Any New Filters Anyone?

[ShytKicker]

Make sure you read the post from page 4 first.

Most people will respond that the chance of tails is now very high.
(Ask your friend and see what he says.) However, the true answer is
that the probability is 1/2. It's 1/2 on EVERY flip, no matter what
results came before. Like the slot machine and the lottery, the coin
has no memory.

By the way I heard a good joke about the Lottery.

Lottery: Definition: A tax for the mathematically incompetent.

Read: http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/56581.html

But every combination of numbers is EXACTLY equally likely (assuming
that the lottery isn't rigged). So you have exactly the same chance
of winning if you pick 1,2,3,4,5,6 or 5,10,18,33,45,50.

Notice he said assuming the lottery isn't rigged.

 

[kosteczki]

Ok too much to respond to now but just a quick point. I don't care what anyone says, the more times a coin lands on heads the more of a chance there is of it landing on tails. Technically iot's alawys 50/50 but for this to be true you need an equalisation sooner or later or the way odds are explained is false.

run a simulation, odds prove themselves, and past occurences are there to show it.

make a computer/excel randomnly pick 1 head and 2 for tails.
Then come back and tell me that after 1 million flips there is a HUGE variance in the amount of times you get heads and in the amount of times you get tails. I bet you, that on average you will not have more than 10 straight tails or 10 straight head flips. That's on average so there will be times when there are more but itr will equal out.

you know what let's put this to the test.
normally I am not the biggest fan of using past performances to predict future, I just use it to prouve theories right or wrong but using the past history of the canadian 649, I bet you that tonight's draw October 05,2005 there will not be more than 4 numbers the same as those picked on October 1, 2005
09 14 19 23 43 45 Not counting the bonus.

If tonights draw (can 649)any 4 of the above numbers are drawn (not counting bonus) I will pay you $100. If they are not you pay me $25.

I will also add something
31 47 34 43 will not be 4 of the 6 either.

 

[ShytKicker]

Wow....you have absolutely 0 understanding of probability, or mathematics whatsoever. I can also guarantee you $100 dollars, that your 4 numbers, using filters, won't be picked either!

This thread is pure comedy. That is all there is to it.

But, let me go back to what you said. "The more times a coin lands on heads, the more of a chacne there is of it landing on tails". LOL. You are telling me, if I flip a quarter 3 times, and it lands on heads, then the 4th time, there is a 3/4 chance that it will land on tails? Hmmm, and then heads only has a 1/4 probability? LOL. As funny as that is, it also contradicts your theory on Lotto. You said you pick the hot numbers, since they appear more often, then if it would land 3 times on heads, you would choose heads again in lotto, but tails in the coin...big time contradiction.

0 knowledge. Go to school. I'm pretty sure you dropped out of it, because I have not met somebody this challenged in math at age 23.

 

[kosteczki]

I will make you another bet in the next year the next 104 draws, there will not be a repeated 6 number combination draw. including the bonus.
in the can 649

 

[ShytKicker]

Yes, I can also bet you that in the next 104 draws, any of your 104 filtered combinations won't win either. You do NOT understand probability. The probability of any winning combination in a 6/59 game, is 1:45,057,474.00. The probability of the same number being drawn again is 1:45,057,474.00. You don't understand, the lotto numbers don't have a memory.

You are NOT smart. That is 1 thing I DO KNOW.

 

[kosteczki]

First of all I resent the comments you are making about my intelligence, I have tried to be civil with you and have a normal conversation but you just can't seem to stay away from putting people down, you must be a pathetic person and a waste of air to society.

Second I never said anything about me picking hot numbers. I don't, I filter out numbers based on on certain factors, but if a number has hit 3 times doesn't make it hot, in my opinion, it;'s the opposit it's a number that will most likely not hit again right away.

Third, you are a complete moron if you can not see that no one here is stating that odds change because of something happening. Heads hitting 3 times still has the odds "MATHEMATICALLY" of 50/50 to hit.
BUT the PROBABILITY is it will not. All I am saying is odds are odds but what really happens doesn't follow exact odds, but sooner or later it will prouve those odds right.

Go to a roulette table and watch the numbers hit, it's almost 50/50 it will be red (if you don't take 0's into account) you will see it hit red/black then myabe black 3 more times and then it will hit red again. that's probability that sooner or later things will change to prouve odds are correct.

By calling this concept stupid you are basically saying you are smarter then the people that brought the concepts of odds into light for the rest of the world.

AGain I repeat probability is based on odds, in the long run probability will prouve odds correct, it has to in order to prouve something like your coin toss actually having a 50/50 chance.

I repeat myself numerous times for you so maybe you can stop looking at what you can use to argue with and actually see what actually is.

Maybe I should repeat myself again.
And no I didn't drop out, and yes I did go to college and yes I do believe I am of average inteligence, though you seem to prouve me wrong in this fact, after speaking to you I am starting to believe I am of above average intelligence. Which must make you wayyyy below. Are you sure you didn't drop out.

BTW dropping out of high school has no value in judging someone stupid or non-intelligent. Most of the time these people think on a differnet leve land drop out for social reasopns, financial reasons or not being able to understand biased text books written by those thinking they are soo much smarte then the rest.

I have a very good friend whom I consider very intelligent hedropped out of HS in grade 10, for the fact he didn';t agree with what was being taught, his brain works on a different level than others.

BTW Dr. Albert Einstein was a HS drop out.

I accept every person from every walk of life who has any ideas and opinions they want to express. But when it comes to complete idiotic ignorance you have no say.

So, I am going to get a warning for this, but take your sorry ass and **** OFF YOU IGNORANT PRIK

 

[kosteczki]

To add, a lot of people drop out when they are being failled by a teacher and they won't stand for someone who is wrong to fail them when they are right. FOr example in social studies when you study World War 2 one of my teachers kept insisting that all poland had was horses as a way of transporting their military. He would not back off and made me look like a complete idiot in front of his class. Just because he was ignorant to the fact that what he was teaching may be wrong, Poland had tanks and other vehicles, the videos shown in schools with Polish cavalry rushing german tanks was propaganda shown to make people aware of the fact that Polish people where fighting with everything they had to protect their country, and not that all they had was cavalry.

Same thing goes for all those teachers teaching that Poland was first created as a country after world war 1 when then allies gave Polish people their land. **** no one actually has the common sence to look further back and see Poland was formed as a nation in 966AD and after many years of wars was finally taken over in the 1800's/ SO we got out land back, but we where not given a land to satart a country.

It's crap like that, ignorant teachers failling students who prouve them wrong, because they are not willing to admit that they may be making a mistake. **** open your eyes a little and see what's going on in this world and how you are adding to the problem.

 

[ShytKicker]

Oh boy. I think I am going to use this as my signature on all the forums I post on:

Third, you are a complete moron if you can not see that no one here is stating that odds change because of something happening. Heads hitting 3 times still has the odds "MATHEMATICALLY" of 50/50 to hit.
BUT the PROBABILITY is it will not. All I am saying is odds are odds but what really happens doesn't follow exact odds, but sooner or later it will prouve those odds right.

I'm not sure you even made it to high school. You have to understand, the lottery that we are talking about, doesn't allow identical numbers more than once, and isn't sequential. Therefore, mathematical odds are the only odds that exist for us. 1,2,3,4,5 has same odds and probability as 15,22,27,32,35. Because, as the balls are being spun in the machine, after 1 is picked, the second has nothing to do with the first. So maybe you can even further say, not only does each lotto game have a life of its own, each ball has a life of its own. But why do we not see as many 1,2,3,4...draws? Because After 1 is picked, 2 has a 1:48 chance of being picked. But, you have to understand at the same level, that number 22, also has a 1:48 cchance of being picked. They all do. That is why, every 48 games, we usually have sequential combinations, maybe not all of them, but we do have sequential combinations. Because in order for all of them to come out sequentially it is a 1:72 or so million probability. But same for any other combination.

Uzywaj troche polskiego, bo polowe twojich zdan nie rozumie. Bac jakis polak, nie popisuj sie ze umiesz angielski, uwiez mi, ja tez umie angielski.

 

[kosteczki]

Zamknij sie, Angielski jest moj czwarty jenzyk, morze robie blendy ale to jest tylko bo mnie nie obchodzi sprawdzanie.

 

[ShytKicker]

Nie rozumiesz tego wszystkiego co tlumacze? Juz nie wiem jak w inny sposob wytlumaczyc. Przeczytaj te quotes na tym page na samej gurze i na page 4. Do sa questions asked to Math Doctors, oni bardzo duzo wiedza, i dobrze tlumacz. Lotto to jest wszystko psychologia. I sie tak wczajiles do tego "past winning numbers filters" ze zapomniales sobie jak wszystkie numery maja mozliwosci. Ja mam nadzieje ze lotto jest fixed, przewaznie kazdy biznes ma przekrent, zapytaj sie byle jakiego polaka, on ci powie ze lotta ma przekrenty napewno. To jest wiadome, dla tego patrzyc czeba na stare numery, bo te numery co sa HOT numbers, napewno sa naj mnie submitted. Nikt nigdy nie submituje #1 and #2, i duzo lotek ma #1 and #2 as hot numbers. 1 facet co certifies the drawing is nothing. Oni sa bilionerzi, connections maja naj wiekszy, uwiez mi.

 

[kosteczki]

Ile razy musze czi muwicz, ja nie urzywam "Hot Numbers" ja urzywam "random" numbers i potem filtruje je nie urzywajac historyczne numery ale matematyczne "odds" take jak "evens & Odds" albo wszystkie numery z ta sama koncuwka.

Ale nie morzerz muwicz rze lotto jest "Fixed" jak nie marsz prawdziwego "evidence" co by to pokazalo. I Polacy sa ogulnie niewierzancy w wlatwan kase, myszla jrze watwa kasa jest oszust.

 

[ShytKicker]

I don't know if I mentioned anything about ball dents and the fact that they are replaced every 1 month in New York lottery on this forum, I think I have, but this person's theory really does work with what I do think:

Why does it appear to work? I think the reason is the lottery machine itself. Over time, the physical parameters of the draw machine - its shape, size, number of rotating paddles, etc - determines how the balls move, ultimately imposing a degree of predictability on them. The patterns in the numbers reflect the underlying physics of what's going on inside the draw machine. A different design of lottery machine would impose a different pattern, but one which would still be amenable to recurrence analysis (you would simply need a different set of recurrence model values). The fact that the UK lottery employs more than one machine is not really a problem. They are all the same design, and so behave in the same way. It's effectively like using a single machine.

What originally led me to think lottery numbers could even be predicted? The book 'The Eudaemonic Pie' (also published as 'The Newtonian Casino') recounts the true story of how a group of American physics students developed a set of Newtonian equations to predict the path of a ball on a roulette wheel. The equations worked with up to 44% accuracy. Of course, there is a higher degree of randomness involved in the lottery (more balls, more complex behaviour), but I believe enough predictability is imposed by the draw machines to make prediction possible.

It's a quote from a thread from a different lottery forum. This and the guess about numbers being fixed are the two initial guesses I had. I still know 100% there are no point in looking at past numbers to eliminate duplicate combinations, etc. Because I think I already made my point in this enitre thread.

 

[kosteczki]

What's also funny is after having read through the links you posted to the other forum, you are either the writter of these trying to push your ideas on others. Or you have no idea what you are really talking about and are incapable of creating your own opinions. Because almost every example you have stated is almost word for word what has been written as the answers by this so called "Dr.Math"

lol

 

[ShytKicker]

Uhhh..no. I have first stated what I knew, then since you were arguing, I searched google for lottery combinations. And one of them was mathforums.org. Then I searched mathforums.org for "lottery" and "lotto", and seen those answers, and was glad that somebody else also knows 5th grade probabilities. I am a math genious that wrote answers for over a few hundred thousand questions and published Math books then came here to prove you wrong, yes, I am 100% sure that is me, if that would be me, I wouldn't even begin arguing with un-knowledgeable people like you.

You don't understand, I am showing you facts and explaining mathematical probabilies. There is no such thing as non-mathematical probabilites as you suggested. There is only mathematical, that is what a probability is. What you are telling me and others, is not facts, no mathematical probabilies, but theories, which aren't actually theories anymore, since I have already proved them wrong.

Kosteczki, it is very very sad, on how much you know, rather how much you don't know, about math A.

Let me add something to the end of my sentence to make me sound as dumb:


"lol"

 

[ShytKicker]

This is not really getting anywhere, you're giving a bad name to Polish people, so I might as well stop telling you the truth. Go ahead look at past drawing numbers, for no obvious reason, and eliminate the numbers that are hot, cold, overdue, whatever theory you want to use which is already proven wrong with simple Math A. I'm still going to be the smart guy, know the right ways to play a game of Lotto to reduce my odds, and you'll be the guy sitting down uselessly eliminating numbers for 11 hours, and then ending up with less winning prizes than me.

Call me when you hit the jackpot.

 

[kosteczki]

And after all this you are still going by your assumption of how I play the lotto.
1 I am quite good in math, I always have been top of my class or very close.
2 I use math for my odd increasing
3 I use past numbers to prove theories right or wrong
4 I don't use them to figure out what patterns have occured and try to find what pattern will follow.
5 your an idiot cause when someone tells you one thing over and over again you simply keep saying that they are saying the opposite.

And don't bring My Heritage into this bs, even if I am wrong on everything I have said you would still be the one giving Polish people a bad name based on the way you have carried on these conversations, and your ignorance/arrogance lack of humbleness.

and now I am starting to sound like you, congratulations if your aim was to get me aggrevated and to start using insults as yourself, you have suceeded in that.

 

[ShytKicker]

I don't think I ever sounded remotely close to what you sound like. How can you use math to increase your odds if you just said the probabilities you use are not the same as "math probabilities". I don't think you know what you are talking about. Face it, there is no specific pattern in a lottery. It is all 100% random, unless it is fixed, which is what I tend to believe.

What do you mean you don't use patterns to try to find out what will follow and what has occured? That makes no SENSE! Then TELL ME, why do you look at past data? Just tell me that! And thats IT. I don't want to hear anything else from you, tell me EXACTLY why you look at past data if it is not to determine what happened and what is to follow. I want to know. If you fail to answer this, I have no reason to reply.

 

[kosteczki]

My last post in this thread. I have said it like 5 times all ready.
I look at past data to prouve certain theories correct or incorrect.

crap learn how to read guy.

 

[ShytKicker]

So you use past winning numbers not to see any past patterns, not to predict patterns, but to PROVE theories correct and incorrect. Would you like to tell me what theories you are proving correct and incorrect inorder to help you win the next jackpot?

I have already looked at your posts, and most of them talk about using past winning numbers for patterns. So what are crap are you trying to load me?

Kosteczki, you got nothing. Maybe you should come up with a new strategy before submitting your next lottery numbers.

Have a good life.

 

[kosteczki]

yes you are right I do talk about something I was looking into which was using past history but not to find patterns, it was to eliminate played 6 number combinations. I was figuring that with all the lottos out there there still has only been very few combinations out of all possible that have been picked and they are very likely not going to repeat or at least only repeat a little bit. So looking at past history of 16,000 draws I saw that yes this is true a 6 number combination has not repeated it's self. I understand that a picked 6 number combination is just as likely to be picked again as the next, but seriously you cannot expect it to hit it is more logical that it will not. Just like that message in the other forum you posted said, it's like picking a ticket out of almost 14million, you may pick the same ticket 2 or 3 times but it is a very unlikely occurence. AGain just to make sure you undersatnd I am not saying odds are in favour of not picking this number, it's just logical that it probably will not. ANd probably means maybe and it's not a sure thing.

I also wanted to know if every number really has the same chance of getting picked, has this been happening, and yet again it has been. Over all most numbers have been picked almost the same amount of times or close enough to not make a huge difference. This is to show that yes odds have been fairly correct in the long run.

I went and looked at history to see if the odds and evens probability has been what it should be. And yes it has been.

Same thing goes for combinations ending in the same last digit. Using odds you can see that having 3 or 2 ending digits repeating counts for something like 90% of possible combinations, so I looked at history to see if that was happening, yes it has.

same thing with combinations in the same tens group.

If you can't prouve real odds correct what's the point of using them.

It's one thing to write it all out, and figure out the odds of these things happening. But what ever you come up with you should be checking against some sort of record. so I checked past now I am checking future outcomes and see if the odds are prouving themselves or not. And they are.

I am not saying I am going to predict the next winning 6 using 10, but I do believe cutting out certain combinations of numbers that have smaller odds of getting picked can increase your chances of winning. Though you would still be left with 8+ million combinations or more but it's still under the amount of combinations possible.

now if you are reffering to the numbers I gave Kaenzig about his theory of position, well what's wrong with that. This is his theory he is working on I had the database all ready set up with all histories I just helped him out. I may not believe 100% in his theories but it doesn't mean I won't help the guy out if I have something that can be contributed. It's called learning from one another, even if you don't use it you still learn something.