Pcnut gave me a doubles Idea

Reply #78

cps10 — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:58:49 GMT

Pac

Great idea though..I think that it could be modified as Thoth mentioned. Maybe some skips on the doubles, and then begin to play will reduce your cost to play and may in fact give you a nice profit. Anyone interested in testing that? Perhaps waiting until a double hasn't appeared for 6 draws

Reply #77

Thoth — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:49:51 GMT

Your welcome. Unfortunately, I dont think there is any static system that will ever be able to be played every single game and still end up giving you a profit over the long term. The system isn't too bad if you have a large bank roll to play with and maybe wait to play after a large streak of losses.

Reply #76

sfilippo — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 12:31:13 GMT

I appreciate you putting your ideas out here, pac. Keep up the good work

Reply #75

pacattack05 — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:48:36 GMT

I appreciate your efforts Thoth. I guess it's back to the drawing board.

Thanx again.

Reply #74

Thoth — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:46:10 GMT

I brought my spreadsheets up to date, here is the system tested through the entire histories of five different states. These figures take into consideration the required amount to spend based on the last number drawn: If the last combo was a no-match the bet for the next day is $81. If the last combo drawn was a double, then the next bet is $54. Playing off the Triples is also included as well - if the last combo drawn was 555, then the next bet would cost $27, etc. If you choose not to play... [ More ]

Reply #73

cps10 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:45:05 GMT

okay...got it

Reply #72

paurths — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:44:31 GMT

Hi Keith,

no, with 6-ways i mean the singles, since it has 6 ways. (123, 132, 213, 231, 312, 321

Reply #71

cps10 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:44:00 GMT

That didn't work either...shoot.

Reply #70

BevsPicks — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:39:33 GMT

Pac: I just found it.

Reply #69

cps10 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:38:50 GMT

Doggone it...test from SC Evening (1/1/05-12/5/05):

Total wagers: $24,867 ($81 after a single, $54 after a double, $27 after a triple)

Winnings: $18,000

Profits: ($6,867)

Maybe I will check out the mates and see how that works.

So in the case of the 33 44 77, then you would have:

330 303 033 300 030 003 440 404 044 400 040 004 770 707 077 700 070 007

331 313 133 311 131 113 441 414 144 411 141 114 771 717 177 711 171 117

332 323 233 322 232 223 442 4... [ More ]

Reply #68

cps10 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:20:25 GMT

Pac

I have noticed in SOUTH CAROLINA that you will see a lot more of the reverses hit as well, meaning when you have for example 123 as your previous draw, that you get for instance 771 instead of 711.

Reply #67

cps10 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:19:08 GMT

Ricky,

Is the 6-way meaning that you are playing double the amount of actual combos

Reply #66

paurths — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:07:20 GMT

Hi Pac,

i did not include a double-qualifier in this test,

i'll do this in a half an hour or so, after i put the little people are in their beds.

I looking forward to the test, in such that perhaps only playing doubles after a double might blow winnings skyhigh, or not ;-). (not lots of plays, but there are states enough lol

Reply #65

Thoth — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 16:47:41 GMT

Ok Pac - real quick...I back tested the idea over 10,291 consecutive games in Ohio and it would have hit 793 times. That is about a 7.71% hit rate. I will try to run the cost/win profit/loss figures later if I have time, and perhaps a few other states.

I might also play with the skips and hits for the system as well....this may be one of those strategies where waiting X amount of games after its last initial hit could make it more profitable.

Reply #64

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:56:11 GMT

I see in your calculations that you multiplied 2053 X 81.

I can't see where you took the reduction in cost, if a double was a qualifier the night before, because that will reduce the cost from $81.00 down to $54.00, just for those qualifiers that were a double.

In fact, I don't see any doubles on your list in the before section. They are all non repeat digits. What happened to the doubles as qualifiers?

Remember that about 25 percent of the total winning numbers are doubles. Whether the... [ More ]

Reply #63

paurths — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:29:26 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by superman001 on April 24, 2006 Hey Pac,

Nice finding you got there!

I just did a backtest on Florida as well, a few differences;

Out of the 365 days, 105 were days with a double being drawn the day before, thus lowering the cost...

Total cost: 105 x 54 + 260 x 81 = 5670 + 21060 = 26730

I only found a total of 36 winning days though...

Total winnings: 36 x 900 = 32400

Profit: 32400 - 26730 = 5670

Weekly profit: 5670 / 52 = 109.04

Bac... [ More ]

Reply #62

psykomo — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 06:35:04 GMT

THANK$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$Thoth:

I only playyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyJck'pot$$$4444$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!

mbyyy......look @..............................................,,,,,,,$$$4444444444444!!!!

JUST,,,,,,,,A..............................................................TIPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP!!

LOL

PSY???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

ODK.com

Reply #61

Stack47 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 05:31:56 GMT

Pac - It would have hit 6 times in the last 90 games in Ohio

After reading about it, I decided to box the 27 combos in the Ohio evening pick-3.

Thanks Pac

Stack

Reply #60

tntea — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 02:47:21 GMT

Kansas Double test listed on pick 3 forum.. Will watch it a week.. See how it goes with narrowing down doubles..

Reply #59

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:21:23 GMT

I know exactly what you mean. It's just a short term trend. And that ruins my day....LOL

But the numbers have been in the green and not in the red yet.

So, there is some hope based on the positive cash flow here. Don't ya think

Reply #58

Thoth — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 01:17:17 GMT

Florida is probably clustering with hits right now (as all rondom things tend to cluster off and on) ...it will most likely stretch back out to an unprofitable system if you played it every draw. Most likely it will only hit an overall percent of the time according to its probability percentage. Lol I always run into things like that - things that work great for a short time then stop.

Reply #57

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:39:48 GMT

Oh well, I guess I'll ring my hands and throw in the towel.....NOT...LOL

This one might be a bust, but I can gaurantee that I will never stop learning from the lessons I impose on myself.

Failure is not an option.

Reply #56

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:35:06 GMT

That is exactly the reason why I wanted to do a long term study.

Reply #55

Thoth — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:30:26 GMT

The chance for the event to occur is 8.1% (from a no-match to a double) or 5.4% for a double to a double.

Reply #54

Thoth — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:24:19 GMT

Pac - It would have hit 6 times in the last 90 games in Ohio

Reply #53

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:23:09 GMT

I would like to lessen the days being played with your selection process and test it to see if it is profitable. The scientific method is the only way to determine what works and what doesen't. I need all the help I can get....LOL

We need a think tank on this one....

Reply #52

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:13:46 GMT

Thanx, I just saw it in your workout, sorry. I've had 4 Heinekens now.....LOL

It's still a positive cash flow. And that's what really counts anyway, right

Reply #51

tntea — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:12:41 GMT

let's try it out..

Will start a test post

Reply #50

superman001 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:04:09 GMT

Yup...

Reply #49

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:03:34 GMT

At what percent is that selection process successful?

Sounds like if people put their heads together here, we can have many profitable days to come....

Thanx tntea....

Reply #48

pacattack05 — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:00:15 GMT

I'm embarrased for not thanking you for this. If it wasn't for your post, I would not even be thinking about the doubles.

Still needs some tweaking, but not much.

Reply #47

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:56:54 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by superman001 on April 24, 2006 Hey Pac,

Nice finding you got there!

I just did a backtest on Florida as well, a few differences;

Out of the 365 days, 106 were days with a double being drawn the day before, thus lowering the cost...

Total cost: 106 x 54 + 259 x 81 = 5724 + 20979 = 26703

I only found a total of 36 winning days though...

Total winnings: 36 x 900 = 32400

Profit: 32400 - 26703 = 5697

Weekly profit: 5697 / 52 = 109.56

Bac... [ More ]

Reply #46

tntea — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:48:04 GMT

A narrow down would be seeing the doubles that show up in the OLD string after a draw..

Reply #45

tntea — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:46:40 GMT

I use the combos with 0 in it as a double warning.. If I dont play all possible 88 11.. I at least put the two together and play 188 118...

Caught a box too.. $75.. worth 50cent after the warning.. sometimes it is a few days later

Reply #44

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:44:32 GMT

That's a great idea carbob./

Hi folks! My name is pacman. I want to introduce you to the latest in numerology. It's called the Power hour system . It only takes one hour to fully understand this great piece of art.

For only $29.95 plus S/H, you could own your own copy.

Please don't post the info on the LP, email, or snail mail to your friends.......

Thank You......

Mail payment to:

Pokemon

777 fast lane drive

Suite 7

Las Vegas, Nevada

95259

But wait!!! If you or... [ More ]

Reply #43

pcnut — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:43:14 GMT

WOW pacattack05, I guess I got those doubles wheels grinding. So far, what I have put into motion is having a bad start, but the night is not over yet. I do like your concept and I'm going to look into it a little further. I will be following this thread as you go along and I may throw a bone in there now and then.

Good luck

pcnut

Reply #42

superman001 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:40:40 GMT

Hey Pac,

Nice finding you got there!

I just did a backtest on Florida as well, a few differences;

Out of the 365 days, 105 were days with a double being drawn the day before, thus lowering the cost...

Total cost: 105 x 54 + 260 x 81 = 5670 + 21060 = 26730

I only found a total of 36 winning days though...

Total winnings: 36 x 900 = 32400

Profit: 32400 - 26730 = 5670

Weekly profit: 5670 / 52 = 109.04

Backtesting entire history (1573 draws) produced the followin... [ More ]

Reply #41

CARBOB — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 23:28:58 GMT

Pac,

You are on the road to financial freedom. I can see the info-commerical now. LOL

Reply #40

Raven62 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:47:50 GMT

Logically you are correct.

Most of the time I see it shown this way:

0 1 2 3 4 (Low)

5 6 7 8 9 (High)

Adding or subtracting 5 gives you the mirror number.

Reply #39

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:18:28 GMT

Well, I did a years worth of back testing in Florida, and here are the results.

Cost: 365 days @ $81.00 a day = $29,565.00

103 doubles adding to @2,781.00, bringing the cost down to $26,784.00

There were a total of 38 qualifiers amounting to 900 X 38 = $34,200

$34,200 won, minus the cost of $26,784 = $7,416.00, net profit for one year.

$7,416.00 divided by 12 months = $618.00 a month net profit.

Most of the months did not yield as much as the past 3 months, which did very well.... [ More ]

Reply #38

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:13:19 GMT

Carbob - You're right about the mirror list you posted. 1 being the mirror of 6 etc. I was taught that when looking at mirrors of doubles, that 339 mirrors 399. Hey maybe my verbiage is all whacked!?!?! I've heard it both ways here on LP, so not sure which is appropriate in this case.

Reply #37

CARBOB — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 20:02:48 GMT

That's not the way I learned.

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 0

the way this works, the numbers in bottm row are mirrors to top row and vice versa

339 mirror would be 884, 399 would be the mate of 339, 448 would be mate of 884, 399 mirror would be 844.

Carbob

Reply #36

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:55:34 GMT

Pac - Not sure if you read the entire thread, but the trigger you mention above is what I call a Weak trigger in that it is really hit or miss. The other two types of triggers (for example the 42X and X32) are much stronger ones. Hope this makes sense

Reply #35

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 19:34:49 GMT

Sun, Apr 23, 20067-3-4

With the 023 method, 734 = 757

Is this a trigger, meaning tonight can possibly be a double?

Hmmmmm.....

Reply #34

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:46:17 GMT

Using the trigger, I noticed that the mirror fell more than the one's you point out. However, looking at this system, all bets are off, since you are looking to trap ALL doubles essentially. Backtesting NJ showed a lot of the mirrors. It is most likely state dependant, so trends are important for any given state.

Reply #33

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:29:58 GMT

That's still awesome. You can parlay that the following month and so on....

thanx for checking...

Reply #32

tww24 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:21:47 GMT

Pac let me go check again.

Rechecked ,, 13 doubles only 3 qualifiers not 5 as I said early.

So $560 profit for the month , still not bad

Reply #31

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:59:57 GMT

Were all 13 qualifiers?

If so, then I can now quit my job. It's looking good all over.

Thanx for checking it out.

If this keeps up and more and more people do their own state with good results, I actually will have to do a year's test today, and if it comes back with a green light for a whole year, meaning it's profitable in the long run, I will really consider quitting my job, within a year's time.

If the lab results come back negative, well, then it's back to the drawing board. But... [ More ]

Reply #30

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:53:47 GMT

Thanx, now I know. HMMMMM...interesting, I'll have to check it out.

Did you notice whether you had more hits your way or not

Reply #29

tww24 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:52:35 GMT

Pac a quick look at Pennsylvania evening over the last 30 days.

There were 13 doubles so in the last month out lay = $ 2140. (if the math is correct)

There were 5 hits = $ 4500

4500- 2140= $2360 profit not to shabby.

Pa evening is averaging a double every 2.38 draws.

Reply #28

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:49:25 GMT

Pac, the mirror is basically the reverse of the number when it comes to doubles. So for example the double 339, the mirror would be 399. So in the example above the XX would be the double number in the doubles. 7XX would be 711, 722, 733 etc. It would essentially generate twice the number of doubles you came up with.

Reply #27

Litebets27 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:47:08 GMT

!!!!

I glanced back at Maryland's history and your theory showed some merit. So I thought, I'll take a gamble .

IT PAID OFF FOR ONCE!

Thanks again.

litebets

Reply #26

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:43:14 GMT

I never knew what mirrors really meant. Can you please explain?

So what would the x be in the example above?

Thanx.

Reply #25

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:34:21 GMT

Pac - Have you taken a look at the mirrors as well. So if in your example 734, you come up with 77 33 and 44. How many more hits would you get if you also played the 7XX , 3XX, and 4XX? When I was doing backtesting on the triggers, I noticed that the 7XX type would fall more frequently. Just a thought

Reply #24

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:28:55 GMT

You mean you actually used money and won?

WTG......

Reply #23

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:27:25 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by undress on April 24, 2006 Now only if you could use a pairchart to narrow up your possible plays....

Good call, however, again, it can possibly take away the winning double, and I can't afford missing a bunch of hits. The system would render itself useless.

Until someone comes out with a sure fire doubles prediction chart, I have to cover every angle. So far I wouldn't need any narrowing down. Even If I netted $500.00 a month, one third of what I produced, I cou... [ More ]

Reply #22

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:26:00 GMT

Yeah pac, I know what you mean about filtering. The triggers work a lot, but there are certainly doubles that fall without a trigger, so you could miss them. Please keep us posted on any new developments

Reply #21

Litebets27 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:25:27 GMT

Thanks Pac. It worked in Maryland mid-day 188. Last evenings number was 081.

Tried it and caught it for $80.00. Had a $66.50 profit.

litebets

Reply #20

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:15:43 GMT

I will read the thread. Looks interesting, considering it could narrow down the days being played, but then again, since it's not 100 percent, you could miss a hit not playing, because a trigger didn't show, but a double did.

I try not to use filters because it can possibly eliminate the winning number. I'll have to do a back test on your system though, and see if there is a direct correlation.

Thanx calabs.

Reply #19

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:11:37 GMT

I'm not playing the triples.

So, 9 sets per column plus 9 columns =81

If I were to include the triples it would be 90 bucks. 10 vertical X 9 columns= 90

077 707 770 033 303 330 044 404 440

177 717 771 133 313 331 144 414 441

277 727 772 233 323 332 244 424 442

377 737 773 no triples 344 434 443

477 747 774 433 343 334 no triples

577 757 775... [ More ]

Reply #18

CalifDude — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:06:21 GMT

I have not read all of this thread, so maybe you have caught this error already. If you are playing 3 doubles (eg. 22x, 55x, 88x) that is 30 numbers. To play all the straight combos it would be 30 X 3 = 90 combos each draw which is $90, not the $81 I keep seeing.

Reply #17

calabs — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:47:12 GMT

Hey pac - this is good stuff! It is sort of what I was working on in trying to determine doubles from triggers. And a lot of times the double that fell contained at least one digit from the trigger. If you haven't seen this thread, take a look, it may help refine your system.

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/128034.htm

Good luck, and thanks for sharing

Reply #16

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:23:53 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by Stack47 on April 24, 2006 The only reason they can afford to pay that much is because 90 percent of the people who play, lose.

OK

Let s say 100 people played $81 and 10% of them won $900. Betslips would take in $8100 but payout $9000 and lose $900.

By the way, I m not knocking your system because there is potential with the tradional $500 payoff.

Stack

You forgot to include all the thousands who lost not using my sy... [ More ]

Reply #15

lotterybraker — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:10:56 GMT

Looks very interesting Pacattack for sure..WTG....

Reply #14

paurths — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:01:44 GMT

What are you talking about?

Why don't you go take a look then: http://www.betslips.com/orderp3.aspx?partner=101

Pick 3 payouts: http://www.betslips.com/gameinfo_pick3.aspx

Reply #13

Stack47 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:57:26 GMT

The only reason they can afford to pay that much is because 90 percent of the people who play, lose.

OK

Let s say 100 people played $81 and 10% of them won $900. Betslips would take in $8100 but payout $9000 and lose $900.

By the way, I m not knocking your system because there is potential with the tradional $500 payoff.

Stack

Reply #12

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:11:58 GMT

The only reason they can afford to pay that much is because 90 percent of the people who play, lose. That's how they can make a profit, and still payout that high.

Reply #11

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:09:05 GMT

Thanx, I'll have to do a years worth of backtesting before I feel comfortable enough to actually use real money.

So far so good.

Reply #10

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:07:47 GMT

20 of those 30 days were doubles, so the cost would not be $4,860.00 but $3,780.00

Even better. profit =$3,420.00

Not bad for one month.

Reply #9

undress — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:06:42 GMT

Now only if you could use a pairchart to narrow up your possible plays....

Reply #8

Stack47 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:05:30 GMT

Question: Does Betslips pay more than $900.00, if it's a double?

If Betslips is paying $900 for a dollar straight hit on any pick-3, they must have a money tree growing in their backyard.

I've heard of bookies paying $600.

Stack

Reply #7

mry711 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:51:12 GMT

JUst looked back in Michigan for the last 30 days.

You would have won 8 times = 7200.00

60 draws x 81.00 = 4860.00

Profit = 2340.00

Only works playing online.

Looks good, very interesting.

Thanks Pac.

Reply #6

Litebets27 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:30:11 GMT

Very interesting Pac. You maybe on to something. I'll have to check this out. THANKS. Good Luck!!!

litebets

Reply #5

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:28:22 GMT

I forgot to look and see if any of those qualifiers had a double the previous night, which means that the cost for the next day's workout would cost less than $81.00, considering that you only have two numbers to put in the system, rather than 3. For example, if last night's number was 677, then it would cost less to do the system above.>>> It would only cost $60.00, not $90.00.<<< So the profit might be higher than the one stated above. I'll have to go back and look.

I meant to say It would... [ More ]

Reply #4

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:15:42 GMT

I just went back and looked to see how many days were doubles in the 90 day period. There were a total 25 doubles, thus reducing the cost for those days at $60.00 for those 25 days.

Actually the cost is $54.00, not $60.00

Even better....

Reply #3

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:10:09 GMT

Question: Does Betslips pay more than $900.00, if it's a double

Reply #2

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:02:37 GMT

Oops, I found another one that doesen't qualify.

Sun, Feb 5, 20060-6-0

Sat, Feb 4, 20063-3-6

$6,060 minus another $900.00 equals $5,160.00

So, 13 total wins. not 16.

Still good.

So, $1,720.00 a month profit. Still good.

Reply #1

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:00:12 GMT

There are 14 qualifiers, not 16.

Tue, Feb 21, 20067-5-5

Mon, Feb 20, 20067-1-3

Wed, Apr 5, 20061-0-1

Tue, Apr 4, 20065-0-8

Those two above don't qualify because the double has to be one of the 3 the night before, and they weren't.

It still is profitable though.

$7,860.00 minus $1,800 less for the two above equals $6,060.00 net profit. Divided by 3 months equals $2,020 a month for three months.

I can live with that. Not to mention that I can double up on the wagers... [ More ]

Pcnut gave me a doubles Idea

pacattack05 — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:43:52 GMT

Pcnut gave me an excellent idea for doubles. I never really concentrated on doubles before, but now this one is interesting, but too good to be true. I'm hoping someone might see the flaw in this too good to be true system.

I back tested this system for 90 days, and it yielded a net profit of $2,370 a month for three months.

All I do is use each of the three digits from the night before's winning numbers as the key for the double the next day. So, for example, last night in Florida was 7... [ More ]