On Apr 29, 10:22 am, Nevermore
thestake.net> wrote:>
>> On Apr 28, 2:56 pm, Nevermore
thestake.net> wrote:>>>> Best let a true random number generator select your
>>>> numbers
>
>>> Why? The science of random numbers is that 14-15-16-17-18-19 is as
>>> valid and exactly as likely (or unlikely) as any other combination.
>>> Random number generation has no "history" or "memory" which is why
>>> it's called random.
>
>>> Any random combination is as valid as any other.
>
>>> Evnerrome (rdonam is as random does)
>
>> That's the idea that neural networks are based around. The lotto
>> number 14 15 16 17 18 19, have never come up because there are certain
>> weights and balances in random numbers.
>
> There are NO weights and balances in random numbers. They are RANDOM
> unless someone has made a mistake in building the ball machine and even
> if you can find a .0.000000001 of a gram difference in ball number 35
> from ball number 11 if it falls below the threshold at which it makes a
> testable significant difference in its likelihood to appear in the ball
> tube you are still screwed and randomness is still gaurenteed. You are
> making a mistake that is probably unique to the human brain because of
> the recursive nature of the Universe. You live in an environment where
> things emerge from and form into patterns, where cause precedes effect,
> etc. Your brain (well, most people's anyway) is designed to find
> similarities, trends, and causes and anticipate outcomes. It's part of
> what distinguishes you and your crafty little animal ancestors from
> plant life BUT it is serving you badly in this instance.
>
>> No random number generator is
>> exactly perfect, so neural networks are able to find trends and get an
>> advantage.
>
> That is simply wrong. Even if there were a slight bias in a random
> number generating system you would have to divide the statistical
> significance of it into the pool of outcomes and then ask yourself how
> many CYCLES it would take to manifest itself. In something like the
> Powerball your odds of winning are 1-in-80 million because there are 80
> million possible combinations. It would take about 1,538,461 YEARS to
> run through one set of 80 million drawings and even then not ALL
> combinations would be expected to occur. Your "neural network" could
> only spot a bias trend that was statistically significant over time.
> You could run the Powerball week after week for the next MILLENNIUM and
> you still wouldn't have a sample large enough to draw any conclusions
> from and THAT's assuming they didn't upgrade or replace the machine or
> any of the balls in that period of time because you'd have to start over
> gathering data the day they did.
>
>> That is what they are designed to do. Find patterns!
>
> You can find patterns in a white carpet if you get a big enough
> magnifying glass - how does that translate into you holding a winning
> ticket?
>
>> I've decided to start playing the lotto on a regular basis, and need a
>> good system. Neural Networks are one of my interests, and just using
>> the intuition in my brain I've won $600 dollars at the lottery
>> before.
>
> That's called "dumb luck"! The lottery provided the luck and you
> provided the...
>
>> I can see the pattern myself, and I know this neural network
>> is doing a better job than I am at seeing it.
>
>> So I went out and I bought 10 lottery tickets for the pick 5, because
>> the cash out in that game is worth playing it for. The price of $10
>> versus the chance of winning over $100,000 is too much to resist. My
>> system picked up 12 lottery numbers for me that are wheeled, so if any
>> of them come up I'm going to win something on all of them. That's a
>> scientific system to get the maximum payouts. Even if only 2 numbers
>> come up, I'll probably win on most of them and can make up my loss.
>
> And every time you lose and keep adjusting and fine tuning your system
> remember your odds aren't cumulative but your loses ARE. So your
> winning system will need to make up for every single loss you incurred
> over your lifetime trying to develop it or you are worse off than you
> started by any objective measure.
>
> But hey, GOOD LUCK!!!
>
> Nevermore (there's a reason Witches cheat)
I played a few numbers & lost. I'm still testing the system out.
Here is what it gives me for pick 3 mid-day today. We will see if it
is accurate.
BALL 1 ANALYSIS
Analysis of prior draws for this number calculates that the best
strategy is by picking the number from the pool of non-hot/non-cold
numbers.
Hot number pool: 0, 1, 5
Non-hot/non-cold number pool: 3, 4, 6, 8
Cold number pool: 2, 7, 9
BALL 2 ANALYSIS
Analysis of prior draws for this number calculates that the best
strategy is by picking the number from the pool of non-hot/non-cold
numbers.
Hot number pool: 2, 4, 9
Non-hot/non-cold number pool: 0, 5, 6, 8
Cold number pool: 1, 3, 7
BALL 3 ANALYSIS
Analysis of prior draws for this number calculates that the best
strategy is by picking the number from the pool of non-hot/non-cold
numbers.
Hot number pool: 0, 2, 5
Non-hot/non-cold number pool: 1, 7, 8, 9
Cold number pool: 3, 4, 6
SUMMARY
Average Standard Deviation: 2.393
Average Arithmetic Mean: 4.466
Average Median: 5.011
Average Sum: 13.397
%% Even: 50.12%%
If the next drawing follows the suggested strategy, the odds of
winning the highest prize (jackpot) has improved from 1:1,000 to 1:64,
an improvement of 94%%.
The suggested numbers displayed are based on these recommendations.
