Follow-up to reducing 90,000 combinations

Reply #11

SHTh — Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:19:05 GMT

Lantern,Just a newbie opinion, but I believe a lottery player should be allowed to decide for themselves if knowing and/or use of the odds will be beneficial or a hindrance.I m sure the majority of lottery players who filter would agree that extensive analysis of the draw history provides crucial information that can be used to develop filtering criteria and strategy. But for me personally the additional knowledge of the probabilities has helped in i) Eliminating extremes of specific populations... [ More ]

Reply #10

LANTERN — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:30:09 GMT

Fri, Jul 1, 2005 14-25-41-42-50, Mega Ball: 40Tue, Jun 28, 2005 02-20-37-43-46, Mega Ball: 04Fri, Jun 24, 2005 14-43-44-50-56, Mega Ball: 07Tue, Jun 21, 2005 09-13-40-46-50, Mega Ball: 30Fri, Jun 17, 2005 16-35-40-49-50, Mega Ball: 34Tue, Jun 14, 2005 01-10-29-48-49, Mega Ball: 36Fri, Jun 10, 2005 14-29-31-37-50, Mega Ball: 34Tue, Jun 7, 2005 07-14-28-46-47, Mega Ball: 25Fri, Jun 3, 2005 04-06-14-28-47, Mega Ball: 42Tue, May 31, 2005 05-13-22-37-38, Mega Ball: 11 Forget about math, le... [ More ]

Reply #9

SHTh — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 15:48:28 GMT

LANTERNI just want to counter just one thing you said. I think a player should really be aware of the odds if they want to take filtering seriously and not lose a lot of money in the process.Probably another bad analogy but you can play poker for fun and amusement, but if you start playing seriously or competitively (however small the stakes) you need to be aware of the odds.

Reply #8

LANTERN — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 03:53:07 GMT

We have been thru this many times, nobody has yet proved that the state lotteries cheat. That does not mean that they don't, just that they haven't been caught yet.

Reply #7

solidsnake1626 — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 03:31:41 GMT

I am new to the lottery post, the past week i have been experimenting with the abbreviated and full wheels. It seems that when i use past drawing results to predict a certain drawing combination, i fail miserably because some weird combinations of numbers come up like 3 consecutive numbers, or decades, or 4 odd numbers, in my humble OPINION, i believe that the ppl who run the lottery gather all the numbers played for a certain day, and pick the combination that will generate the most profit for

Reply #6

JKING — Mon, 04 Jul 2005 12:09:04 GMT

Everyone has their own opinion. But for me, straight numerical analysis is only going to get you part of the way. I use it to eliminate what I call dumb bets (possible, but highly improbable occurrences). I would suggest you apply your math skills to the dynamics of the lotto...history, occurrences....etc. Even though it is not exact, it should put you more in the ballpark.This is probably a bad analogy....Straight numerical analysis is like knowing what the average rainfall is going to be for... [ More ]

Reply #5

LANTERN — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:41:16 GMT

Also as I said before, some forms of math can sometimes be a handycap to some people.Their knowledge of random is restricted to their knowledge of math or of what math tells them about random.On the other hand, I think that is best to let the past winning draws teach you about random for that particular lottery game, but again many or most people for some reason are unable to SEE random and not so random patterns.Their loss, I think, to each his own.Good luck.

Reply #4

LANTERN — Sun, 03 Jul 2005 02:05:02 GMT

Well, that shows you that there are very few True filter experts, Not every lottery expert really knows filters, they might know about some filters, but they don't know filters.But as always don't take my word for anything, I might be wrong.Good luck.Also as I said before, you don't predict, you guess, it might be an acurate guess or not, but a guess just the same.

Reply #3

SHTh — Sat, 02 Jul 2005 15:28:48 GMT

Thanks for everyone s input so far. I hope with a lot of brainstorming and a little discussion we can all discover a little bit more. What I learnt since my last visit to this forum is that Traditional filtering does not provide some magical recipe to the winning jackpot ticket. If you do select all the right parameters you still have to beat the probabilities within that subdivision of population. As to my hypothesis that brought me to the brink of despair. Well read on .. The following bri... [ More ]

Reply #2

LANTERN — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:04:07 GMT

A truly random lottery with virtually no trending/bias/flaws/anomalies is very bad for prediction strategies, but great for filtering experts since parameters on a draw by draw basis are more likely to follow a normal population distribution.I am not a jackpot game player myself yet and I am no expert at all, but from my brief studies of the history of jackpot games and from my pick 3 sudies, I think that you might be right, but no matter what, there is no such thing as unbiased or unpatterned r... [ More ]

Reply #1

SHTh — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:09:56 GMT

>>>I ve lost most of my original enthusiasm mainly because I now have to rely to a greater extent on my predictive abilities, on a lottery that is truly random independent and has virtually no biases6 days later, and I am even more disheartened . An off-site discussion/thoughts about unlikely combinations having as much chance as any other combination. In conjunction with accidentally coming across archive statements by peer recognized playing experts on the nature of the UK 6/49 in compari... [ More ]

Follow-up to reducing 90,000 combinations

SHTh — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:10:22 GMT

An update for those forum members kind enough to post suggestions. Approx 3/4 weeks ago during continual experimentation, I realised I d made a near fatal error, in my interpretation of statistical data for one of the UK 6/49 parameters. Which ultimately meant that to produce the same 7 jackpot wins each year I would have to generate a wheel with between 350,000- 500,000 combinations. My original 90,000 combinations generated using the original filtering criteria including the erroneous crite... [ More ]