Quick Links You last visited January 22, 2017, 12:47 am All times shown are Eastern Time (GMT5:00)  Numeric frequency theories do not applyNew Member
Perth Australia Member #2848 November 22, 2003 1 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 12:56 am  IP Logged  
Numeric Frequency Theories don't apply! I am surprised at the number of numeric frequency theories that are suggested through this discussion board. I am no mathmatician, but anyone with even a slight understanding of probability would know that these theories do not apply to random draws, such as lottery numbers. Each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn if it has been drawn 1000 times or only 10 times before.
Anyone who wants to win at gambling using strategy would be better off at a casino  at least they will give you free cash just for opening an account (check out all the free cash deals at http://www.richchicken.com). Of course the house will usually win in the end, but you have a much better chance of winning than playing lotto!   
Greece Member #2815 November 18, 2003 502 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 3:56 am  IP Logged  
You're absolutery right. I'm a mathematicial and frequencies are the easiest to use but they don't offer any better odds than playing random numbers! We should look for patterns, unusual behaviour of each number or anything else except frequencies! If you have something to do, at least do it well...   
Belgium Member #2220 September 2, 2003 553 Posts Offline
 Posted: November 22, 2003, 4:16 am  IP Logged  
I'm not a frequency freak either, but saying that Each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn, is old school foolish "wisdom".   
Greece Member #2815 November 18, 2003 502 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 5:01 am  IP Logged  
To have a clear idea of each lottery's random behaviour, we should have a very large history of draws. There are mathematical formulas to determine the minimum draws required but believe me, it's far beyond any history draws we have. A lottery 5/45 for example has 1221759 different tickets. Each of these 45 numbers exists in exactly 135751 tickets. Thus as most lotteries around the world have much less than 10000 history draws, we can realize our sample is relative short to conclude anything about the random nature of lotteries. But since we have an adequate sample size, we expect to observe that each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn. Of course most people say lotteries are random. I don't disagree neither agree. The real thing we should consider about is that lotteries appear not truly "random" in a short period of time (eg a number may not be drawn at all) but at a larger scale they should be (or may be not as well). We just cannot prove this at the moment. Neither a program that generates random draws is valid to test this assumption because the numbers generated are not really random (althought they have properties of random numbers), neither do they come up the same way as lotteries do. If you have something to do, at least do it well...   
United States Member #1759 June 29, 2003 1156 Posts Offline
 Posted: November 22, 2003, 8:13 am  IP Logged  
All Lottery numbers theoretically have the same chance of being drawn but in reality they don't behave this way
because you will have numbers that come up repeatedly or more often and less often in a given draw history.You also have numbers that don't come up for weeks,in the Pick3/4 games I've seen a number drawn 4 days in a row while another number was out for 2 wks.In the Pick3/4 you can observe the numbers Hit/Skip activity and select a group of numbers to wheel(8).In the Pick5/6 games you would place the numbers in Consecutive Number Groups like this using a 5/36 game as an example (1,2,34,5,67,8,9)(10,11,1213,14,1516,17,18)(19,20,2122,23,2425,26,27)(28,29,3031,32,3334,35,36) next you eliminate 1 (3)number set from each group then eliminate 1 number from the remaining number sets which leaves you with 16 numbers to wheel.   
Pennsylvania United States Member #1340 April 6, 2003 2450 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 1:49 pm  IP Logged  
Quote: Originally posted by apagogeas on November 22, 2003
There are mathematical formulas to determine the minimum draws required but believe me, it's far beyond any history draws we have.
I have over 9,000 drawings in history for the PA Daily number (Pick 3, only 1000 combinations)... what are the formulas you speak of?
Playing more than one ticket per game is betting against yourself.   
United States Member #2460 October 7, 2003 766 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 6:42 pm  IP Logged  
Each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn if it has been drawn 1000 times or only 10 times before.
Each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn, is old school foolish "wisdom".
To have a clear idea of each lottery's random behaviour, we should have a very large history of draws. There are mathematical formulas to determine the minimum draws required but believe me, it's far beyond any history draws we have.
I hate to disagree with you all on the above, seeing as how you know so much about math and I don't, but even so, in reality concerning the above statements you are both: Right and wrong.
First let me say that in an ideal theoretical lottery situation each number or ball, does have the same chance of coming out, or should, but because of circumstances, or laws unknown to us, they really don't.
In the short run, some numbers come more often than others (repeat} and some other come only once and some don't come at all.
But in the long run, (Depends on the game, how long. (Pick3 or pick6 or whatever}} The frequency of all numbers has a tendency to become equal or to equalize itself, so after so many runs all the numbers would had come out a given number of times or percent of the time and it will be as equal as possible or at least as equal as they will ever be and for that number of runs is possible that the number will (Always?} remain constant.
So frequency does count, specially if you predict by percent, based, on a fixed expected percent for that particular number after a given number of draws, on the very long run when the numbers equalize as much as possible of course.
I understand that this or this method is or might not be possible with most lottery games, but it should be possible with the pick3 and maybe pick4.
Anyway this is the opinion of somebody who doesn't know anything or doesn't know better.
What do you think?
  
United States Member #2460 October 7, 2003 766 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 6:49 pm  IP Logged  
It is just an idea, but I suggest that you check
Open Discussion: Define/Refine Prediction Pick 3 hypersoniq
November 17, 2003, 8:12pm
The above interesting post, on the pick 3 forum.
  
Stone Mountain*Georgia United States Member #828 November 2, 2002 10491 Posts Offline  Posted: November 22, 2003, 7:25 pm  IP Logged  
Quote: Originally posted by damo87 on November 22, 2003 Numeric Frequency Theories don't apply!I am surprised at the number of numeric frequency theories that are suggested through this discussion board. I am no mathematician, but anyone with even a slight understanding of probability would know that these theories do not apply to random draws, such as lottery numbers. Each number has exactly the same chance of being drawn if it has been drawn 1000 times or only 10 times before.
..................................................................................................... Dear Damo87 ...sorry
That's wrong. When you use the word chance.... if you mean the odds never change.... that is correct. The odds on a Coin Flip are always 50/50. Each time a coin is flipped the odds never change..... no matter how many times you get a head or a tail. The probability however will change accordingly based on the entire dvent......not just one flip. The probability of your tossing 30 Heads in a row are over one in three Billion ! Even mathematicians think these words are interchangeable. Physicists do not. Probability is when Math meets common sense.
  
Greece Member #2815 November 18, 2003 502 Posts Offline  Posted: November 23, 2003, 9:26 am  IP Logged  
EXCALIBUR, we say exactly the same thing! Actually, anyone here says the same thing in different words. About the formulas, this is like asking me to write a technical article on this, which I'll not. There a lot steps involved in this, it's not just a simple equation. Anyone who has an understanding of statistics, confidence intervals, normal distribution, degrees of freedom, sample size properties etc, can realize the problem we are dealing with. It's differeít to observe a possible dvent than proving it's truth. Consider the tossing of a coin which has only 2 possible outcomes, and if it's fair we expect each one to appear 1/2. If you toss it 10 times, you may end with 5 heads. This doesn't mean it's fair. To make "sure" we have to setup a whole procedure defining a confidence interval (eg 95%), an assumption of its possible distribution etc. This could require tossing more than 1000 times and may repeat the whole procedure over and over again. This is the simplest example someone can think about. Lotteries have many more outcomes than this. And we don't know their distribution and other properties in advance. You don't need to be a math's freak to understand the complexity of this problem. Pick3 games are possibly easier than lotto but have the same problems too. If you have something to do, at least do it well...   
Stone Mountain*Georgia United States Member #828 November 2, 2002 10491 Posts Offline  Posted: November 23, 2003, 1:06 pm  IP Logged  
At this point, I don't know enough about the big games to ever attempt any sort of system. I play on occasion but don't attempt to overcome its complexity. At this point, I believe there is already too much to overcome with simple pick3 games, much less the big games. Don't we agree that the first breakthroughs will come at this level? This is where I have begun. Trying to learn to walk before we run. Even at the Pick3 level, the odds and payoffs are such that you feel like you're forced to eat Chinese food with 5footlong chopsticks. That's pretty tough, even if you occasionally manage to grab a bite with these ridiculous chop sticks.......the odds of getting it all the way to your mouth are still ....1 time out of 6, and even if you do get that piece to your mouth, the states pay off at 50% the correct rate, instead of something closer to the correct odds of 1000 to one. You have to spit half of your food out! LOL Now that's a tough game! Following this logic leaves us with a horrible picture of the big games. For the big games, the chopsticks are Thousands or Millions of feet long! LOL   
BC Canada Member #2120 August 19, 2003 258 Posts Offline  Posted: November 23, 2003, 1:08 pm  IP Logged  
No one has metion if at first you don't succeed ... destroy all evidence you ever tried   
Dump Water Florida United States Member #380 June 5, 2002 3114 Posts Offline  Posted: November 24, 2003, 11:05 pm  IP Logged  
Frequency is a bootstrapping effect when put to proper use. First you break down the numbers into hot, average and cold, then you look at the draw history and see how many came from each in the drawings, now you know the percentage ratio of how many hot, average and cold numbers you need to put on your wheel to mimic the proportions of your game.
The idea of playing the hottest numbers is a waste as the winning draw never comes from all hot or all cold or even hot and cold. Every draw has a mixture of hot and average, average and cold or hot, average and cold.
If you do find a draw with all hot, it will have had so many winners it would have the worst payout possible, not the one to win. BobP
  
Ocala United States Member #3015 December 13, 2003 70 Posts Offline  Posted: December 13, 2003, 4:53 pm  IP Logged  
apagogeas 


EXCALIBUR, we say exactly the same thing! Actually, anyone here says the same thing in different words. About the formulas, this is like asking me to write a technical article on this, which I'll not. There a lot steps involved in this, it's not just a simple equation. Anyone who has an understanding of statistics, confidence intervals, normal distribution, degrees of freedom, sample size properties etc, can realize the problem we are dealing with. It's differeít to observe a possible dvent than proving it's truth. Consider the tossing of a coin which has only 2 possible outcomes, and if it's fair we expect each one to appear 1/2. If you toss it 10 times, you may end with 5 heads. This doesn't mean it's fair. To make "sure" we have to setup a whole procedure defining a confidence interval (eg 95%), an assumption of its possible distribution etc. This could require tossing more than 1000 times and may repeat the whole procedure over and over again. This is the simplest example someone can think about. Lotteries have many more outcomes than this. And we don't know their distribution and other properties in advance. You don't need to be a math's freak to understand the complexity of this problem. Pick3 games are possibly easier than lotto but have the same problems too. Johnny5 says: I agree with this assumption and yes the fact of having more problems than this is very true. In the process of developing a good system you must consider all PROBABLE CAUSE.. Like for instance.. the Florida Lottery uses 3 different machines and ball sets labeled A thru G.. not to mension the ware on the ball sets, current temperatures or any of the such CAUSES.. this alone will increase your guess.. but none the less observing all these with carefulness might give you the tick you need.. I have developed a system for the Fantasy 5 wich I am still testing before applying and so far I am getting a 96% accuracy on it.. I can't seem to go under a $3,000 USD invenstment but hey.. to invest $3,000 USDs and get back $54,000 USDs.. I think would be a good investment.

  
Pennsylvania United States Member #1340 April 6, 2003 2450 Posts Offline  Posted: December 13, 2003, 5:51 pm  IP Logged  
Quote: Originally posted by apagogeas on November 22, 2003
We should look for patterns, unusual behaviour of each number or anything else except frequencies!
Frequency is the basis for patterns. A number's frequent appearance or conspicuous absence is the core of most systems. I would be more inclined to believe sums have no practical value in a jackpot (multiball, nonreplacement) game. Playing more than one ticket per game is betting against yourself.   
