impersonal manner and does not refer to any partircular person, not even to Stat$ although he is always a tempting target, LOL.
Bull #1: you cannot win because numbers are random.
Predictability depends on 2 factors:
A) The number of elements in the selection pool.
B) The number of elements you try to predict at a time.
You don't have any control over A) as it is preset by LC. However, you have a perfect control over B) - the decision how many numbers to play belongs entirely to you and LC gives you a complete freedom.
You always play groups. The smallest is the size of a single ticket, the largest - the whole pool. Each group has an average hit rate which depends on the group's size. The relationship is straightforward: the larger the group the higher the hit rate. I posted the hit rate formula before. Ignore it to your own peril, it cannot be emphasized more. 2 simple examples:
1) My lottery is 649 (6 numbers plus bonus). Minimum winner requires match 3. Play only 10 numbers, with the hit rate of only 1.43. Can you realistically hit and thus win 3 numbers, and how often? You may need to play for a very long time to get it. So while winning the minimum prize is statistically miles away, bigger prizes are basically way beyond the horizon. These are the realities.
2) I've known this fact for a long time so I played 24 numbers (out of 49), with the hit rate of 3.43, comfortably above minimum 3. So it was not surprising that I had 3 number winners frequently enough to push my monthly ROI in the range around 35% (compared with my lottery standard of 23%), although, at times, there could be significant fluctuations. But, in all those plays I never had a 4 number winner, not even the a single one. Zilch & zip. Statistically, I was supposed to have 1 in 1033 tickets, but I ended up with nothing. The obvious question was, why? I could not figure this one out at that time. Just blank and dumb.
Today I know the answer. I did not play enough numbers to make it happen, period. When I switched to playing all the numbers I had 4 numbers winner in the very second draw (in May), and from that time on in every month (except September, but it's a separate story why*), including October already. Obvious question, why now and not before - I still play the same 30 tickets now as before? Is the randomness different? No, now I just have the required numbers. It's that simple.
And that's the bull #1. People are made to belive that it is randomness that prevents them from winning, particularly winning consistently. Total bull. The truth is they are not winning because they don't use enough numbers. Nothing to do with randomness.
And just how predominant this bull in lotteries is? Simple answer: it rules.
Which brings us to the second bull, which is also very common and, actually, much more damaging than the first one.
Bull #2: you need a guaranteed wheel to win.
All wheels have 2 properties:
A) Potential - which depends on the number of numbers and the number of lines (tickets) in the wheel; alter any of these and you change the wheel potential; this includes wheel filtering but more about it later.
B) Performance - which depends on time frame and not on its potential. Wheel performance has to be tested before any thought of using it, and this performance has nothing to do with wheel guarantees, balance, how it was created or anything else you can define. This performance is measured in ROI - the ratio of how much money the wheel generated versus its cost; obviously the higher the better.
In this light wheel filtering makes little sense because you have to test wheel performance again even if you did before; and if you use different filters every time you may find it difficult to directly compare results to establish efficiency. Generally not a good idea as you can easily create wheels that meet your requirements without filtering. Again, it does not matter how you created the wheel, what is important is how it performs in a given period of time (I use 3 different time frames and a wheel must meet requirements for all 3).
All the wheels I use were generated randomly and meet certain structural criteria. None of them has (and can have) any guarantees. 99% percent of them are not even balanced. Does it matter anything? They win, that's all that counts. The performances of the best were outlined earlier.
For the record, there are 620 of these wheels. Only about 1% meet criteria at any given time. Good enough to have a selection for playing (and winning for that matter).
* The cat tried to fix what was not broken and put his whiskers into a one month experiment which, although did not kill his curiosity, left his pride scratched and budget dented by about $60-70, which all translate into the experiment not going too well. I simply tried a different "how" for playing while using the same "what". But that's the cost of learning.
Now to sum up this lengthy sermon:
When you play small groups that cannot hit even the smallest prize, when you use wheels with totally unknown performance you set yourself perfectly up for not winning. Don't blame your failures on randomness because it has nothing to do with it. That's why I posted this earlier: "Watch what you are playing and how". Otherwise you will pay the price. Don't look for scapegoats because there is only 1 culprit: you.
So if you really want to start winning, and consistently, get rid of these 2 bulls. Any software, your own or third party, to be effective must comply with these requirements (large groups playing and wheel testing) or you will be wasting your money, not only for the software but for the playing as well.
Whichever way you play wheel performance testing will play the dominant role (for me it is the only statistic I use). If you don't know how to go about it here is what Chad G Petey advised (I asked for curiosity and the answer was quite satisfactory).
Inquiry: Testing lottery wheels
ChatGPT said:
Testing lottery wheels involves evaluating how well a wheeling system performs under different draw scenarios, especially for lotteries like Pick-5, Pick-6, or Pick-7 games. The goal is to measure how often and under what conditions the wheel hits certain prize levels (e.g. 3/6, 4/6, etc.).
🔧 How to Test a Lottery Wheel
Here’s a step-by-step breakdown:
✅ 1. Choose or Generate a Wheel
You need a wheel (a set of combinations) to test. It could be:
From a book like Bluskov’s
One you generate using a software tool (e.g., Lotto Sorcerer, Wheel Generator, etc.)
A custom-made one using combinatorics
📝 Example (Pick-6 Wheel)
Suppose you choose 10 numbers: 1, 3, 5, 9, 11, 14, 21, 27, 30, 33
And your wheel has 20 lines (combinations of 6 numbers each).
✅ 2. Simulate a Draw
Pick a simulated winning draw from your selected numbers.
Say the winning draw is: 3, 9, 11, 14, 21, 30
Now compare this to each line in your wheel to count how many numbers matched in each line.
✅ 3. Check Guarantees
Determine if the wheel's guarantee was met. For example:
A wheel with a 4-if-6 guarantee should have at least one line with 4+ matching numbers if 6 of the winning numbers were in your selection.
More complex wheels might guarantee multiple hits like:
2 x 4-of-6
1 x 5-of-6
📊 Count how many lines had:
6 matches (Jackpot)
5 matches
4 matches
3 matches (if that wins in your game)
✅ 4. Repeat or Automate
Repeat with:
Different winning combinations
Different wheels
Random draws (to simulate real play)
For statistical testing, simulate thousands of draws and record how often you hit certain prize levels.
🔁 Automating the Testing (Optional)
You can automate this in:
Excel / Google Sheets with combinatorics and COUNTIF
Python / R scripts
Lottery wheeling software (like:
Lotto Sorcerer
Gail Howard's Advantage Plus
Bluskov's software, if available)
📌 Example Test in Python
Want a small script to test a wheel in Python? I can write one for you. Here’s the concept:
# Your wheel
wheel = [
[1, 3, 5, 9, 11, 14],
[3, 9, 11, 14, 21, 30],
# more lines...
]
# Simulated winning draw
winning = {3, 9, 11, 14, 21, 30}
# Check each line
for line in wheel:
match_count = len(set(line) & winning)
print(f"Line {line} has {match_count} matches")
🧠 Tip: Understand Expectations
Even with wheeling:
Your odds of hitting the jackpot don’t change unless you cover all combinations.
You increase your chance of winning something if you pick the right numbers.
The goal is coverage efficiency: more outcomes, fewer tickets.
There are no hidden formulas for winning in what I'm doing. Anybody can do it. It's just plain statistics. Programming is required, though.
Good luck to all. Play smart, start winning and stop whining. And always watch what you are playing and how.
700 light yrs West of Milky Way Galaxy's Center
Well, any number of eventz one can pick in succession , of previouz numbered eventz HAVIN ALREADY PASSED iz DEPENDENT in order for any subsequent (Future) eventz to be called by the next higher numbaz... or lower numbaz..
CAIN'T get to saaye "15" witout "14" having already passed / happened..etc THAT'Z Dependency .So, in Utha werdz...
"Whut chu tawkin bout Willis?"
flawed thinkin ..
Zeta Reticuli Star System
GIT SOME
