Re: Actual Lottery Stuff. WOW eh?

"Gerry" <tulalip@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Sbcyg.3890$gF6.608@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Abraxas" <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44c8fca0$0$21785$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Back in early May of this year, I posted some material concerning the
effect
of reducing the field of combinations to play by applying certain filters
that result in eliminating 4,142,607 from the field, leaving the player
with
9,841,209 combinations to consider for play...and confine their picks to.
No numbers have been eliminated. All 49 are in play.

Since that time, there have been 25 draws conducted (May 3 - Jul 26). The
following results show what has happened over the course of those 25
draws.
This data is from the Canadian Lotto 649, the game I play pretty much
exclusively.

First we see how well the subset that passes the filters has performed:

Lottery: CA 649
Testing 9,841,209 lines against 25 draws

Match 0 - 107,113,250 Expected is 107,260,600.000
Match 1 - 101,509,888 Expected is 101,615,300.000
Match 2 - 32,725,657 Expected is 32,569,000.000

Match 3 - 4,425,890 Expected is 4,342,533.000 Score is 250,752,900.000
Match 4 - 250,456 Expected is 238,309.700 Score is 258,570,000.000
Match 5 - 4,937 Expected is 4,433.669 Score is 273,960,700.000
Match 5+ - 125 Expected is 105.564 Score is 291,329,500.000
Match 6 - 22 Expected is 17.594 Score is 307,644,000
Total Plays - 246,030,225
Total Losses - 241,348,795
Total Wins - 4,681,430

Expected Total Score Is 1,230,151,000.000
Actual Total Score Is 1,382,257,000.000
This Wheel Scored 112.365% Of Random Expectation

Golly! It looks like it outperformed expectation in every prize category,
with an overall score that's over 12% better than a theoretical random
subset of the same size. Bear in mind that this is not good enough to
play
at a profit, but what kind of gambler would thumb his nose at a 12% edge
in
any game of chance?

Note that the subset contained the jackpot combination for 22 of the 25
draws. Random chance expects only 18. That's an 88.0% hit rate for
covering
only a little more than 70% of all the possibilities. Keep in mind that
any
*one* ticket is facing odds of 1 in 9,841,209 instead of 1 in 13,983,816.
The penalty for this is that for 3 of the 25 draws, my chance of a
jackpot
win was exactly *zero*. I know that going in...and find it to be an
acceptable risk.

Let's see how well the subset of *rejected* combinations performed:

Lottery: CA 649
Testing 4,142,607 lines against 25 draws

Match 0 - 45,298,100 Expected is 45,150,790.000
Match 1 - 42,879,812 Expected is 42,774,430.000
Match 2 - 13,553,093 Expected is 13,709,750.000

Match 3 - 1,744,610 Expected is 1,827,967.000 Score is 98,842,500.000
Match 4 - 88,169 Expected is 100,315.300 Score is 91,025,400.000
Match 5 - 1,363 Expected is 1,866.331 Score is 75,634,690.000
Match 5+ - 25 Expected is 44.436 Score is 58,265,900.000
Match 6 - 3 Expected is 7.406 Score is 41,951,450
Total Plays - 103,565,175
Total Losses - 101,731,005
Total Wins - 1,834,170

Expected Total Score Is 517,825,900.000
Actual Total Score Is 365,719,900.000
This Wheel Scored 70.626% Of Random Expectation

Gee whiz! For some reason, this set of combinations failed to meet
expectation in every prize category and produced a dismal overall score
of
less than 71% of random expectation. The reason should be obvious, and
this
is why they were rejected to begin with. Any player that stubbornly clung
to
the idea that these combinations are proportionally just as good as the
others would have suffered a disproportionate loss in comparison. The gap
is
well over 41% (112.365 - 70.626).

My original statement was that my clearly defined subset of combinations
would give the player about a 30% reduction in the odds for a jackpot
about
70% of the time. For this particular series of draws, that success rate
has
been exceeded. It should be clear to anyone that this situation was
confidently predicted well in advance of this particular series of draws.

There is no "retrofit" here. Any player that confined their picks to the
filtered subset that was clearly defined and described would have been
playing with an effective 30% reduction in the jackpot odds for 22 of the
last 25 draws. That's an irrefutable *fact*...presented in plain black &
white.

There is no promise of some kind of "magic" here. It simply serves to
prove
that the claim of the *only* way to improve your chances of a jackpot win
is
to buy more tickets. That is a demonstrably false and misleading
statement
that is forcibly perpetuated by the presence of certain personalities
here
that are clearly incapable of higher thought...and clearly have no grasp
of
the expertise that they claim to possess. In plain street language, they
are
full of ***.

Certain aspects of random lottery draws are clearly
predictable. A knowledgeable player can exploit that information to
obtain
an advantage...however slight it may be. In this case, the advantage
could
hardly be called slight.

Arguments for or against are welcome. Present your real-world data if you
are capable of doing so. Anything else will be viewed as so much useless
bull*** from where I sit. I don't claim to know everything there is to
know
as some of my detractors falsely claim. That includes my fair-weather
friends who would rather cow-tow to the bullying tactics of their
neighbours rather than stand up for what is right and decent. Adios
muchachos! I'd rather cut ya loose than endure that kind of pain in the
ass.

Cool !!

You reduced the Law of Large Numbers to the 70% Law of Large numbers !!

What's next? How do you reduce that pile of combinations to a list of
combinations that will give you a better chance than the same amount
of quick picks ? It's entirely possible you could buy quick picks that
reside in the big pile of numbers. But you already knew that didn't you?


Near as I can figger...there's no easy way to do that. Nobody said it was
easy. Let me know when you've successfully generated 9.8 million unique
quick picks and I'll run them through my handy cipherin' sorter thingie that
I keep handy for just such a purpose.

White hats 'n silver bullets v 9.8 million combinations. Who wins that
shootout ?



Beats the *** out of black hats and 12 gauge shotguns v 13.9 million
combinations don't it?




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

.