View Full Version : Lotto Tips

lotto

17-10-2004, 02:52 PM

Ummm....does anyone have any good tips on winning lotto ....he he :p

Do the lotto software(s) really improve your chances or they just $$ making schemes. If they do, is there a good one?

Does anyone know of any other methods of improving your odds?

:D :D

Spacemannz

17-10-2004, 02:54 PM

Try http:www.//download.com type in Lotto. Theres a lot of programs around, BUT I would say most of them are shareware.

Wouldnt have a clue which one is the best. I dont do Lotto myself.

Spacemannz

17-10-2004, 02:55 PM

That should be http://www.download.com/

> Ummm....does anyone have any good tips on winning

> lotto ....he he :p

>

> Do the lotto software(s) really improve your chances

> or they just $$ making schemes. If they do, is there

> a good one?

>

> Does anyone know of any other methods of improving

> your odds?

>

> :D :D

Someone who posts her wrote a book, and a program on this, they may come to your aid.

Terry Porritt

17-10-2004, 03:03 PM

If you have qbasic.exe, a dos program, I can post a basic programm that will generate sets of 6 random numbers.

45South

17-10-2004, 03:06 PM

>Does anyone know of any other methods of improving your odds

Buy more tickets

terry,

Iallways have trouble getting mine not to generate a zero, or the same number in 1 set. or to repeat same set.

D.

45South

17-10-2004, 03:10 PM

>Do the lotto software(s) really improve your chances or they just $$ making schemes

If they really worked, the authors wouldn't be bothered trying to flog off usesless shareware number generators, they'd be far too busy soaking up the sun, downing the odd pink gin or 2, & watching the pretty girls walking along the beach.

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:13 PM

check out my website http://lottologic.50megs.com/

and you can download a demo version of a program I wrote in delphi here: http://lotto.nzpages.net.nz/lottologicdemo.exe

i'ts only 169kb

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:15 PM

45south this maybe true for some types of number generating programs but really all mine does is rearrange your chosen numbers into suitable patterns, much like the lotto combo systems, but cheaper to play.....the idea is to get the most logical/scientific coverage for your budget.....

Ps: my site's a little out of date cause I've been lazy but the principles still stand........

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:17 PM

ah and terry.....................truly random in qbasic or basic or pretty much any programming language is VERY VERY VERY hard to achieve if not impossible.........

lotto

17-10-2004, 03:18 PM

Terry...any software that sort of does some more analyzing on previous results and then generating.

45South..i will try your option. ;\

Now why didnt i think of that before!

Has anyone tried this (http://www.justlottery.com/nz-lotto/new-zealand-lotto.html).

drcspy...just saw your post...will try

:D

> >Do the lotto software(s) really improve your chances

> or they just $$ making schemes

>

> If they really worked, the authors wouldn't be

> bothered trying to flog off usesless shareware number

> generators, they'd be far too busy soaking up the

> sun, downing the odd pink gin or 2, & watching the

> pretty girls walking along the beach.

Are you saying it cant be done, or it cant be done consistently in the first 100,000 lines.

D.

pulling hair out

17-10-2004, 03:20 PM

If you've got a ticket - you're in with a chance.

If you're destined to win, it will be on a $2 ticket or 500 tickets.

Maybe some programs can increase the chances but can't see how you can definitely know which numbers will come in.

It's just one of those "your lucks in" or "your lucks out".

Maybe if you stick to the same numbers each week , your numbers will eventually come up. The people who promote those programs make their winnings of those who buy the program, not from the lotto tickets.

Thats just my thoughts anyway, Marg.

45South

17-10-2004, 03:31 PM

>Are you saying it cant be done, or it cant be done consistently in the first 100,000 lines

Oh I'm sure it can be done, & probably within the first 100,000 lines but then you need a program that will pull the winning line out.

Or buy a few '000 tickets & start filling 'em all in.

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:37 PM

if you have a certain budget for playing lotto there are ways to increase the chance of you winning A prize.........theres smart playing methods that'll make sure that you get the greatest numerical coverage for the money you spend.........now for example I have a system which allows you to play a game of 9 number combination for um........hell it used to be $6 so I suppose it'd be $7.20 now anyway the lotto version used to be $42 (9 combo - now $50.40 I guess). If you play MY version you will still have exactly the same chance of winning a prize as the much more expensive lotto combo........however there is always a tradeoff and that is that you may win a smaller prize................theres also the positive trade off that if you lose you've just lost a lot less money..........now my version costs 1/7th of the cost of the lotto combo to play .......so...........if you lotto budget wasss $50.40 this week and you bought one lotto 9 combo you would have played ONE lot of 9 numbers.............however if you spent that money on 7 versions of the 9 number game that i've designed then you would have SEVEN times greater chance of winning a prize .........at the same cost ..........so yes............SMART plyaing can improve your chances.................and yes a win CAN be guaranteed BUT...........in the same game you CANT guarantee a profit............you can play a game that's so cheap that IF you win you will be GUARANTEED a profit or you can play a game that guarantees you a win but you are possibliy not gonna make a profit and thats the gamble.........you CANT beat the system..........

those lotto softwares that advertise that they can provide you with number generators...........well........lmfao............ even if they take all the previous draws and analyse them then give you a result listing the numbers in the order of the most often drawn ...........think of it this way.......say you play a game of 'toss the coin' now imagine you are gonna toss the coin 10 times and you havwe so far tossed it 9 times and you have come up with heads 9 times..............whats the odds of the final toss being heads ?................do you have higher odds of that last toss being a 'head' ..................OF COURSE NOT.........all toss'es of the coin have a 50/50 chance of being either head or tails..........no matter what has happened previously.............same rules apply to lotto............

so there you are some food for thought

there are programs that print the universal input tickets from data stream, 100% accurately. the issue is that buying 8334 tickets in 1 week breakes the rules of the game, and you can lose the prizes if they pick it/you up.

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:41 PM

to guarantee a win costs approx $720 now that's NOT a guaranteed FIRST div it's just a guaranteed LOWEST div win...........to guarantee a first div win you got to play.......3,838,380 lines of lotto

45South

17-10-2004, 03:42 PM

How much have you spent/won since you started using it?

No I'm not taking the p...s, yes I am nosey

Growly

17-10-2004, 03:43 PM

You could use a scientific or graphic calculator to generate random numbers, if you don't have your laptop handy at the shop -

Rand#*40 + 1

Take the number without the decimals, and voila!

> to guarantee a win costs approx $720 now that's NOT a

> guaranteed FIRST div it's just a guaranteed LOWEST

> div win...........to guarantee a first div win you

> got to play.......3,838,380 lines of lotto

Which is 1 reason why in NZ they stopped the larger 1st division prize, also there is no garantee that there wil not be more than 1 st div winner, split prize you out of pocket. even with the extra 2.3m you put in the pool.

The E65m Italian one, earlier this year would have been a different story.

D.

drcspy

17-10-2004, 03:49 PM

I'm probably about even................I won $4700 one time last year

> I'm probably about even................I won $4700

> one time last year

Before they brought in the second bonus and the power ball that would have been better.

I got a div 3 before they changed it 13.500.00 my mate got a2 and a3.

I had a 4 this year but it was a low week only 250. my friend got 3or4 and PB nearly a grand. this year.

Over the years im still up, but not buy anything worth knowing about.

D.

45South

17-10-2004, 04:51 PM

>I'm probably about even................I won $4700 one time last year

Sure beats the $30 I've won in the past year, mind you I've only bought the one ticket, not bad I suppose.

lotto

17-10-2004, 07:11 PM

interesting info drcspy :-) and it makes sense on improv combo of set numbers.

Is the site retailing a full version?

Winston001

17-10-2004, 07:16 PM

> Sure beats the $30 I've won in the past year, mind

> you I've only bought the one ticket, not bad I

> suppose.

Wooah! Thats a 1500% return man. :O Whats your secret? I won't tell. ;)

drcspy

17-10-2004, 07:30 PM

no mate I dont retail it from the site but I'll sell ya one if you use the email link onsite to ask nicely :-) you NEED to put 'lotto' into the subject line otherwise it'll goto my junk bin

Rob99

17-10-2004, 10:22 PM

>Iallways have trouble getting mine not to generate a zero, or the same number in 1 set. or to repeat same set.

Dont include 0 in your loop.

An easy way to not repeat the numbers is catch the repeated with an if.

Graham L

18-10-2004, 02:42 PM

If you want to make money out of Lotto, become a Lotto outlet. :D Ti win money gambling, you have to be on the side with the cash-register.

There is no software which will improve your chances of winning.

Any set of 6 numbers has a chance of 1 in 40x39x38x37x36x35/720 of winning.

That's about 1 in 13 million or so. If you buy 13 million selections, you would "win" Lotto. And lose a lot of money. :D And just think of the delight you would have when you discovered that you made a single mistake and duplicated one set, and missed out one set --- which by Mirphy's Law would win. ;-)

> If you want to make money out of Lotto, become a

> Lotto outlet. :D Ti win money gambling, you have to

> be on the side with the cash-register.

You are absoulutly right, the House bias is normally 40%.

I just want to master the programing to pick it, consistently, because I can/should be able to.

System runninmg is against the rules, the exersise isnt.

D.

Graham L

18-10-2004, 03:58 PM

You can't. As long as all the balls are included, and they are properly mixed, the first ball is one of 40. The next is 1 of 39. ...

The balls don't have memory. It's a random process.

You can make money with Lotto selection programmes. You can sell a Lotto numbers selection programme to the gullible.

This is like the story about the Wall Street broker who said the sisze of his yacht demonstrated how much money people could make "investing" on the sharemarket. He was told: "Show us your customers' yachts"/

drcspy

18-10-2004, 04:12 PM

yeh which is why my systems DONT operate on the 'help you choose numbers' principle......it's not possible..........did you see my post about 'coin tossing' .........it's very simple really.......my systems help you play the numbers you have chosen so that you get the best 'coverage' for your dollar......but that's all you still need soem luck to choose a combination with sufficient winnign numbers in it in the first place

drcspy

18-10-2004, 04:14 PM

graham actually there are 3,838,380 possible combinatinos of 6 winning numbers which may be derived from 40 .......so ..........any six winning numbers have 1:3,838,380 chances of winning div 1 and you have an approx 1:200 chance of winning any prize at all............

Graham,

The random is the fun part, there are some stat an programs that narrow it down to 100-000 combos, per draw, with a vague degree of accuracy.

With over 16 years of data, there some interesting inballances and patterns.

D.

> yeh which is why my systems DONT operate on the 'help

> you choose numbers' principle......it's not

> possible..........did you see my post about 'coin

> tossing' .........it's very simple really.......my

> systems help you play the numbers you have chosen so

> that you get the best 'coverage' for your

> dollar......but that's all you still need soem luck

> to choose a combination with sufficient winnign

> numbers in it in the first place

This is correct, I have been kicking around the idea of your kind of system, combined with a good stat an, to improve average return.

D.

drcspy

18-10-2004, 04:29 PM

love to know how youd' get on cause as far as i can see the draws to the best of our technological expertise are random...........same as my coin draw example.....even if you get a 'run' of numbers you still cant predict with any degree of certainty what the next draw may bring.........what language you gonna create your prog using ?

drcspy

18-10-2004, 04:32 PM

I'm too lazy to brush up on my, self taught, programming skills anymore to do this but you coudl possibly work on trying to run a diagnostic over the past draws to see if you can isolate some groups of say 10 numbers which appear to contain numbers which are drawn more often than others then perrhaps play those groups.........

Winston001

18-10-2004, 04:34 PM

Some people believe that there are natural numbers, and combinations can be predicted. Drb1 hints at this with reference to patterns.

Now, Classical physics says - nonsense. The Lotto draw must always be totally random. As with your example on the heads/tails for the 100th throw. Still 50/50 probability.

But have a look at Quantum physics some time. There are weird things happening at the subatomic level. Particles do not conform to probability theory or Classical models.

I won't go into that here. Suffice to say that there "might" be natural patterns which a computer program could detect. Goes against commonsense but so do the activities of quantum particles. Worth keeping an open mind.

Good luck for Saturday night. :D

> I'm too lazy to brush up on my, self taught,

> programming skills anymore to do this but you coudl

> possibly work on trying to run a diagnostic over the

> past draws to see if you can isolate some groups of

> say 10 numbers which appear to contain numbers which

> are drawn more often than others then perrhaps play

> those groups.........

That is what I meant,

As winston says, there are odd patterns, its like the Stock Market, there are patterns, the art is annaylising the patterns.

With the power offered by clustering, you can run a lot of module comparrisons in the home, quite economically, that five years ago were the preserve of nasa.

D.

lottogeek

18-03-2008, 12:24 PM

Interesting reading! I am not much of a programmer, but I am intrigued by the maths. How easy is it to write a program that will generate 6 number lines that cover all four number combinations of 1-40, without any repeats? There are 91390 four number combinations from numbers 1-40. Each 6 number line covers 15 four number combinations. Is it possible therefore to generate 6092.66 (91390/15) six number lines that cover the 91390 four number combinations? If possible let me know.

DeSade

18-03-2008, 01:46 PM

Thread necromancy = bad

KenESmith

18-03-2008, 06:55 PM

Lotto is totally Random with odds of 1: 3,838,383 of any one line winning, for power ball just multiply these odds by 9.

The best odds are on Lotto Strike which has odds of 1:40 to the power of 4.

There is no system that can reliably pick a series of randomly generated numbers.

If you want a sure way of winning on Lotto, and "Invest" say $10 per week.

Put the $10 each week in a box under your bed, instead of giving it to a lotto shop, After 12 months pull out the box and you have won $520, which in all probability is a long way ahead of where you would have been if you had given it each week to the lotto shop.

Then if you still want to play a game of chance, buy bonus bonds with your $520 - while you get no interest, and lose a percentage to inflation, you just may win, and you are still ahead.

Roscoe

18-03-2008, 08:29 PM

Lotto is totally Random with odds of 1: 3,838,383 of any one line winning, for power ball just multiply these odds by 9.

The best odds are on Lotto Strike which has odds of 1:40 to the power of 4.

There is no system that can reliably pick a series of randomly generated numbers.

If you want a sure way of winning on Lotto, and "Invest" say $10 per week.

Put the $10 each week in a box under your bed, instead of giving it to a lotto shop, After 12 months pull out the box and you have won $520, which in all probability is a long way ahead of where you would have been if you had given it each week to the lotto shop.

Then if you still want to play a game of chance, buy bonus bonds with your $520 - while you get no interest, and lose a percentage to inflation, you just may win, and you are still ahead.

Has to be the best advice so far. Can only totally agree!!!!!:thumbs:

Metla

18-03-2008, 08:35 PM

I'd rather spend the $800 a year and be in with a chance.

Hell, I spend way more then that a year on pies and cakes.

andrew93

18-03-2008, 09:14 PM

Lotto is totally Random with odds of 1: 3,838,383 of any one line winning.I thought it was 1:3,838,380 - a rounding difference perhaps......?

Your best odds involve picking the numbers yourself instead of relying on a 'lucky dip' - that way you drop out of the 'odds management' process employed by NZ Lotteries.

Roscoe

18-03-2008, 09:19 PM

Hell, I spend way more then that a year on pies and cakes.

Sounds as though you have quite an investment in that belly of yours.:eek:

Metla

18-03-2008, 09:20 PM

Sounds as though you have quite an investment in that belly of yours.:eek:

Its quite a belly.

Plus, I can take it with me.:thumbs:

Digby

18-03-2008, 09:29 PM

The best Lotto tip ....

Don't buy any the odds are very poor and the prizes are even worse. Check out 2nd division !

andrew93

18-03-2008, 09:34 PM

Completely agree. The prizes are out of whack with the odds so where is the incentive? But if you 0 tickets your odds of winning are exactly zero. If you buy a ticket your odds of winning are (a little bit) more than zero. Gotta be in to win! :)

Sweep

18-03-2008, 09:47 PM

Interesting reading! I am not much of a programmer, but I am intrigued by the maths. How easy is it to write a program that will generate 6 number lines that cover all four number combinations of 1-40, without any repeats? There are 91390 four number combinations from numbers 1-40. Each 6 number line covers 15 four number combinations. Is it possible therefore to generate 6092.66 (91390/15) six number lines that cover the 91390 four number combinations? If possible let me know.

Random numbers may not be totally random. The programme you may write could be predictable over time depending on the seed.

You could win Lotto with certainty with a computer by generating all possible combinations and buying tickets to suit. I hope you have enough money to invest.

drcspy

19-03-2008, 01:25 AM

Interesting reading! I am not much of a programmer, but I am intrigued by the maths. How easy is it to write a program that will generate 6 number lines that cover all four number combinations of 1-40, without any repeats? There are 91390 four number combinations from numbers 1-40. Each 6 number line covers 15 four number combinations. Is it possible therefore to generate 6092.66 (91390/15) six number lines that cover the 91390 four number combinations? If possible let me know.

Well it's like this........yes certainly every group of six numbers contains 15 groups of four but.....you will get plenty of 'doubleups' a simple example is the 8 number 'budget' combo i made up it goes like this:

123456

123478

125678

135678

145678

235678

245678

345678

now this grouping of 8 rows of six numbers contains all the groups of 4 numbers which may be derived from any 8 numbers (from memory theres 70 - I think) theres NO possible way to reduce that down so you can play less than 8 groups of six numbers to 'cover' all the 4:8 sets........

as you can easily see theres several 'repeats' .......in fact 8 groups of six numbers contain 120 groups of 4 numbers.....

so to answer this:

How easy is it to write a program that will generate 6 number lines that cover all four number combinations of 1-40, without any repeats? as far as I can make out its most likely totally impossible to avoid repeats......

Oh btw for anyones interest .........waaaaaaayyyyyyyy back when I first started doing this stuff I wrote a 700 line BASIC program (on my 128 commodore lol - pretty much my first REAL program) ......this was designed to allow you to input any group of 8-9-10-12-14-16-20 numbers (or get the pc to input a ramdomly chosen group for you then match those numbers against any number of simulated draws then print out a summary of the resulting 'wins'. Was quite interesting......taking into account the non 'true' randomness of numbers generated by the pc I recall running one set of 20 numbers over 10,000 draws.......it showed up overall that you'll get about one group of SEVEN winning numbers (6+bonus) within any chosen group of 20 appearing with a frequency of about 1 in 50 draws......

lol......commodores........I also wrote a program designed to generate all the groups of 4 numbers which could be derived from 40 ........this took over three hours to run ! Guess on my P4 (3.2ghz) it'd take a HELL of a lot less probably a matter of seconds.......

lottogeek

19-03-2008, 10:29 AM

Cool, thanks drcspy. Obviously you have thought about this more than me. I was thinking more along the lines of:

1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 7 8 9

1 2 3 10 11 12

1 2 3 13 14 15

1 2 3 16 17 18

1 2 3 19 20 21

1 2 3 22 23 24

1 2 3 25 26 27

1 2 3 28 29 30

1 2 3 31 32 33

1 2 3 34 35 36

1 2 3 37 38 39

1 2 3 40

1 2 4 7 10 13

1 2 4 16 19 22

1 2 4 25 28 31

1 2 4 34 37 40

1 2 4 8 11 14

1 2 4 17 20 23

1 2 4 26 29 32

1 2 4 35 38 9

1 2 4 12 15 18

1 2 4 21 24 27

1 2 4 30 33 36

1 2 4 39

And so on. All I have done here is use 123456 then the next line (by adding 1 to the end) that doesn't have repeats and so on. Sort of like binary 40 system I suppose? As you can see there is no way around the first incomplete line as if you add any number to complete the line you will get repeats.

That is not such a big deal as some double ups are ok. The reason I am trying to work this out is simple. I agree with everyone that lotto is completely random and there is no way to beat the odds. However there is a way to guarentee getting 25% of your money back and reduce your odds to a real probability of winning 80% of your money back each draw. And of course you still have the odds of getting more (or less) but that is what gambling is all about!! This system would suit people that faithfully get their $6 lotto ticket every week. Essentially it's getting a definite 25% discount on lotto tickets, and probably an 80% discount, i.e. playing lotto for 20% of the normal price!!

If you can help with the combos let me know. I have a maths/stats degree. this is for real. In fact it's really simple!!! Can share more if anyone is interested?

PaulD

19-03-2008, 11:09 AM

Isn't it a fact that you can't improve your chance of winning but you can use numbers least likely to be picked by other people for various reasons so that if you ever do win, you're less likely to be sharing with a crowd of others.

drcspy

19-03-2008, 11:55 AM

I had thought of doing this long ago to write a program to generate all the possible combos of 4:40 then run a process to create all necessary sets of 6 numbers incorporating those 4:40 groups.....and set it up to make the least possible 6 number groups thus covering all the 4:40's as cheaply as possible.....however I got lazy lol......I did long ago design a system which guaranteed a win if you played the 40 numbers (as two groups of 20) This was all the 4:20 combos (from memory there were about five and a half thousand of them) combined into groups of 6 numbers - I did this all 'manually' BY HAND as in those days I didn't have a computer. Turns out it costs about $600 to play all 40 numbers this way and if I recall correctly the 'repeat rate' of the 4:20's was about 1.7 ......so in essence it'd guarantee you a win for you $600 but only maybe $50 - the chances were pretty good of getting more of course.......I actually designed about 35 systematic methods of playing in the end then I kinda got too busy with other life happenings and sorta dropped it though my interest has always been numerical stuff :-)

It's really very interesting and not just because of the potential to win but I find it quite fascinating to look at what different playing strategies do for the potential results.........

Heres a little hint......look at for instance what happens when you play all the 40 numbers as two groups of 20

Group A: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Group B: 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

The above shows that if group A for example has 5 winning numbers then group B MUST contain the other 2. The really interesting thing is this: if you played BOTH groups of numbers then one of them MUST contain AT LEAST 4 winning numbers........the methods you use to play those groups of 20 numbers will be the greatest determining factor in whether you collect a prize.....This can break down into some interesting scenarios........

drcspy

19-03-2008, 12:07 PM

Isn't it a fact that you can't improve your chance of winning

WRONG.........

as I stated earlier heres an example

lotto 9 combo (i'll use the 'old' prices here it's easier for me to remember)

$42 = play ONE group of 9 numbers

Use MY budget 9 combo game

$6 = play ONE group of 9 numbers.....same odds of winning A prize (might be a smaller prize though)

now imagine your budget is $42 per week

what you gonna do ?........play ONE 9 number combo for $42 or play SEVEN 9 number 'budget combo' games for the same cost ?........

it's VERY obvious that for the same cost playin SEVEN different groups of 9 numbers is going to give you a MUCH better chance of winning...

the bottom line is that if you get smart and play 'budget' systems you can indeed increase your chances of winning yet at the same time lose LESS should you not get a prize.........so does that cover it ?......

Dont gamble your plan - Plan your gamble

PaulD

19-03-2008, 01:07 PM

"How can you improve your chances of winning the lottery? Simple, Buy more tickets. I would love to highlight to you a fantastic new system that would change or enhance you ability to win the lottery. Unfortunately I can't because it is not possible. Well I say that, it is, You simply buy more tickets!!"

http://www.probabilitytheory.info/topics/lottery.htm

Your example of $42 sounds like buying more tickets!

drcspy

19-03-2008, 02:10 PM

yes buy more tickets is one way and the trick is - if you get smart - you can cover a greater range of numbers within a certain budget. Of course playing more numbers should give you a better chance of winning......whats your problem with tht ?...

drcspy

19-03-2008, 02:13 PM

I would love to highlight to you a fantastic new system that would change or enhance you ability to win the lottery. Unfortunately I can't because it is not possible

WRONG of course you can *enhance* your ability to win even without 'buying more tickets' or exceeding whatever your current lotto budget might be.....it's called playing SMART.

And anyway it is again entirely possible to GUARANTEE a win but of course you cant guarantee a profit in the same game

Generally speakign when you play lotto you'll either need luck to win - or if you want to spend a bit and play a guaranteed winning system you'll need luck in order to make a profit. You cant 'beat the system' but you can play SMART.

Bantu

19-03-2008, 02:29 PM

Stick with exactly the same numbers ALWAYS and eventually they will come up.

andrew93

19-03-2008, 08:40 PM

yes buy more tickets is one way and the trick is - if you get smart - you can cover a greater range of numbers within a certain budget. Of course playing more numbers should give you a better chance of winning......whats your problem with tht ?...

You may be able to cover a greater range of numbers with a system and a limited budget but you cannot cover more combinations of numbers on an equal or lesser budget. That does not vary.

drcspy

20-03-2008, 01:19 AM

You may be able to cover a greater range of numbers with a system and a limited budget but you cannot cover more combinations of numbers on an equal or lesser budget. That does not vary.

I dont quite get what you are on about ?..........

I can easily 'cover' a greater range of numbers than the standard offerings of lotto 'combo' systems within a MUCH smaller budget....of course however the system is played at $1.20 per group of six numbers .....thats the way it is.....

andrew93

20-03-2008, 04:41 PM

Consider this scenario:

You buy a ticket with the following lines:

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30

31 32 33 34 35 36

37 38 39 40 1 2

Yes you have covered every single number and only at a cost of buying 7 lines. But how much would you get paid if the following numbers were drawn:

6 12 18 24 30 36? It is the combinations of numbers that pay the prizes, not the coverage.

Exactly how many unique combinations are there? I'd say 40!/34! which is over 2.7 billion - only one combination of numbers is going to pay out the big one.

Quick question, out of curiosity : do you think the number sequence 1 2 3 4 5 6 has a greater, lesser or the same chance as winning when compared to a randomly (or otherwise) selected set of 6 numbers?

Andrew

drcspy

20-03-2008, 06:25 PM

do you think the number sequence 1 2 3 4 5 6 has a greater, lesser or the same chance as winning when compared to a randomly (or otherwise) selected set of 6 numbers?

equal of course

and the nz lotto system has 3,838,380 possible combinations of six numbers which may be derived from the 40 not 2.7 billion

drcspy

20-03-2008, 06:29 PM

It is the combinations of numbers that pay the prizes, not the coverage.

yes BUT you can 'cover' a preferential combination of numbers (derived from a group such as 8-9-10 or 12 numbers for example) either randomly or else you can get smart and use a system such as the lotto combo or my 'budget' versions which give you SPECIFICLY the correct combinations derived to 'cover' all the necessary groups of 6:8 or 6:9 etc (LOTTO combo) or using my budget method 4:8 or 4:9 which will ensure that you DO get a prize in the event that your 8 or 9 or 10 numbers contains 3+bonus or 4 'straight' winning numbers.....

drcspy

20-03-2008, 06:31 PM

a random grouping of numbers such as your

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30

31 32 33 34 35 36

37 38 39 40 1 2

has poor 'coverage'....essentially what you have there is a 'lucky dip'

andrew93

20-03-2008, 07:29 PM

equal of course

Pleased to see that! Would you believe some people can't even figure that out?

and the nz lotto system has 3,838,380 possible combinations of six numbers which may be derived from the 40 not 2.7 billion

My bad - that was the permutation calculation - I even referred to the 3.8m combinations in a previous post.

If I am understanding you correctly (for want of a better word) are you saying that you can guarantee a 4-ball winning prize? Surely not - I figure there are 91,390 4-ball combinations in a 40-ball lottery. Or are you saying you can provide good coverage for a limited selection of numbers? How does that differ to the combo ticket already available? That gives the maximum number of combinations for a selection of n numbers.

Andrew

drcspy

20-03-2008, 07:56 PM

if I am understanding you correctly (for want of a better word) are you saying that you can guarantee a 4-ball winning prize?

yes

I figure there are 91,390 4-ball combinations in a 40-ball lottery.

yes

I DID once design a system which would guarantee you a win every time you played ( a 4 ball win as you called it) however this costs about $600 to play and does NOT guarantee a profit !

Or are you saying you can provide good coverage for a limited selection of numbers?

yes

How does that differ to the combo ticket already available? That gives the maximum number of combinations for a selection of n numbers.

The lotto combo system is designed to cover every combination of six numbers which may be derived from any group you want to play (they offer 8-9-10 number combos)

MY version (Budget combo) is designed to cover every combination of FOUR numbers which may be derived from any group you want to play (8-9-10-12-14-20)

Heres a little quote from my book which I wrote 17 years ago, nearly got published by David Bateman Ltd who were quite interested and instead marketed it myself and sold through adverts in Sunday News etc I sold several hundred of them and have a large number of interesting letters from grateful buyers many of whom have won more than I ever did, I still get enquiries from people now and then who several years after their initial purchase want to konw if i'm still creating systems:

Both the Lotto Combo system and the LOTTOLOGIC equivalent systems only require that you have at least 4 winning numbers in your combination in order to win a prize. The Lotto Combo will give you a division one prize in the event you get THE six winning numbers - a LOTTOLOGIC system may not. You would certainly collect many prizes in that instance though.

The odds of winning a division one prize are about 300,000/1 against you. Not very good. Therefore LOTTOLOGIC takes this into account by, at the cost of reducing your chances of collecting the "big one" a little more, giving you some ways to play which will still pay out if you have at least four winning-numbers - or three and the "bonus" without having to spend all that extra money. All this ends in a much much cheaper game and thus, the player can play more games with the budget. This can result in getting a better chance of winning than Lotto on-line Combo's can offer.

andrew93

20-03-2008, 09:15 PM

Ah - I'm with you now. You are aiming for the division 4 prize (with maybe division 5 or a higher division as a bonus) by getting the most coverage of say 4 balls on n numbers. For instance, rather than paying for 28 lines to cover 8 numbers, you could pay for 9 rows and cover all possible 4-ball combinations from the selection of your 8 favourite numbers (or 97% coverage from 8 rows, or even 68% coverage from 4 rows). So essentially you are trying to cover a greater range of numbers, albeit at the lower prize level, for a smaller investment. My previous assertions were based on aiming for the big one. Makes sense. It's a bit like place betting on the horses - better odds but lower dividends.

What is your minimum number of game lines to get x% coverage on say 8 numbers? Hmmm - I could probably write a computer programme to optimise that.

Cheers

Andrew

drcspy

20-03-2008, 09:33 PM

depends on the coverage you want.......

to guarantee a prize from 8 numbers IF you have at least 4 numbers (or 3+bonus) requires 8 lines of six numbers.........

you can of course reduce that even further with interesting results.....

if for example you DOUBLE the 8 numbers so you are playing

1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8

and split the resulting 16 numbers into three groups of 6:

1-2-3-4-5-6

1-2-3-4-7-8

x-x-5-6-7-8

this results in:

1-2-3-4

1-2-3-5

1-2-3-6

1-2-4-5

1-2-4-6

1-2-5-6

1-3-4-5

1-3-4-6

1-3-5-6

1-4-5-6

2-3-4-5

2-3-4-6

2-3-5-6

2-4-5-6

3-4-5-6

1-2-3-4

1-2-3-7

1-2-3-8

1-2-4-7

1-2-4-8

1-2-7-8

1-3-4-7

1-3-4-8

1-3-7-8

1-4-7-8

2-3-4-7

2-3-4-8

2-3-7-8

2-4-7-8

3-4-7-8

5-6-7-8

the 1-2-3-4 line is repeated twice but otherwise all lines are only represented one time........thus you have covered 30 of the possible 70 combinations of 4:8 numbers

AND the INTERESTING part of this is.............although you have only covered slightly less than half of the combinations..........IF you get four or more winning numbers your chances of a win are good......because of the fact that you have played all the 8 numbers twice and in fact the 'x-x' numbers on the last line could be any of the 8 repeated or any other numbers........it's very interesting really what you can do with the 'structure' of different playing strategies....

andrew93

20-03-2008, 10:02 PM

It's making sense now. I went back and re-read your earlier post of using 8 rows of 6 numbers to cover all possible 4 number combinations from a sample of 8 numbers. My first attempt resulted in 9 rows so I wasn't too far off. I came to the same conclusion that the first 3 or 4 lines provide the most coverage of the 70 combinations on an 4/8 number strategy - the law of diminishing marginal returns is kicking in for the last 4 lines of numbers.

I reckon you could get 60% (42 out of 70) coverage of 8 numbers on 3 lines using this scenario:

1-2-3-4-5-6

1-3-4-5-6-8

3-4-5-6-7-8

And you could increase the coverage to 54/70 (77%) by also using this line:

1-2-3-6-7-8

That's right isn't it?

Andrew

wratterus

20-03-2008, 10:21 PM

You've spent a bit of time figuring that out drcspy.... :sleep :lol:

drcspy

21-03-2008, 01:32 AM

oh yeh it was an interest of mine for about four years ......I developed about 35 systems I think.....

drcspy

21-03-2008, 01:53 AM

That's right isn't it?

You're getting the idea

i've got systems for 'full' coverage of 4:x for

9 numbers = 12 lines of 6

10 numbers = 27 lines of 6

12 numbers = 42 lines of 6

14 numbers = 137 lines of 6

and lots of other methods of play also

I prefer currently to play 2x groups of 20 numbers (very cheap method) as I KNOW without any doubt that one of those groups will/MUST contain at least 4 winning numbers.....of course cause it's a very cheap game the 'coverage' I get is pretty minimal tho it's done me some good I did win just under $5k four years ago and a few hundred a couple of times since.........

The reason for playing 40 numbers is pretty obvious - you MUST have within that group all 7 winning numbers. Your chance of winning is of course dependant on HOW you've 'covered' those numbers.

It works like this :

say you've decided to play all 40 numbers by using four groups of 10 the possible results will be thus:

A 765544432

B 012132132

C 000101112

D 000000101

If you read the numbers vertically you'll see that each column contains 7 numbers this is the possible distribution of winning numbers between the four groups of 10 you've played (A-B-C-D)

soooooo.......from those possibilities only two of them will result in losses...(the last two)......

see it does get interesting eh ! basically the possibilites are only limited by your imagination and the structure of the game.

Lets see what YOU can come up with ?

andrew93

21-03-2008, 08:54 AM

I haven't put much thought into it for a new system but I was tinkering with the 4-9 game last night. I found a combination where you can get 84% coverage on the 126 combinations using 9 lines. What I can't get past is that it is still only 106 combinations out of 91,390 4-ball combinations, 30 of which will pay a prize. The expected return is what? About $50-$60 x the average number of double-ups? How many times would you have to spend $5 to earn say $70? To be of benefit the technique would have to be combined with another......?

drcspy

21-03-2008, 09:55 AM

well if you are a good programmer try this

generate the 91,390 4:40 combinations then compress em into as FEW AS POSSIBLE 6 number sets and see how many you get.......

another way to do this is to generate the 5000 (approx) 4:20 number combinations then re-combine em into as FEW AS POSSIBLE 6 number groups......ive actually done this MANUALLY some years ago and ended up with .....um......approx 600 groups of 6 numbers maybe you can improve on this ?

cause if you play all 40 numbers by splitting them into two groups of 20 and ensure that you have covered all the 4:20's within your game then you MUST win a prize (or perhaps several due to double ups').......

andrew93

21-03-2008, 11:38 AM

Ah - I see what you are saying. By splitting the numbers into two, and given there are 7 possible numbers that can give you a 4-ball prize, then at least one half has to have at least 4 numbers and hence a prize. Interesting. But I'm still looking at the expected return versus the investment aspect.....but it is a good way of managing your odds and avoiding having your odds managed for you by the Lotteries Commission through number distribution. I will have a quick look at writing something to work out the combos.

KenESmith

21-03-2008, 06:03 PM

Look at the lower dividends, then roughly calculate the cost of ensuring a 4 number win -

Is not the objective to come out ahead. not to have a winning combination at a significant financial loss.

I can remember a friend of mine who is a senior lecturer in statistics making the comment that no professional statistician would buy a lotto ticket.

If one must gamble take horse racing, in most races the odds can be dramatically reduced as a fair percentage of the field are outsiders, but about only 65 cents of every dollar wagered is returned as part of the dividends, so even on swings and roundabouts it is hard to break even - betting on horse racing has produced more paupers than rich men.

I had a colleague who was a racing fanatic,he was always going on about the $30,000 trifecta he had won, but for a man in his fifties who had always been paid a salary well above the average, he had very little in the way of material possessions compared to most people of his age.

There is no such thing as a free meal.

drcspy

21-03-2008, 06:34 PM

Look at the lower dividends, then roughly calculate the cost of ensuring a 4 number win -

Is not the objective to come out ahead. not to have a winning combination at a significant financial loss.

no one here is stating anything otherwise so what's your point ? Have you actually READ this thread ?

lottogeek

22-03-2008, 09:36 AM

Ah - I see what you are saying. By splitting the numbers into two, and given there are 7 possible numbers that can give you a 4-ball prize, then at least one half has to have at least 4 numbers and hence a prize. Interesting. But I'm still looking at the expected return versus the investment aspect.....but it is a good way of managing your odds and avoiding having your odds managed for you by the Lotteries Commission through number distribution. I will have a quick look at writing something to work out the combos.

Thanks drcspy and andrew. You are now getting very close to answering my initial question!!! Andrew I have calculated the "investment return" you mention. It's as follows and is based on historical prize values:

If you cover all 4 number combos and can squeeze them into 6 number lines without any double-ups then it will cost $3655.56 (6092.6 lines)

Now if you do this you will have the following odds of winning each division:

Div 6 = 20 definite

Div 5 = 15 definite

Div 4 = 1 in 1.27268 = 0.78574

Div 3 = 1 in 3.18186 = 0.31428

Div 2 = 1 in 105 = 0.00952

Div 1 = 1 in 630 = 0.00159

If you add these up by mulitplying the number of prizes by the historical prize values (I only went back 10 draws) you get a total prize of $2901. You have to split this number though into definite and probable. Definite (Div 5 & 6) is $967 and the remainder is just playing the odds. Having said that, your investment return if you play for a million years will be pretty close to:

(3655.56-2901)/3655.56 = 0.21% loss

And that is why statisticians don't play lotto!!!!

:clap

drcspy

22-03-2008, 09:56 AM

ah......but theres probabilities and possibilities

assuming your maths is correct the probability is as you've stated

It's the possibilities that bring the excitement !

andrew93

22-03-2008, 10:20 AM

Some fair points - although you can't avoid double-ups so to get the coverage you would have to spend an additional x% - say 25-40%? Although you don't need statistics to prove you will lose because once the Lotteries Commission deducts say 40% or whatever for community grants and administration then in the long run (if you conform to the odds and probabilities) you can expect to be down 40%.

Drcspy has shown a way of managing your odds to reduce the cost of covering more number combinations while lowering the expectation of the prize won. It doesn't increase the probability of winning - it merely reduces the cost.

drcspy

22-03-2008, 10:32 AM

Drcspy has shown a way of managing your odds to reduce the cost of covering more number combinations while lowering the expectation of the prize won. It doesn't increase the probability of winning - it merely reduces the cost.

yep thanks but beg to differ

dependant on your playing stategy you can indeed increase the chance of a win....as you say your self

educe the cost of covering more number combinations

obviously the more number combinations you cover the greater your chance of getting some winning numbers within those combinations ? And if you have/had a set budget and you were not aware of systems and methodoligies of play such as those I have developed then your odds of winning would be increased if (using the same budget) you acquired those systems and used them.

EX-WESTY

22-03-2008, 01:48 PM

So has anybody got the winnings numbers for tonight's draw? :drool

I'd especially like the power ball number. TIA

wratterus

22-03-2008, 02:46 PM

Yep, send me a PM with the winning numbers, I'll let you have 20%. :p

drcspy

22-03-2008, 03:32 PM

cool I'll PM ya right after 8pm !:D

Sweep

22-03-2008, 03:48 PM

cool I'll PM ya right after 8pm !:D

All you have to have is the newspaper printed tomorrow.

It would be sad to see your obituary printed there as well.

drcspy

22-03-2008, 04:51 PM

It would be sad to see your obituary printed there as well.

I totally agree but dont see the relevance to this thread or anything else for that matter ??

Muzzargh

17-02-2009, 10:26 PM

WRONG.........

as I stated earlier heres an example

lotto 9 combo (i'll use the 'old' prices here it's easier for me to remember)

$42 = play ONE group of 9 numbers

Use MY budget 9 combo game

$6 = play ONE group of 9 numbers.....same odds of winning A prize (might be a smaller prize though)

now imagine your budget is $42 per week

what you gonna do ?........play ONE 9 number combo for $42 or play SEVEN 9 number 'budget combo' games for the same cost ?........

it's VERY obvious that for the same cost playin SEVEN different groups of 9 numbers is going to give you a MUCH better chance of winning...

the bottom line is that if you get smart and play 'budget' systems you can indeed increase your chances of winning yet at the same time lose LESS should you not get a prize.........so does that cover it ?......

Dont gamble your plan - Plan your gamble

But if you play a 9 ball combo for $42 and the 6 drawn numbers are in that 9 you WILL win 1st division.

Muzzargh

17-02-2009, 10:27 PM

Bottom line is if you are aiming at the top prize you have to buy more lines.

Muzzargh

17-02-2009, 10:31 PM

Some interesting Lotto facts:

http://www.shareamillion.co.nz/slotto/interesting-facts.html

if we had some bread we could have bread and cheese, if we had some cheese.

drcspy

18-02-2009, 03:10 AM

Muzzargh. I dont disagree at all however I DO re-iterate the following bearing in mind that the odds are always stacked against you (that's how gambling works) and the chances of winning are much lower than the chances of losing, and even then the chances of winning BIG are FAR lower than the chances of losing also:

what you gonna do ?........play ONE 9 number combo for $42 or play SEVEN 9 number 'budget combo' games for the same cost ?........

it's VERY obvious that for the same cost playin SEVEN different groups of 9 numbers is going to give you a MUCH better chance of winning...

the bottom line is that if you get smart and play 'budget' systems you can indeed increase your chances of winning yet at the same time lose LESS should you not get a prize

tutaenui

18-02-2009, 07:50 PM

Don't buy any tickets and you win six bucks every week!

How the devisers of these fancy "can't lose" systems can spare the time from banking their winnings to post here astounds me ;)

Digby

19-02-2009, 06:09 AM

I gave up on Lotto years ago.

If you buy a lucky dip every week fro a while, just look at the low number of circles you put on each ticket. So how are you EVER going to get 5 or 6 on one line ?

I don't like their rules

And I did not like the way the changed the number of powerballs from 8 to 10 without telling anyone.

I do have one small tip. If you want to go for that number at the bottom of your ticket, you are better to buy several small tickets than one lucky dip. So you get two or three more chances of winning. Now THAT IS A FACT !

Well, go to a remote small town in NZ and buy a ticket from there. From memory, small towns stand a better chance in winning. Don't as me why.

roddy_boy

19-02-2009, 11:17 PM

Are you having a laugh?

Gobe1

20-02-2009, 11:22 AM

Dont bother at all, save your $20 each week and buy you self something nice each year

Lotto is rigged, just like Survivior!

They know what numbers are going to come out before the program is run

prefect

20-02-2009, 11:38 AM

How could Survivor be rigged? They vote people out at every tribal and there are surprises when people get blind sided.

Another Elvis is still alive, Princess Dis driver was jober as a sudge, 911 was CIA plot,

Lady dried cat out in microwave, Harold Holt taken away in Soviet submarine.

Christ whats next in the conspiracy theories.

pctek

20-02-2009, 01:22 PM

Don't buy any tickets and you win six bucks every week!

I do that.

And my numbers haven't ever come up.

I've saved heaps.

:thumbs:

Gobe1

20-02-2009, 02:17 PM

How could Survivor be rigged? They vote people out at every tribal and there are surprises when people get blind sided.

Another Elvis is still alive, Princess Dis driver was jober as a sudge, 911 was CIA plot,

Lady dried cat out in microwave, Harold Holt taken away in Soviet submarine.

Christ whats next in the conspiracy theories.

Nice ones, you were meant to ask how the hell they rig lotto, probably would be easier than rigging Survivor.

I was watching lotto about 5 years ago and Hillary (:drool) was calling the numbers out when number 21 came out she said "12" but then corrected herself straight after. Guess what the next number was!!! You can say coiincendence but what would be the odds of that? :2cents:

And survivor - why do you never see any cameras? Because they are all paid actors??? hmmmm

Rob99

20-02-2009, 02:44 PM

I was watching lotto about 5 years ago and Hillary (:drool) was calling the numbers out when number 21 came out she said "12" but then corrected herself straight after. Guess what the next number was!!! You can say coiincendence but what would be the odds of that? :2cents:

Less than 1 in 40

Gobe1

20-02-2009, 03:05 PM

Less than 1 in 40

:thumbs: shot bro

Twelvevolts

20-02-2009, 06:52 PM

Well Derren Brown got six straight winners in horse racing using "The system"", so I reckon if anyone can swing the lotto odds it is him.

Otherwise - lotto tickets are generally a waste of money.

Muzzargh

20-02-2009, 08:41 PM

Muzzargh. I dont disagree at all however I DO re-iterate the following bearing in mind that the odds are always stacked against you (that's how gambling works) and the chances of winning are much lower than the chances of losing, and even then the chances of winning BIG are FAR lower than the chances of losing also:

It's hard enough getting 6 numbers out of a list of 20 let alone 9. If I could get 6 out of 9 I would want to get 1st div not just 5th or 6th.

Muzzargh

20-02-2009, 08:47 PM

Are you having a laugh?

Who? and What do you mean?

Muzzargh

25-02-2009, 10:37 PM

I’ve been thinking about patterns within a random process and have decided that there are none, that’s why they call it random. Then I was thinking about a coin toss having a 50/50 chance of being “heads” or “tails”. If you toss a coin 1000 times you will get pretty close to 500 heads and 500 tails. I don’t know what the proper word is for it yet but I think it’s called probability. So if you have tossed a coin 1000 times and you have 490 heads and 510 tails, and although the chance of getting a head or tail in the next toss is 50/50 the “probability” must slightly favour getting a head?

johcar

25-02-2009, 11:09 PM

I’ve been thinking about patterns within a random process and have decided that there are none, that’s why they call it random. Then I was thinking about a coin toss having a 50/50 chance of being “heads” or “tails”. If you toss a coin 1000 times you will get pretty close to 500 heads and 500 tails. I don’t know what the proper word is for it yet but I think it’s called probability. So if you have tossed a coin 1000 times and you have 490 heads and 510 tails, and although the chance of getting a head or tail in the next toss is 50/50 the “probability” must slightly favour getting a head?

No - it's still 50:50. Every time.

Lotteries are for the mathematically-challenged...

Muzzargh

02-03-2009, 09:34 PM

Yes, the Chance is 50/50 as I said, I'm talking about Probability.

roddy_boy

02-03-2009, 09:42 PM

You don't even know what you're talking about.

For a fair coin, p(H) = p(T) = 0.5

It doesn't matter how many times you've tossed it before and what it's landed on. It's still a 50% chance. Or, the probability of flipping tails is 50%. (Seeing as you seem to think using a different word will somehow influence the coin.)

Muzzargh

05-03-2009, 10:38 PM

The Law of Large Numbers

If a trial (such a play of a game of chance) is repeated many times, then the more times the trial is repeated, the more likely it is that the frequency of any particular event will be close to the probability of that event. For example, if we flip our coin many times, the more times we flip it, the more likely it is that the the number of "heads" divided by the total number of tosses will be close to 1/2. This may be taken as the definition of probability, or it can be taken as a theorem, in which case it is called the Law of Large Numbers.

I guess these guys don't know what they are talking about either?

roddy_boy

06-03-2009, 01:28 AM

Lol diaf. If you've flipped a coin 1000 times (not that large of a number), and flipped 510 heads and 490 tails, then the proportion of heads flipped is 0.51.

If we were to carry on, and this was just the first 1000 flips of 10000 to be done, and we end up flipping 50/50, then we would have 5010 heads and 4990 tails, giving us a proportion of heads flipped as being 0.501, which is close to 0.5 for all intents and purposes.

What you are (unsuccessfully) trying to argue, is that the coin has some sort of memory of what side it has landed on previously, so will try to counteract that on the next flip. Coins don't remember ****.

Muzzargh

06-03-2009, 03:31 AM

It's not about the coin (or whatever you use) it's about the result. 1000 was just a figure, use 10000 or even 1000000 it doesn't matter, but can you explain why the results will always tend towards a 50/50 split?

Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2017 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.