lottotrix strikes gold!!!!!
- Thread starter luckyhorse
- Start date
Brad
Member
Out of curiosity I ran Nick's wheel C(49,6,2,2)=82 thro CoverMaster and here's the quick report:
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 1,176 1,176 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 3 : 18,424 18,424 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 211,876 211,876 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,906,884 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 18,424 1,622 8.80373 16,802 91.19627
3 If 4 : 211,876 70,436 33.24397 141,440 66.75603
3 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,282,485 67.25553 624,399 32.74447
3 If 6 : 13,983,816 12,819,096 91.67094 1,164,720 8.32906
3 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,252,568 99.24562 648,016 0.75438
4 If 4 : 211,876 1,230 0.58053 210,646 99.41947
4 If 5 : 1,906,884 53,220 2.79094 1,853,664 97.20906
4 If 6 : 13,983,816 1,124,800 8.04358 12,859,016 91.95642
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 13,564,146 15.79052 72,336,438 84.20948
5 If 5 : 1,906,884 492 0.02580 1,906,392 99.97420
5 If 6 : 13,983,816 21,238 0.15188 13,962,578 99.84812
5 If 7 : 85,900,584 447,640 0.52111 85,452,944 99.47889
6 If 7 : 85,900,584 3,526 0.00410 85,897,058 99.99590
As you can see the 3if6 is 92%, and the 4if6 is 8% covered.
There must be some tremendous twist on the Trix 2if2 to improve that dramatically.
So I checked the free demo for Luisiana C(40,6,2,2)=57 as displayed on the Trix ws. The CM report is below, note the 3if6 is 97%, and the 4if6 is 13% covered.
That's a bit of an improvement but don't forget that may be 'cuz these are different size wheels. I don't have the ones for a direct comparison but it should be good enough for our discussion.
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 780 780 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 3 : 9,880 9,880 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 91,390 91,390 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 658,008 658,008 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 3,838,380 3,838,380 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 18,643,560 18,643,560 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 9,880 1,120 11.33603 8,760 88.66397
3 If 4 : 91,390 37,944 41.51877 53,446 58.48123
3 If 5 : 658,008 513,354 78.01638 144,654 21.98362
3 If 6 : 3,838,380 3,719,938 96.91427 118,442 3.08573
3 If 7 : 18,643,560 18,631,279 99.93413 12,281 0.06587
4 If 4 : 91,390 845 0.92461 90,545 99.07539
4 If 5 : 658,008 29,040 4.41332 628,968 95.58668
4 If 6 : 3,838,380 482,536 12.57135 3,355,844 87.42865
4 If 7 : 18,643,560 4,545,612 24.38167 14,097,948 75.61833
5 If 5 : 658,008 340 0.05167 657,668 99.94833
5 If 6 : 3,838,380 11,605 0.30234 3,826,775 99.69766
5 If 7 : 18,643,560 192,280 1.03135 18,451,280 98.96865
6 If 7 : 18,643,560 1,936 0.01038 18,641,624 99.98962
Judge for yourself, apologies for the bad formatting.
PS. sorry Irvin, I was playing with the format ... not worth it for the Secret ... isn't that what Colonel Sanders put into KFC?
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 1,176 1,176 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 3 : 18,424 18,424 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 211,876 211,876 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,906,884 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 13,983,816 13,983,816 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,900,584 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 18,424 1,622 8.80373 16,802 91.19627
3 If 4 : 211,876 70,436 33.24397 141,440 66.75603
3 If 5 : 1,906,884 1,282,485 67.25553 624,399 32.74447
3 If 6 : 13,983,816 12,819,096 91.67094 1,164,720 8.32906
3 If 7 : 85,900,584 85,252,568 99.24562 648,016 0.75438
4 If 4 : 211,876 1,230 0.58053 210,646 99.41947
4 If 5 : 1,906,884 53,220 2.79094 1,853,664 97.20906
4 If 6 : 13,983,816 1,124,800 8.04358 12,859,016 91.95642
4 If 7 : 85,900,584 13,564,146 15.79052 72,336,438 84.20948
5 If 5 : 1,906,884 492 0.02580 1,906,392 99.97420
5 If 6 : 13,983,816 21,238 0.15188 13,962,578 99.84812
5 If 7 : 85,900,584 447,640 0.52111 85,452,944 99.47889
6 If 7 : 85,900,584 3,526 0.00410 85,897,058 99.99590
As you can see the 3if6 is 92%, and the 4if6 is 8% covered.
There must be some tremendous twist on the Trix 2if2 to improve that dramatically.
So I checked the free demo for Luisiana C(40,6,2,2)=57 as displayed on the Trix ws. The CM report is below, note the 3if6 is 97%, and the 4if6 is 13% covered.
That's a bit of an improvement but don't forget that may be 'cuz these are different size wheels. I don't have the ones for a direct comparison but it should be good enough for our discussion.
T if M Tested Covered % Not Covered %
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 If 2 : 780 780 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 3 : 9,880 9,880 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 4 : 91,390 91,390 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 5 : 658,008 658,008 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 6 : 3,838,380 3,838,380 100.00000 0 0.00000
2 If 7 : 18,643,560 18,643,560 100.00000 0 0.00000
3 If 3 : 9,880 1,120 11.33603 8,760 88.66397
3 If 4 : 91,390 37,944 41.51877 53,446 58.48123
3 If 5 : 658,008 513,354 78.01638 144,654 21.98362
3 If 6 : 3,838,380 3,719,938 96.91427 118,442 3.08573
3 If 7 : 18,643,560 18,631,279 99.93413 12,281 0.06587
4 If 4 : 91,390 845 0.92461 90,545 99.07539
4 If 5 : 658,008 29,040 4.41332 628,968 95.58668
4 If 6 : 3,838,380 482,536 12.57135 3,355,844 87.42865
4 If 7 : 18,643,560 4,545,612 24.38167 14,097,948 75.61833
5 If 5 : 658,008 340 0.05167 657,668 99.94833
5 If 6 : 3,838,380 11,605 0.30234 3,826,775 99.69766
5 If 7 : 18,643,560 192,280 1.03135 18,451,280 98.96865
6 If 7 : 18,643,560 1,936 0.01038 18,641,624 99.98962
Judge for yourself, apologies for the bad formatting.
PS. sorry Irvin, I was playing with the format ... not worth it for the Secret ... isn't that what Colonel Sanders put into KFC?
Last edited:
Brad,
Thanks for doing the test.
Luckyhorse / stefan why dont you do a similar test and I bet you will get very similar results.
If we look at the report that Brad has provided you will see that the chances of matches from seven balls (this includes the bonus ball) is;
99% (3num) 91.67% excluding bonus ball.
15.8%(4num) 8% excluding bonus.
0.52%(5num)
0.00410%(6num) This is matching 6 with the first 6 or the bonus. so the chances of winning first div is less than 0.00410%
I usually play a wheel where there is at least a 10% chance of a 6 number win if all your numbers come in.
So we are talking at least 3000 to 4000 times better than the less than 0.00410% (dont forget the 0.00410 was calculated on 7 numbers not 6)
So do you play a wheel that covers all the numbers and claim a lot of small prizes (and once every 2 years a 5 number or 4+b prize if played 2x/week). Or do you play a small wheel and claim the odd small prize but still have a decent shot at the Jack Pot.
Me personally I would take the small wheel.
Thanks for doing the test.
Luckyhorse / stefan why dont you do a similar test and I bet you will get very similar results.
If we look at the report that Brad has provided you will see that the chances of matches from seven balls (this includes the bonus ball) is;
99% (3num) 91.67% excluding bonus ball.
15.8%(4num) 8% excluding bonus.
0.52%(5num)
0.00410%(6num) This is matching 6 with the first 6 or the bonus. so the chances of winning first div is less than 0.00410%
I usually play a wheel where there is at least a 10% chance of a 6 number win if all your numbers come in.
So we are talking at least 3000 to 4000 times better than the less than 0.00410% (dont forget the 0.00410 was calculated on 7 numbers not 6)
So do you play a wheel that covers all the numbers and claim a lot of small prizes (and once every 2 years a 5 number or 4+b prize if played 2x/week). Or do you play a small wheel and claim the odd small prize but still have a decent shot at the Jack Pot.
Me personally I would take the small wheel.
Last edited:
Nick Koutras
Member
Re: Nick, I can prove it !
>>>Nick, I can prove it !
You can prove what?
That you can alter the odds?
Call your "Eureka" a Sinking Ship that can not withstand Time
Since you do not know how to calculate odds yet.
I visited your site's web page that indicates the odds
for each Game using your system.
It is completely wrong and very misleading.
YOU CAN NOT IMPROVE THE ODDS for the Jackpot you can only equal them
or reduce them.
In this case you are reducing them.
Lets use the 6/40 game.
1 ticket has a chance of 1:3,838,380
57 (unique) tickets then 57:3,838,380 or 1:67340
You indicate otherwise.
These are statements of ignorance of simple mathematical properties.
I will not correct your calculations since it is up to you
to understand the Probability Properties.
Below are 67 of the pairs that are repeated twice on your 6/40 free system
0116
0203
0213
0216
0220
0225
0228
0307
0310
0311
0312
0313
0314
0315
0318
0319
0320
0321
0323
0324
0325
0328
0329
0330
0332
0334
0335
0337
0416
0508
0509
0616
0827
1115
1116
1119
1123
1135
1316
1320
1325
1328
1516
1519
1523
1535
1617
1619
1620
1622
1623
1625
1626
1628
1631
1633
1635
1636
1638
1639
1640
1923
1935
2025
2028
2335
2528
and below are the pairs that are repeated 3 times
0305
0308
0516
0816
Do you understand then why your odds are wrong?
>>>Dear Nick,
>>>I can prove with my copyright papers that lottotrix was (and still is) using 82 lines to trix lotto 649.
>>>I am sure that many of the system designers on the internet are nothing more than system collectors.
>>>I AM NOT ONE OF THEM !!!
Lotto Designs (covering designs, wheels) are free.
If you know anything about combinatorial designs you can find some or all of them in a good
University Library under Block Designs, BIBD, MOLS, Orthogonal Arrays.
>>>It is impossible to make a GOOD AND ORIGINAL working system in a couple of hours, NICK.
I could provide in a few minutes not in hour a better system than your
and I could prove it to you if you are willing to compare yours with mine.
The answer lies on the overlapping pairs on all of your designs which do exist.
>>>I have spend years of testing and re-designing lottotrix before it was released.
What have you done is copying/re-arranging/finding some Covering Designs of the form (n,6,2,2)=x
But yet you do not understand the basic concept of Probability.
>>>So, please respect my work and stop those false insinuations.
I do not make any false insinuations, you do, with your false posted Odds and covering properties.
>>>If you have designed all the systems you have posted on this forums, then you are a genious with a lot of spare time. (I don't believe that)
I do not care if you belive it or not.
>>>By the way : lottotrix is a 2if2 system (I prefer the term 6minus2-system) with a twist.
>>>And I won't tell anyone what that twist is. That's my secret. I won't even discuss it on the forums.
>>>I HATE copycats. Just use lottotrix and you'll see. And add some patience to your game !!!
There is not any trick you can apply to any covering design but only to destroy the cover.
>>>FAIR PLAY is the name of the game.
>>>Sincerely,
>>>Stefan
>>>P.S. No hard feelings !!!
I have no problem or hard feelings with the truth.
The problem is, that you can not see, the truth yet.
>>>Nick, I can prove it !
You can prove what?
That you can alter the odds?
Call your "Eureka" a Sinking Ship that can not withstand Time
Since you do not know how to calculate odds yet.
I visited your site's web page that indicates the odds
for each Game using your system.
It is completely wrong and very misleading.
YOU CAN NOT IMPROVE THE ODDS for the Jackpot you can only equal them
or reduce them.
In this case you are reducing them.
Lets use the 6/40 game.
1 ticket has a chance of 1:3,838,380
57 (unique) tickets then 57:3,838,380 or 1:67340
You indicate otherwise.
These are statements of ignorance of simple mathematical properties.
I will not correct your calculations since it is up to you
to understand the Probability Properties.
Below are 67 of the pairs that are repeated twice on your 6/40 free system
0116
0203
0213
0216
0220
0225
0228
0307
0310
0311
0312
0313
0314
0315
0318
0319
0320
0321
0323
0324
0325
0328
0329
0330
0332
0334
0335
0337
0416
0508
0509
0616
0827
1115
1116
1119
1123
1135
1316
1320
1325
1328
1516
1519
1523
1535
1617
1619
1620
1622
1623
1625
1626
1628
1631
1633
1635
1636
1638
1639
1640
1923
1935
2025
2028
2335
2528
and below are the pairs that are repeated 3 times
0305
0308
0516
0816
Do you understand then why your odds are wrong?
>>>Dear Nick,
>>>I can prove with my copyright papers that lottotrix was (and still is) using 82 lines to trix lotto 649.
>>>I am sure that many of the system designers on the internet are nothing more than system collectors.
>>>I AM NOT ONE OF THEM !!!
Lotto Designs (covering designs, wheels) are free.
If you know anything about combinatorial designs you can find some or all of them in a good
University Library under Block Designs, BIBD, MOLS, Orthogonal Arrays.
>>>It is impossible to make a GOOD AND ORIGINAL working system in a couple of hours, NICK.
I could provide in a few minutes not in hour a better system than your
and I could prove it to you if you are willing to compare yours with mine.
The answer lies on the overlapping pairs on all of your designs which do exist.
>>>I have spend years of testing and re-designing lottotrix before it was released.
What have you done is copying/re-arranging/finding some Covering Designs of the form (n,6,2,2)=x
But yet you do not understand the basic concept of Probability.
>>>So, please respect my work and stop those false insinuations.
I do not make any false insinuations, you do, with your false posted Odds and covering properties.
>>>If you have designed all the systems you have posted on this forums, then you are a genious with a lot of spare time. (I don't believe that)
I do not care if you belive it or not.
>>>By the way : lottotrix is a 2if2 system (I prefer the term 6minus2-system) with a twist.
>>>And I won't tell anyone what that twist is. That's my secret. I won't even discuss it on the forums.
>>>I HATE copycats. Just use lottotrix and you'll see. And add some patience to your game !!!
There is not any trick you can apply to any covering design but only to destroy the cover.
>>>FAIR PLAY is the name of the game.
>>>Sincerely,
>>>Stefan
>>>P.S. No hard feelings !!!
I have no problem or hard feelings with the truth.
The problem is, that you can not see, the truth yet.
Dennis Bassboss
Member
Please people ...I don't like hard feelings and I'm staying away from controversies as much as I can... Always have...So like my post said originally in a respectfull fashion I won't play it....But I respect your opinion...Dennis Bassboss said:
If I would have spotted some changes in these odds ...I would most probably be the first to have gone for it don't you think so??It doesn't mean that you can't win using this..But it wouldn't prove anything either even if you'd win with it...
Lets put all of this behind us now...And lets all act in a civilized fashion...
Okay Dennis.
This is my last post on Lottotrix.
To everyone please read the covermaster report and decide for yourself all the information is there.
It is a 2if2 wheel with a twist....The only twist is you just forked out $12 for something that can be had for free.
To Luckyhorse - good luck with it...especially for the bigger prizes.
To Nick - I always know your right + Good software + good wheel designs.
Stefan - suggest you do a search on this website for stuff from Nick (The man is a genius in this field)
I'll go back to my small wheels with the higher (bigger prize target, 4if4 and 5if6) guarantees.
Regards,
Irvin
This is my last post on Lottotrix.
To everyone please read the covermaster report and decide for yourself all the information is there.
It is a 2if2 wheel with a twist....The only twist is you just forked out $12 for something that can be had for free.
To Luckyhorse - good luck with it...especially for the bigger prizes.
To Nick - I always know your right + Good software + good wheel designs.
Stefan - suggest you do a search on this website for stuff from Nick (The man is a genius in this field)
I'll go back to my small wheels with the higher (bigger prize target, 4if4 and 5if6) guarantees.
Regards,
Irvin
Dennis Bassboss
Member
Nick like any human beings including myself is not perfect but he is for sure the best wheel designer that I know!Irvin said:
... let's go for a cold one I'm not a math genuis, so I don't want to wade into all this stuff, All i do know is , Nick has been providing wheels and information here for free.... why.... because I believe Nick does'nt care who here wins something, but as long as some one benefits and wins, that to me is totally unselfish, so lets stop the biggering,and lets all work together.... I said it before , and I'll say it again, the lotto corp has lots of money to go around for all of us.
I think it is terrific for LT to let this free advertisement go on.
I think it is terrific for LT to let this free advertisement go on.
Brad
Member
FYI
Peter,
I would look at this as a discussion that got started because I was curious about luckyhorse's posts mainly since he plays the same lotto as I do. There are not that many ppl who post about BC49. On the surface what he writes looks on the up and up ... but here are some quotes I came across :
_"Are you that same guy from Canada that use to sell the lucky horse system at Maybell? If I remember right, you took a system from an old publication that was copyrighted and sold it as your own. It been about a year since you posted anything, I would have thought you would have changed your name ... <snip> ..."
_"You are the same guy. I did a search of luckyhorse and there all kinds of posts about you and your system about a year back. Old scam artists never die, they just fade out for a little while and come back with the same old lines to a new crowd. Any body want to know about this guy can do the same search. Man you should have at least changed your name."
I won't post the author's name here but some of our members may have seen these already ... I just found out.
So this is the same luckyhorse, as some of his recent posts on the other forum are almost duplicates of the ones here. I'm not accusing him of anything, really he's done nothing wrong on this forum ... but this may put things into another perspective, ie: should we believe his claims in light of all this? Is credibility an issue here? ... make your own conclusions, I have made mine.
As far as lottotrix goes it has unfortunately gotten more publicity than it deserves, largely thanks to luckyhorse, partly thanks to my digging but I think we put that one to bed, mainly thanks to Nick and Irvin.
This is Anything Goes ... Ok, I'm done, won't waste anymore time
Peter,
I would look at this as a discussion that got started because I was curious about luckyhorse's posts mainly since he plays the same lotto as I do. There are not that many ppl who post about BC49. On the surface what he writes looks on the up and up ... but here are some quotes I came across :
_"Are you that same guy from Canada that use to sell the lucky horse system at Maybell? If I remember right, you took a system from an old publication that was copyrighted and sold it as your own. It been about a year since you posted anything, I would have thought you would have changed your name ... <snip> ..."
_"You are the same guy. I did a search of luckyhorse and there all kinds of posts about you and your system about a year back. Old scam artists never die, they just fade out for a little while and come back with the same old lines to a new crowd. Any body want to know about this guy can do the same search. Man you should have at least changed your name."
I won't post the author's name here but some of our members may have seen these already ... I just found out.
So this is the same luckyhorse, as some of his recent posts on the other forum are almost duplicates of the ones here. I'm not accusing him of anything, really he's done nothing wrong on this forum ... but this may put things into another perspective, ie: should we believe his claims in light of all this? Is credibility an issue here? ... make your own conclusions, I have made mine.
As far as lottotrix goes it has unfortunately gotten more publicity than it deserves, largely thanks to luckyhorse, partly thanks to my digging but I think we put that one to bed, mainly thanks to Nick and Irvin.
This is Anything Goes ... Ok, I'm done, won't waste anymore time
Stefan shut up you prick
This site is all about trying to find a winning strategy without spending huge amounts of money, admitedly the money doesnt really matter anymore and didnt from the begining because i could afford it anyway, but i still would love to be able to beat the system for a very modest cost because i dont like giving any of my money away without a fighting chance and it would be an amazing feeling to get another jackpot out of them for a few £££'s.
You are just trying to sell on your system, which is infact not even correct.
So either put up or shut up and bugger off with your sales talk!!
Tim - uk
This site is all about trying to find a winning strategy without spending huge amounts of money, admitedly the money doesnt really matter anymore and didnt from the begining because i could afford it anyway, but i still would love to be able to beat the system for a very modest cost because i dont like giving any of my money away without a fighting chance and it would be an amazing feeling to get another jackpot out of them for a few £££'s.
You are just trying to sell on your system, which is infact not even correct.
So either put up or shut up and bugger off with your sales talk!!
Tim - uk
luckyhorse
Member
this is pretty much the bottom line on this lottotrix system it has worked for me thus far! i'am not saying it will continue to but for the $12 invested so far it has been money well spent! try it for yourself or dont bother itss completely your decision! i'am just reporting truthful results based on my experience with stefans algorithm!
like I said make sure to thank LT for all the free advertisement, but unless you post picks prior to the draw I'll assume nothing,so in order to gain credibility, and respect plse post. I agree with Brad, having been here a few years, I recognize the name Luckyhorse, from posts before.
luckyhorse
Member
why would i want to gain any credibility to begin with since lottotrix is not my system!!!! i could care less whether you use it or not!
