To Colin Fairbrother,
Stig Holmquist
recreational.
Remember the old ditty: love and marriage go together like horse and
carriage. You should team up with your buddy Saliu and form your own
lotto site. It would be like a match made in heaven. Together you
think you know everything worth knowing about lottto. You're like a
pair of peas in a pod. People would abandon LP and join you to read
your daily Frick and Frack exchanges, almost like a Dog and Poney
show, one yapping and the othe braying. Go to it.
Stig Holmquist
Colin Fairbrother
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.lottery/msg/119a270efa842f0c
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.math.recreational/msg/b2dc371f8d16...
Poor Stig - all those years of pondering Standard Deviation in
irrelevant Lotto draw histories since the late 90's shot down in
flames. Maybe Hari Kari with a blunt bread and butter knife - you do
like to prolong the agony!
Stig Holmquist
The only poverty is in your mind, that is unable to appreciate the
mathematical nature of lotto. Winning money is not the only reason for
looking at lotto numbers, which in themselves can be interesting.
Colin Fairbrother
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:51:28 -0800 (PST), Colin Fairbrother
>
Stig
Here is a bit of life advice and a reiteration of the fundamentals of
Lotto number analysis.
You can be a good Sumo wrestler but don't even dream about being a
race jockey. In your case one is being kind when describing you as
being just plain thick. That is easily verified by sampling the posts
you have made over some 12 years or more, most basically harping on
applying Standard Deviation to Lotto number analysis. What I'm saying
Stig is that you have no penchant for mathematics and I suggest you
stick to playing dominoes or drafts etc as a pastime. For you to go
into a math usenet group and try to lecture and abuse professional
mathematicians is not only delusional but decidedly lacking in the
most common of courtesies.
It has been pointed out to you Stig by John Griffin, myself and others
that the numbers have no magnitude - they are just identifiers. To
ascribe magnitude to Lotto numbers is the stuff of numerologists - it
is simply not valid. If you want to see if there is any useful
correlation between occurrence calculations on Lotto identifiers and
numerology stuff, that is fine, but you soon find there isn't. The
fundamental error you make which makes it difficult for a rational
person to follow you is that you interchange these measurements as if
they were compatible.
Just accept that an obsession you had in life for far too long is
over - move on - the possibility is if you don't put it behind you
then you will end up in a mental asylum (seriously) persistently
asking the other inmates, "What is the Standard Deviation for
trajectories in a human adult male when pissing into a force 8 gale."
Colin Fairbrother
Stig Holmquist
The RGL number cruncher Harry has just derived the position mean and
variance for any n/N lotto. Check at alt.math.recreational.
Stig
Nick UK
"Colin Fairbrother" <colin.fa...@gmail.com> wrote
> "What is the Standard Deviation for trajectories in a
> human adult male when pissing into a force 8 gale."
It is a mathematical certainty that the 'standard deviation' of trajectories
for those on the outside of a force 8 gale.. pissing in, is favourable to
the 'standard deviation' of trajectories for those on the inside of the same
force 8 gale.. pissing out!
Question for RGL lotto-campers: is it better to be outside the tent..
pissing in, than it is to be inside the tent.. pissing out?
Stig Holmquist
<stigf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I seem to have misidentified the poster. It's Henry, not Harry.
Thus there are a few of us who find lotto numbers interesting as
mathematical problems.
Stig
Stig Holmquist
Every keystroke you make oozes and reeks with ignorance, incompetece,
narrowmindedness, intolerance and stupidity. If you are a
mathematician you are a disgrace to the profession. Your own lotto
website is a testimony to your standing. Pissing and moaning seems to
be all you can do. Get a life shithead.
Stig Holmquist
nigel
> Winning money is not the only reason for
> looking at lotto numbers, which in themselves can be interesting.
The carrot of winning money and the stick of losing money is one hell of
an incentive to find something which works, though.
That's why hedge fund computer models work better than climate change
computer models :)
Evil Nigel
Nick UK
> Question for RGL lotto-campers: is it better to be outside the tent..
> pissing in, than it is to be inside the tent.. pissing out?
Colin Fairbrother, aka 'Professor Pisspot' replied..
> No matter what protestations, any reasonable observer is going to
> conclude after the event that the pisser pissed his pants and the
> standard deviation from that is zero.
>
> Regarding camp pissing providing the tent has an exit on the lee side
> of the wind it is definitely better to piss out but if another tent is
> struck nearby then the occupants may not enjoy either the spectacle or
> the spray.
>
> This is only conjecture on my part. However, of interest is the fact
> that those in diving suits, whether male or female and in need of a
> piss have no alternative to letting it run down their legs. Also in
> passing one of the sacred male pleasures in life is the sheer joy of a
> piss after nearly busting to go synchronized with an explosive fart
> with an emission speed of at least force 9. Women in general are
> incapable of mimicking this male feat and are embarrassed rather than
> totally satisfied as are men.
...........................................
Bw..ahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
Stig Holmquist
<stigf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Long time, no see. What happened? Did you get writer's block or
cramps. Did you run out of crap to write or did you piss it all away
in the wind, as seems to be your recent MO?
Come to think of it, your new title Prof. Pisspot is a bit unfair,
brother. A better moniker would be Colin the Windpiss. Tha't how I'll
address you next time.
Let me repeat my idea you pair up with Saliu. You would make a fine
modern Bobbsey Twins set. One would not be able to tell you apart.
Have a good day,
Stig
Colin Fairbrother
attributing magnitude to the identifying objects in say a 6/49 game it
is better to play a line that sums to 150. This myth as espoused by
the likes of Gail Howard was totally debunked by me March 11, 2005.
http://lottoposter.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=143
Recently, I discovered that Mike H in June 1995 had done an analysis
in this very usenet group
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.gambling.lottery/browse_thread/thread/b6c09bfd28c74ed0/1c922a05a894894?q=group:rec.gambling.lottery
Basically, in my analysis I show that the count of lines that sum to
whatever figure of the 259 possible sums appear in Lotto draws
proportional to how they appear in the 13,983.816 possibilities. No
advantage is gained.
If you consider the Standard Deviation per column attributing
magnitude to the identifiers for a set of lines each of which sums to
150 then nothing much has changed. The important point to keep in mind
is that what you are measuring is the deviation from a value per
column when placed in numerical order and this is reasonably
consistent with these values as derived from all 13,983,816
possibilities
Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6
5.74 7.41 8.11 8.11 7.41 5.74
It is however totally useless being no more than an expected result
after putting the integers in numerical order. Consider 120 South
African draws where the integers are presented in the order drawn
giving the following Standard deviations per column
Col 1 Col 2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6
14.91 13.58 14.06 13.52 14.24 15.00
Around the world you will find most Lotto sites provide information on
absence (recency) and occurrence (frequency) for the Lotto integers
per game over recent draws. While this information is irrelevant as
far as what integers will come up in the next draw it is valid
statistical information. Attributing magnitude to the integers
achieves nothing and while the calculation itself can be correct and
you can analyzed it, the irrelevance remains the same and it is really
the stuff of numerologists.
Colin Fairbrother
nigel
Evil Nigel
Jack Ricci
"Nick UK" <lotto_y...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:EIILm.24024$232....@newsfe22.ams2...
...I always rent fancy rooms at the Hilton...They have nice toilets there...
LottoHackJack
Nick UK
Jack Ricci wrote
>
> ...I always rent fancy rooms at the Hilton...They have nice toilets
> there...
>
> LottoHackJack
>
Boudoir for a few months and Sheriff 'Buffalo Bob' Perkis hasn't received
Evil Niggle's CV. So it looks like you Jacko (with a keen eye for nice
toilets) could be the next candidate for the vacant Lotto Plumber's post.
And 'er, could you like, kinda hurry with your application, the place is
starting to stink!
Colin Fairbrother
I have to admit that I have wondered about Stig for a long time. I
seem to recall even Toddikins got upset with him years ago. The
problem is that there appears to be two people who post under the same
name and they know each other. One is definitely stupid - I mean
really stupid. Is it the father covering for the son or the other way
round.
Is this the Stig we know?
http://www.microtopia.ca/bridge/openHCP.html
No, I'm not making it up - I have actually wondered about it for
years. How many Stigs are there?
Colin
Stig Holmquist
Are you the Colin the Windpisser, who runs Lotto Poster, that nobody
cares to visit, so you came over here to dump your crap, because you
are not welcome at LP to spread your shit? Just wondering
nigel
> No, I'm not making it up - I have actually wondered about it for
> years. How many Stigs are there?
>
> Colin
>
The producers of 'Top Gear' are allegedly extremely keen not to reveal
the identity of The Stig or Stigs.
Colin Fairbrother
unfortunate and deserving of sympathy and his posts over some 14 years
are by one person then the only explanation to explain the huge
difference between those that are reasonably lucid and intelligent and
those of a blithering idiot is that he gets totally pissed! I mean
blotto as in totally whacked out. Obviously, the next day he has no
recollection of asking the same boring question and especially of
having asked it some 1000 times before that!
All those years of searching for a Standard Deviation (SD) magic
formula which sometimes referred to occurrence and other times
referred to attributing magnitude to the integers like a good
numerologist. So what does this formula do? Well, if you have say 49
draws presented in drawn order as the South African Lottery does and
do a SD for each column you find it is pretty close to the SD for the
series 1 2 3 ... 47 48 49 which is 14.29 Now, if you calculate the
SDs per column as enumerated lexicographically for all 13,983,816
possibilities you have the following: -
Col 1: 5.74
Col 2: 7.41
Col 3: 8.11
Col 4: 8.11
Col 5: 7.41
Col 6: 5.74
If you managed to make it past primary school you should be able to
come up with the following conversion factors:
Col 1 and 6: 0.4017
Col 2 and 5 0.5185
Col 3 and 4: 0.5675
This means you can do your SDs on the South African lotto tables and
apply the conversion factors to get the equivalent results for the
lines presented in numerical order. The reason for wanting to do this
escapes me and as Stig didn't know until I told him that the South
African draws are presented in drawn order I doubt whether he can.
As an alternative to measuring the randomness of a Lotto game I doubt
whether it will catch on due to lack of drawn order data etc but let's
give it a name and call it the Stigexcrement test.
A fuller treatment with extra tables may be viewed here: -
(Warning: Common sense and rational thinking may contribute to the
severity of a hangover headache for blood/alcohol readings in excess
of 3.89.)
http://lottoposter.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=90
So the long search is over. The holy grail and magic elixir have been
found. Of course you may dismiss them as being some quaint and totally
forgettable conversion factors about as relevant to useful Lotto
analysis as walking on hot coals while doing the Michael Jackson moon
walk.
Colin Fairbrother
Stig Holmquist
You need to adopt the acronym KISS, which in you case stands for :
Keep It Simple, Shithead.
One of the Stigs
Colin Fairbrother
The coup de gras is that removing 11 or 39 from the sequence 1, 2,
3 ..., 49 still gives the same Standard Deviation of 14.29.
Full details: -
http://lottoposter.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=90
Colin Fairbrother