Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
How many lines need to be inferred to validly claim a prize from 20 numbers posted in a 6/49 Lotto game.
132 views
Skip to first unread message
Colin Fairbrother
May 11, 2012, 12:48:25 AM5/11/12
to
A participant in this newsgroup has since 14th March been posting 20
numbers for the Ontario 6/49 Lotto game. As previously mentioned their
is little rhyme or reason behind him doing so apart from attention
seeking and I assume a desire to be further up the pole in useless
posts as he is now third at 3829 and would like to get to 5563 or
more.
He does not provide a progress score but does give the winning number.
Just to inject a bit of realism into this charade if he is to claim a
CombThree prize for three of his numbers being correct then he is
playing a C(20,6,3,3)=72 ie 72 lines. If claiming a CombFour prize he
needs to be playing a C(20,6,4,4)=400 ie 400 lines.
Now, the question is will this idiot work out his progress score and
show us how bad or good he is doing?
For the 3if3 he has played 1296 lines and for the 4if4 7200 lines.
Using UK ticket costs and payouts he should have got for the 3if3
about 23 CombThrees and 1 CombFour. For the 4if4 he should have got
around 126 CombThrees and 7 CombFours.
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
numbers for the Ontario 6/49 Lotto game. As previously mentioned their
is little rhyme or reason behind him doing so apart from attention
seeking and I assume a desire to be further up the pole in useless
posts as he is now third at 3829 and would like to get to 5563 or
more.
He does not provide a progress score but does give the winning number.
Just to inject a bit of realism into this charade if he is to claim a
CombThree prize for three of his numbers being correct then he is
playing a C(20,6,3,3)=72 ie 72 lines. If claiming a CombFour prize he
needs to be playing a C(20,6,4,4)=400 ie 400 lines.
Now, the question is will this idiot work out his progress score and
show us how bad or good he is doing?
For the 3if3 he has played 1296 lines and for the 4if4 7200 lines.
Using UK ticket costs and payouts he should have got for the 3if3
about 23 CombThrees and 1 CombFour. For the 4if4 he should have got
around 126 CombThrees and 7 CombFours.
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
PlayLotteryOnline.org
May 12, 2012, 4:19:04 PM5/12/12
to
I found your post really interesting, check more strategies at http://www.playlotteryonline.org
Shay Ronen
May 12, 2012, 4:15:22 PM5/12/12
to
I found your post really intersteing, how did you calculate this
interesting statistics
I have found few interesting lottery strategies in http://www.playlotteryonline.org
about lottery statitics as well.
but they have never had such a comprehensive strategy as you posted.
Bravo
interesting statistics
I have found few interesting lottery strategies in http://www.playlotteryonline.org
about lottery statitics as well.
but they have never had such a comprehensive strategy as you posted.
Bravo
nigel
May 14, 2012, 6:38:50 PM5/14/12
to
Colin Fairbrother wrote:
> A participant in this newsgroup has since 14th March been posting 20
> numbers for the Ontario 6/49 Lotto game.
What a coincidence. That must be about the sort of time I started
> A participant in this newsgroup has since 14th March been posting 20
> numbers for the Ontario 6/49 Lotto game.
posting forecasts for the Canada 6/49 lottery.
I'm not getting the Ontario 6/49 posts so I guess the perp must be
posting using Google Groups - there's an intermittent bug which stops
them being propagated to other news servers.
> As previously mentioned their
> is little rhyme or reason behind him doing so apart from attention
> seeking and I assume a desire to be further up the pole in useless
> posts as he is now third at 3829 and would like to get to 5563 or
> more.
>
> He does not provide a progress score but does give the winning number.
> Just to inject a bit of realism into this charade if he is to claim a
> CombThree prize for three of his numbers being correct then he is
> playing a C(20,6,3,3)=72 ie 72 lines. If claiming a CombFour prize he
> needs to be playing a C(20,6,4,4)=400 ie 400 lines.
>
> Now, the question is will this idiot work out his progress score and
> show us how bad or good he is doing?
statistically significantly different from expectation.
>
> For the 3if3 he has played 1296 lines and for the 4if4 7200 lines.
> Using UK ticket costs and payouts he should have got for the 3if3
> about 23 CombThrees and 1 CombFour. For the 4if4 he should have got
> around 126 CombThrees and 7 CombFours.
>
> Colin Fairbrother
> http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
May 14, 2012, 8:07:44 PM5/14/12
to
What the idiot doesn't want to acknowledge even though it has been
pointed out to him before is that if he wants to claim a CombSix prize
for the inferred CombSixes from the 20 numbers posted then he must be
playing 38,760 lines! If less than that then the relevant Cover for
the minimum number of lines is below and the details for Coverage and
Yield for those with a faint whiff of credibility by this Walter Mitty
can be viewed here - http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Getting six numbers correct:
C(20,6,5,6)=845
C(20,6,4,6)=66
C(20,6,3,6)=10
Getting five numbers correct:
C(20,6,5,5)=15504
C(20,6,4,5)=142
C(20,6,3,5)=18
Getting four numbers correct:
C(20,6,4,4)=386
C(20,6,3,4)=35
Getting three numbers correct:
C(20,6,3,3)=71
In the absence of enumerating the lines played for each draw will the
idiot now tell us what cover he is playing and the results or in his
usual style is this just another expression of his idiocy as in a
mental asylum patient attributing meaning to a repetitive meaningless
act.
Colin fairbrother
pointed out to him before is that if he wants to claim a CombSix prize
for the inferred CombSixes from the 20 numbers posted then he must be
playing 38,760 lines! If less than that then the relevant Cover for
the minimum number of lines is below and the details for Coverage and
Yield for those with a faint whiff of credibility by this Walter Mitty
can be viewed here - http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Getting six numbers correct:
C(20,6,5,6)=845
C(20,6,4,6)=66
C(20,6,3,6)=10
Getting five numbers correct:
C(20,6,5,5)=15504
C(20,6,4,5)=142
C(20,6,3,5)=18
Getting four numbers correct:
C(20,6,4,4)=386
C(20,6,3,4)=35
Getting three numbers correct:
C(20,6,3,3)=71
In the absence of enumerating the lines played for each draw will the
idiot now tell us what cover he is playing and the results or in his
usual style is this just another expression of his idiocy as in a
mental asylum patient attributing meaning to a repetitive meaningless
act.
Colin fairbrother
Colin Fairbrother
May 18, 2012, 9:53:42 AM5/18/12
to
Correction: C(20,6,5,5)=2850
Without enumerating the lines played the bonus number cannot be
claimed and only one win is guaranteed per draw
so only one win can be rightfully claimed.
.
So, for an outlay of £45,600 for 45,600 plays over 16 draws using UK
ticket costs and payouts only a measly £3,242
can be claimed by the idiot as winnings or a 7% return for 2
CombFives, 3 CombFours and 5 CombThrees. A fellow idiot
considers this to be above expectation.
Expected is about 1 CombFive, 44 CombFours and 800 CombThrees giving
£11,976 or 26% for 45,600 plays..
To give 20 numbers without enumerating the lines played is quite
plainly idiocy.
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Without enumerating the lines played the bonus number cannot be
claimed and only one win is guaranteed per draw
so only one win can be rightfully claimed.
.
So, for an outlay of £45,600 for 45,600 plays over 16 draws using UK
ticket costs and payouts only a measly £3,242
can be claimed by the idiot as winnings or a 7% return for 2
CombFives, 3 CombFours and 5 CombThrees. A fellow idiot
considers this to be above expectation.
Expected is about 1 CombFive, 44 CombFours and 800 CombThrees giving
£11,976 or 26% for 45,600 plays..
To give 20 numbers without enumerating the lines played is quite
plainly idiocy.
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
May 18, 2012, 9:03:19 PM5/18/12
to
Obviously, the idiot did not like the result for 4th April where he
only got 1 number correct so he gave fictitious winning numbers ie the
real winning numbers were 18 23 25 26 45 48 with bonus 16 and when he
only got 1 correct again for 12th May he didn't bother posting the
winning numbers which were 04 05 10 34 37 45 with Bonus 7.
The only way you can claim the bonus number for UK payouts is to have
6 numbers correct in a line which means all combinations of six
numbers amounting to 38,760 lines must be played. A 5 + B win at about
£100,000 would be more than canceled out by the six draws with no wins
costing £232,560.
Amending the results we see for 18 draws playing a C(20,6,5,5)=2850
the idiot has outlaid £51,300 for wins of £3,262 without the lines per
draw being given which is only a 6.36% return. A probability
calculation gives 1 CombFive, 50 CombFours and 900 CombThrees expected
or 13312/51300=26% return.
The plain and simple fact is if you just give a pool of numbers then
to take credit for six correct or five plus bonus then all
combinations of 6 integers must be inferred which amounts to playing
38,760 lines per draw. Like I said a 1st class idiot!
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
only got 1 number correct so he gave fictitious winning numbers ie the
real winning numbers were 18 23 25 26 45 48 with bonus 16 and when he
only got 1 correct again for 12th May he didn't bother posting the
winning numbers which were 04 05 10 34 37 45 with Bonus 7.
The only way you can claim the bonus number for UK payouts is to have
6 numbers correct in a line which means all combinations of six
numbers amounting to 38,760 lines must be played. A 5 + B win at about
£100,000 would be more than canceled out by the six draws with no wins
costing £232,560.
Amending the results we see for 18 draws playing a C(20,6,5,5)=2850
the idiot has outlaid £51,300 for wins of £3,262 without the lines per
draw being given which is only a 6.36% return. A probability
calculation gives 1 CombFive, 50 CombFours and 900 CombThrees expected
or 13312/51300=26% return.
The plain and simple fact is if you just give a pool of numbers then
to take credit for six correct or five plus bonus then all
combinations of 6 integers must be inferred which amounts to playing
38,760 lines per draw. Like I said a 1st class idiot!
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
May 19, 2012, 11:28:05 AM5/19/12
to
The idiot and lying rat is now caught out; indeed this evil attention
seeker aka Evil Nigel that postures about knowing and doing things
Lotto related has repeatedly been shown up as a know nothing creep.
His 18 idiotic predictions were for the Canadian National Lotto game
ie 6/49 and can be looked up on any of the provincial web sites
including Ontario - see http://www.olg.ca/lotteries/viewPastNumbers.do
As previously mentioned the results for April 4th ie 18 23 25 26 45 48
Bonus 16 with only 1 main integer match were substituted with 10 23 25
26 45 48 Bonus 16 and when he got just 1 integer match again for May
12th he just couldn't bring himself to post the winning results of 04
05 10 34 37 45 Bonus 07.
Prediction in Lotto is for utter imbeciles. If a set of integers is
given as in the idiot's 20 in a particular order then a method has to
be given to convert to actual 6 integer combinations. In Australia you
can do a System Entry from 7 integers up to 18 and there is no problem
in knowing the combinations as it is all of them for the number of
integers crossed ie System 7 is 7, System 8 is 28 and System 18 is
18,564. Now, when you give 20 integers in a particular order then in
the usual modus operandi a Cover or Wheel needs to be specified.
Because they are isomorphic the guarantee will still apply if the
integers are switched around as specified by a different order of the
integers picked.
This concept of playing has been around since the earliest Lotto games
in Eastern Europe and is currently promoted by the likes of occultist
and numerologist Gail Howard and unbelievably by an actual Professor
of Mathematics, Iliya Bluskov. The nail in the coffin for this method
of play as being better than Random Selections or my method of a
partial 3if3 maximized for 3if6 coverage and using all integers is
given in the table at -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
seeker aka Evil Nigel that postures about knowing and doing things
Lotto related has repeatedly been shown up as a know nothing creep.
His 18 idiotic predictions were for the Canadian National Lotto game
ie 6/49 and can be looked up on any of the provincial web sites
including Ontario - see http://www.olg.ca/lotteries/viewPastNumbers.do
As previously mentioned the results for April 4th ie 18 23 25 26 45 48
Bonus 16 with only 1 main integer match were substituted with 10 23 25
26 45 48 Bonus 16 and when he got just 1 integer match again for May
12th he just couldn't bring himself to post the winning results of 04
05 10 34 37 45 Bonus 07.
Prediction in Lotto is for utter imbeciles. If a set of integers is
given as in the idiot's 20 in a particular order then a method has to
be given to convert to actual 6 integer combinations. In Australia you
can do a System Entry from 7 integers up to 18 and there is no problem
in knowing the combinations as it is all of them for the number of
integers crossed ie System 7 is 7, System 8 is 28 and System 18 is
18,564. Now, when you give 20 integers in a particular order then in
the usual modus operandi a Cover or Wheel needs to be specified.
Because they are isomorphic the guarantee will still apply if the
integers are switched around as specified by a different order of the
integers picked.
This concept of playing has been around since the earliest Lotto games
in Eastern Europe and is currently promoted by the likes of occultist
and numerologist Gail Howard and unbelievably by an actual Professor
of Mathematics, Iliya Bluskov. The nail in the coffin for this method
of play as being better than Random Selections or my method of a
partial 3if3 maximized for 3if6 coverage and using all integers is
given in the table at -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
Parpaluck
May 19, 2012, 12:00:35 PM5/19/12
to
The doctors furloughed you … yet again! They let you off sedation, yet again. Worse, they unleashed you off that straightjacket, yet again! Didn’t they tell you, again and again, that you are in danger to kill yourself when in society at large? You swore, yet again, that you’d be cool-game this time. And, what happens next? You mouhfoam convulsively, yet again, in public places… Look at that delirious speech you bleat! You provided enough of that as study material for students in psychiatry!
We gonna put you back in that straightjacket, for your own safety and for the good of society at large.
Colin Fairbrother
May 19, 2012, 8:23:45 PM5/19/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
SYNOPSIS OF LOTTO CHARLATAN ION SALIU
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/SynopsisOfLottoCharlatanIonSaliu.aspx
THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING AND
PARADOX OR PROBLEM OF N TRIALS IS
PLAGIARISM BY ION SALIU
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/FundamentalFormulaOfGamblingIonSaliuPlagiarism.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/SynopsisOfLottoCharlatanIonSaliu.aspx
THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING AND
PARADOX OR PROBLEM OF N TRIALS IS
PLAGIARISM BY ION SALIU
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/FundamentalFormulaOfGamblingIonSaliuPlagiarism.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
Colin Fairbrother
May 20, 2012, 1:02:47 AM5/20/12
to
To summarize - if supplying 20 numbers in a particular order for the
Pool to play in a 6/49 Lotto game then you need to provide a template
structure which may be a Cover or Wheel with guarantee or simply just
a partial Cover or Wheel. The numbers in the template can then be
transposed according to the ordered list given for each draw in the
same template. A different template will still preserve the guarantee
but could give more wins and without being specified in advance is
open to manipulation.
Supplying just the ordered list and claiming prizes without specifying
the template in advance is simply nonsense.
The notion that a Cover or Wheel for a lesser Pool should be played in
a larger Pool Lotto game does not improve one's chances of success.
The guarantee of a prize for a particular Lotto game using a Cover or
Wheel is by definition for the Pool of numbers used in that game not
for a subset.
For more information refer to the table at -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
Pool to play in a 6/49 Lotto game then you need to provide a template
structure which may be a Cover or Wheel with guarantee or simply just
a partial Cover or Wheel. The numbers in the template can then be
transposed according to the ordered list given for each draw in the
same template. A different template will still preserve the guarantee
but could give more wins and without being specified in advance is
open to manipulation.
Supplying just the ordered list and claiming prizes without specifying
the template in advance is simply nonsense.
The notion that a Cover or Wheel for a lesser Pool should be played in
a larger Pool Lotto game does not improve one's chances of success.
The guarantee of a prize for a particular Lotto game using a Cover or
Wheel is by definition for the Pool of numbers used in that game not
for a subset.
For more information refer to the table at -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
Parpaluck
May 20, 2012, 1:17:46 PM5/20/12
to
What, now? They forcefully shut your ‘lotto compost’ forum down?! That’s a … killer!
Colin Fairbrother
May 20, 2012, 8:25:39 PM5/20/12
to
As an example consider a C(20,6,3,5)=18 Cover template as below: -
01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12
02 05 06 14 15 16
07 08 09 10 13 17
07 08 09 12 13 17
07 08 09 10 12 18
07 08 09 11 13 18
07 08 09 11 17 18
10 11 12 13 17 18
01 02 03 14 15 19
03 04 06 14 16 19
01 04 05 15 16 19
03 04 05 14 15 20
01 02 04 14 16 20
01 03 06 15 16 20
01 05 06 14 19 20
02 04 06 15 19 20
02 03 05 16 19 20
After transposing we get: -
24 25 26 31 33 35
02 07 11 16 17 36
24 26 30 31 37 46
02 06 07 11 36 47
02 06 07 11 17 47
02 07 09 11 17 36
02 07 09 11 16 47
02 06 07 09 11 16
06 09 16 17 36 47
26 30 33 35 40 46
24 25 33 37 40 46
25 30 31 35 37 40
15 25 30 31 33 46
15 25 26 35 37 46
15 24 30 33 35 37
15 24 31 35 40 46
15 24 25 26 30 40
15 26 31 33 37 40
The winning numbers for the Canadian National Lotto game for 17th
March 2012 were 01 02 09 15 17 37 B30 with 5 matches plus the bonus
number from the 20 numbers given of 35 26 33 25 31 24 02 07 11 36 16
17 47 46 30 37 06 09 40 15.
As 5 numbers were correct in the 20 numbers given then the guarantee
means there will be at least one CombThree win which there is on line
6 with 02 09 17.
However, if a template as below had been used
03 04 05 11 12 13
02 06 07 09 17 20
04 05 10 12 15 19
02 07 08 09 16 17
02 07 08 16 17 20
02 07 09 17 18 20
02 06 07 08 17 18
02 06 07 16 17 18
06 08 09 16 18 20
03 05 10 13 14 19
03 04 11 14 15 19
10 11 12 13 14 15
01 03 10 11 12 19
01 05 11 13 15 19
01 03 04 10 13 15
01 04 12 13 14 19
01 04 05 10 11 14
01 03 05 12 14 15
then after transposing we have
16 17 25 31 33 47
02 06 11 15 24 26
17 25 30 31 36 40
02 06 07 11 26 37
02 06 07 15 26 37
02 06 09 11 15 26
02 06 07 09 24 26
02 06 09 24 26 37
07 09 11 15 24 37
31 33 36 40 46 47
16 25 30 33 40 46
16 17 30 36 46 47
16 17 33 35 36 40
16 30 31 35 40 47
25 30 33 35 36 47
17 25 35 40 46 47
16 25 31 35 36 46
17 30 31 33 35 46
We see there 3 CombThree matches: line 5 02 15 37, line 6 02 09 15,
line 8 02 09 37 and line 9 09 15 37
QED
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12
02 05 06 14 15 16
07 08 09 10 13 17
07 08 09 12 13 17
07 08 09 10 12 18
07 08 09 11 13 18
07 08 09 11 17 18
10 11 12 13 17 18
01 02 03 14 15 19
03 04 06 14 16 19
01 04 05 15 16 19
03 04 05 14 15 20
01 02 04 14 16 20
01 03 06 15 16 20
01 05 06 14 19 20
02 04 06 15 19 20
02 03 05 16 19 20
After transposing we get: -
24 25 26 31 33 35
02 07 11 16 17 36
24 26 30 31 37 46
02 06 07 11 36 47
02 06 07 11 17 47
02 07 09 11 17 36
02 07 09 11 16 47
02 06 07 09 11 16
06 09 16 17 36 47
26 30 33 35 40 46
24 25 33 37 40 46
25 30 31 35 37 40
15 25 30 31 33 46
15 25 26 35 37 46
15 24 30 33 35 37
15 24 31 35 40 46
15 24 25 26 30 40
15 26 31 33 37 40
The winning numbers for the Canadian National Lotto game for 17th
March 2012 were 01 02 09 15 17 37 B30 with 5 matches plus the bonus
number from the 20 numbers given of 35 26 33 25 31 24 02 07 11 36 16
17 47 46 30 37 06 09 40 15.
As 5 numbers were correct in the 20 numbers given then the guarantee
means there will be at least one CombThree win which there is on line
6 with 02 09 17.
However, if a template as below had been used
03 04 05 11 12 13
02 06 07 09 17 20
04 05 10 12 15 19
02 07 08 09 16 17
02 07 08 16 17 20
02 07 09 17 18 20
02 06 07 08 17 18
02 06 07 16 17 18
06 08 09 16 18 20
03 05 10 13 14 19
03 04 11 14 15 19
10 11 12 13 14 15
01 03 10 11 12 19
01 05 11 13 15 19
01 03 04 10 13 15
01 04 12 13 14 19
01 04 05 10 11 14
01 03 05 12 14 15
then after transposing we have
16 17 25 31 33 47
02 06 11 15 24 26
17 25 30 31 36 40
02 06 07 11 26 37
02 06 07 15 26 37
02 06 09 11 15 26
02 06 07 09 24 26
02 06 09 24 26 37
07 09 11 15 24 37
31 33 36 40 46 47
16 25 30 33 40 46
16 17 30 36 46 47
16 17 33 35 36 40
16 30 31 35 40 47
25 30 33 35 36 47
17 25 35 40 46 47
16 25 31 35 36 46
17 30 31 33 35 46
We see there 3 CombThree matches: line 5 02 15 37, line 6 02 09 15,
line 8 02 09 37 and line 9 09 15 37
QED
Colin Fairbrother
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
Parpaluck
May 21, 2012, 11:17:51 AM5/21/12
to
All normal persons (sane, that is, not like Zamzalasheep) have known for a decade now the best tool to calculate the odds for pools of lotto numbers. That tool runs online and is totally free:
http://saliu.com/calculator_generator.html
These are the odds (calculated as EXACTLY) for 6/49 lotto and playing a 20-number pool:
~ 0 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 29.44
~ 1 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 5.89
~ 2 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 3.1
~ 3 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 3.36
~ 4 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 7.11
~ 5 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 31.1
~ 6 of 6 in 20 from 49 -> 1 in 360.78
Now, the probability (odds) is one thing, appearance is another thing. Playing a 20-number pool (group) for 361 lotto drawings would make the unassuming … assuming that they get the ‘6 of 6’ winner (jackpot). NOT!
That’s where ‘Ion Saliu’s Paradox’ kicks in. The degree of certainty (“chance”) to get the jackpot in 361 draws is only 63.2%.
Maybe the doctors will have a better than 63.2% chance to cure Zamzalasheep. They might have to try injecting the ‘Ion Saliu’s Paradox’ in Psycholin Zamzalasheep’s skull…
Parpaluck
May 21, 2012, 12:19:16 PM5/21/12
to
‘k of 6 IN 7 in 20 from 49’
The results are increased by a probability factor determined by C (7, 6) = 7 (not necessarily increased 7-fold, but artificially increased nonetheless).
Think about it. Think also about the real difference between the odds (probability) calculated as EXACTLY versus as AT LEAST.
nigel
May 21, 2012, 1:28:05 PM5/21/12
to
I changed the title to deprive the religiously anti-scientific faction
of needless publicity.
Parpaluck wrote:
>
> The original poster, Nigootser, did not make any claims as of success/failure
of his “secret” lotto system. The only problem is he takes into
consideration
the bonus number. The bonus number is valid for one and only one
situation:
‘5 of 6 when there is no 6 of 6 winning ticket’.
Blame Rich - he came up with the WLC format ;)
Evil Nigel
of needless publicity.
Parpaluck wrote:
>
> The original poster, Nigootser, did not make any claims as of success/failure
of his “secret” lotto system. The only problem is he takes into
consideration
the bonus number. The bonus number is valid for one and only one
situation:
‘5 of 6 when there is no 6 of 6 winning ticket’.
Evil Nigel
Colin Fairbrother
May 21, 2012, 8:50:17 PM5/21/12
to
This thread is about the posting of 20 integers for a 6/49 Lotto game
without any structure given for how the CombSixes are enumerated. The
only situation where the information given is sufficient is if playing
all the combinations of six integers which for 20 integers is 38,760
lines an obviously unrealistic number. The integers given are as
stated intended for the Canadian National 6/49 Lotto game and for any
meaningful winnings to be calculated need to be converted into
CombSixes.
As I have stated before the information I provide is intended for the
more intelligent readers in this newsgroup and for those who currently
may have distorted understandings of some concepts in Lotto but are
open to more rational explanations. The writings of some are so
obviously the ramblings of occultists, distortionists, ignoramuses and
just plain nutcases that it can be left to the reader to form that
judgment without explanation or response.
For a 6/49 Lotto game you need to play a set of at least 9 lines to
use all the 49 integers or Pool. However, you could play 9 lines using
just 6 integers by repeating the same line or you could use a Cover or
Wheel which has a structure such that a CombThree prize is guaranteed
if four of the winning integers are in the Pool used of 13 integers or
another structure where a CombThree prize is guaranteed if six of the
winning integers are in the Pool used of 19 integers. You could also
play a set of 9 random numbers or as I recommend use all the 49
integers without repeating a paying CombThree and progressive in that
lines are added based on next best coverage. For a fuller treatment
see http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ConstructingBestLottoCoversOrWheels.aspx
where information is provided to download John Rawson's CoverMaster if
you don't have it. At the site you will find a wealth of information
on Lotto including tables of combinations for different Pools
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/CombinationsPerPoolAndPickForLotto.aspx
and an article on Probability as it relates to Lotto and how to build
your own Probability Calculator http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ProbabilityTheoryForLotto.aspx
If you want to use Covers or Wheels they are freely available for Pick
5 and Pick 6 to copy and paste into your own files from Weef's site
for where the prize or match is different from the required hits at
http://www.weefs-lottosysteme.de/systeme,en.htm After selecting the
Pick just be aware on the next page that in the four or six integer
number given the last two integers are the Pick and the first two or
four are the guarantee in reverse. On the next page you simply scroll
to the relevant Pool. So, for C(13,6,3,4)=9 you select Pick 6 then
4306 for a 3if4 guarantee and then scroll down to a v or Pool of 13.
For Covers or Wheels where the prize or match is the same they are
available free at http://www.ccrwest.org/cover.html where v is the
Pool, k is the Pick and t is both the prize/match is the same as the
hits required.
Playing 9 lines over 1000 plays or 111 draws and using 49 integers, a
Pool 13 3if4 Cover or Pool 19 3if6 or random selections gives a
calculated 22.6 Yield or Percentage Return for all but the
C(19,6,3,6)=9 which is 20.6 using UK ticket costs, wins and payouts.
See http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
From the table it is seen that rather than enhancing your chances of
success the Covers or Wheels that are generally promoted actually
reduce them. Of course for the occultist, numerologist predictionists
this is more than outweighed by their presumed and nonsensical ability
to say that some integers are more likely in the next draw than
others.
Colin Fairbrother
without any structure given for how the CombSixes are enumerated. The
only situation where the information given is sufficient is if playing
all the combinations of six integers which for 20 integers is 38,760
lines an obviously unrealistic number. The integers given are as
stated intended for the Canadian National 6/49 Lotto game and for any
meaningful winnings to be calculated need to be converted into
CombSixes.
As I have stated before the information I provide is intended for the
more intelligent readers in this newsgroup and for those who currently
may have distorted understandings of some concepts in Lotto but are
open to more rational explanations. The writings of some are so
obviously the ramblings of occultists, distortionists, ignoramuses and
just plain nutcases that it can be left to the reader to form that
judgment without explanation or response.
For a 6/49 Lotto game you need to play a set of at least 9 lines to
use all the 49 integers or Pool. However, you could play 9 lines using
just 6 integers by repeating the same line or you could use a Cover or
Wheel which has a structure such that a CombThree prize is guaranteed
if four of the winning integers are in the Pool used of 13 integers or
another structure where a CombThree prize is guaranteed if six of the
winning integers are in the Pool used of 19 integers. You could also
play a set of 9 random numbers or as I recommend use all the 49
integers without repeating a paying CombThree and progressive in that
lines are added based on next best coverage. For a fuller treatment
see http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ConstructingBestLottoCoversOrWheels.aspx
where information is provided to download John Rawson's CoverMaster if
you don't have it. At the site you will find a wealth of information
on Lotto including tables of combinations for different Pools
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/CombinationsPerPoolAndPickForLotto.aspx
and an article on Probability as it relates to Lotto and how to build
your own Probability Calculator http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ProbabilityTheoryForLotto.aspx
If you want to use Covers or Wheels they are freely available for Pick
5 and Pick 6 to copy and paste into your own files from Weef's site
for where the prize or match is different from the required hits at
http://www.weefs-lottosysteme.de/systeme,en.htm After selecting the
Pick just be aware on the next page that in the four or six integer
number given the last two integers are the Pick and the first two or
four are the guarantee in reverse. On the next page you simply scroll
to the relevant Pool. So, for C(13,6,3,4)=9 you select Pick 6 then
4306 for a 3if4 guarantee and then scroll down to a v or Pool of 13.
For Covers or Wheels where the prize or match is the same they are
available free at http://www.ccrwest.org/cover.html where v is the
Pool, k is the Pick and t is both the prize/match is the same as the
hits required.
Playing 9 lines over 1000 plays or 111 draws and using 49 integers, a
Pool 13 3if4 Cover or Pool 19 3if6 or random selections gives a
calculated 22.6 Yield or Percentage Return for all but the
C(19,6,3,6)=9 which is 20.6 using UK ticket costs, wins and payouts.
See http://www.colinfairbrother.com/UsingLesserPoolCoversInLotto.aspx
From the table it is seen that rather than enhancing your chances of
success the Covers or Wheels that are generally promoted actually
reduce them. Of course for the occultist, numerologist predictionists
this is more than outweighed by their presumed and nonsensical ability
to say that some integers are more likely in the next draw than
others.
Colin Fairbrother
ions...@gmail.com
May 22, 2012, 11:08:54 AM5/22/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Look at that mouthfoaming, bleating delirious speech of this monster of insanity, Psycholin Zamzalasheep! Mental compost at its stingiest PEAK! It hasnothing to do with lottery and numbers — except for repeating some excerpts written by others!
Aberrantly as it sounds, the latest Google Penguin update rewards this type of mental scum, plus piracy and plagiarism! The monster of insanity and his compost rank high on Google searches related to … Ion Saliu!
Psycholin Zamzalasheep: Confined to the madhouse and the stretchjacket … then furloughed due to so-called “improvements” … then confined again … and endlessly … or until self-destruction concludes its natural course. The doctors say that the boy who lived with his parents until he served jail time is not a real danger in the physical world! His cyber insanity is just a nuisance to be easily ignored…
Some normal people might not ignore the pestilential nuisance all the time and kick Zamzalasheep in his tail with authority. The consequences fall squarely on the doctors’ shoulders…
Colin Fairbrother
Oct 13, 2012, 11:57:04 PM10/13/12
to
You need a minimum set of 4 Pick 6 lines to fit 20 integers in with 4 integers repeated. Applying these 4 lines with the repeat integers to a 6/49 Lotto game you can see the odds in John Rawson's free CoverMaster.
See here if you don't have it -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ConstructingBestLottoCoversOrWheels.aspx
Your chances of getting 3 integers correct calculated by dividing all the CombThrees that are possible from the 4 lines (962,072) by all the 13,983.816 CombSix possibilities to give a probability of 0.069 ie in 1,000 plays or 250 draws you can expect 16 matchs.
If we compare this to 4 random selections using the full pool ie all integers different in the 4 lines then we now have 1,040,096 CombSixes covered giving a probability of 0.0744 ie in 1,000 plays or 250 draws one can expect 19 matches.
You don't have to take my word - check it out yourself in CoverMaster. I and many others have confirmed John Rawson's calculations are correct. Most certainly do not take any notice of odds as given by Mr Fake Degree, Ion Saliu.
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/SynopsisOfLottoCharlatanIonSaliu.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
See here if you don't have it -
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/ConstructingBestLottoCoversOrWheels.aspx
Your chances of getting 3 integers correct calculated by dividing all the CombThrees that are possible from the 4 lines (962,072) by all the 13,983.816 CombSix possibilities to give a probability of 0.069 ie in 1,000 plays or 250 draws you can expect 16 matchs.
If we compare this to 4 random selections using the full pool ie all integers different in the 4 lines then we now have 1,040,096 CombSixes covered giving a probability of 0.0744 ie in 1,000 plays or 250 draws one can expect 19 matches.
You don't have to take my word - check it out yourself in CoverMaster. I and many others have confirmed John Rawson's calculations are correct. Most certainly do not take any notice of odds as given by Mr Fake Degree, Ion Saliu.
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/SynopsisOfLottoCharlatanIonSaliu.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
Colin Fairbrother
Oct 24, 2012, 10:17:13 PM10/24/12
to
Apart from the plagiarism of Ion Saliu in laying claim to break throughs in understanding probabality dating back to the 17th century the irony is his understanding is only half baked.
Consider his assertion earlier in this thread where he claims that playing all the combinations of 6 integers for a partial Pool of 20 in a 6/49 Lotto game where the full Pool is 49 will for 361 draws only have a 63.2% chance of ONE Jackpot match. By simple arithmetic multiplying 361 by 158 gives 57,038 draws or 2,210,792,880 plays are required according to fake degree Ion Saliu to be sure of a Jackpot match, which does not accord with reality.
Using integers 1 to 20 for the 38760 combinations of six integers played each draw to the UK 6/49 Lotto game starting from November 19, 1994 we find that there are 4 Jackpot matches at ID's 386, 432, 706 and 1451 giving an average of 363 draws which is pretty close to 13,983,816/38760 ie 361. The 4th appearance is after an absence of 745 draws and multiplying this by 13 to give 9,685 is a long way from 57,038.
See -
http://lottoposter.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=661
Colin Fairbrother
Consider his assertion earlier in this thread where he claims that playing all the combinations of 6 integers for a partial Pool of 20 in a 6/49 Lotto game where the full Pool is 49 will for 361 draws only have a 63.2% chance of ONE Jackpot match. By simple arithmetic multiplying 361 by 158 gives 57,038 draws or 2,210,792,880 plays are required according to fake degree Ion Saliu to be sure of a Jackpot match, which does not accord with reality.
Using integers 1 to 20 for the 38760 combinations of six integers played each draw to the UK 6/49 Lotto game starting from November 19, 1994 we find that there are 4 Jackpot matches at ID's 386, 432, 706 and 1451 giving an average of 363 draws which is pretty close to 13,983,816/38760 ie 361. The 4th appearance is after an absence of 745 draws and multiplying this by 13 to give 9,685 is a long way from 57,038.
See -
THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
Lotto Number Analysis Using Excel, Access and Visual Basic
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
http://lottoposter.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=661
Colin Fairbrother
Colin Fairbrother
Oct 25, 2012, 8:54:16 PM10/25/12
to
Obvious Correction: -
The multiplier to bring 63% up to close to 100% is 1.58 not 158. This
gives 570 draws as being the maximum absence but we see from examining
the UK Lotto we have an absence of 745 draws when playing 20c6 or
38,760 plays per draw, which requires something like 48.6% with a
multiplier of 2.06.
The point is that making glib assertions which are easily disproved by
examining available data is a partiular forte of Ion Saliu.
Using the Monte Carlo factor of 13 it is possible to go as high as
4690 draws without a match but a still rare 3000 draws is more likely.
However, substituting 12% instead of Saliu's 63% requires a factor of
8.3 to get a 4690 draw absence.
The distinction needs to be made between the average occurrence or
frequency of wins which is simply 13,983,816 / 38,760 = 360.78, which
is backed up by the UK average of 363 and the maximum absence between
wins which for the limited UK draws is 745 so far.
See: -
THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
Colin Fairbrother
On Oct 25, 1:17 pm, Colin Fairbrother <colin.fairbrot...@gmail.com>
wrote:
The multiplier to bring 63% up to close to 100% is 1.58 not 158. This
gives 570 draws as being the maximum absence but we see from examining
the UK Lotto we have an absence of 745 draws when playing 20c6 or
38,760 plays per draw, which requires something like 48.6% with a
multiplier of 2.06.
The point is that making glib assertions which are easily disproved by
examining available data is a partiular forte of Ion Saliu.
Using the Monte Carlo factor of 13 it is possible to go as high as
4690 draws without a match but a still rare 3000 draws is more likely.
However, substituting 12% instead of Saliu's 63% requires a factor of
8.3 to get a 4690 draw absence.
The distinction needs to be made between the average occurrence or
frequency of wins which is simply 13,983,816 / 38,760 = 360.78, which
is backed up by the UK average of 363 and the maximum absence between
wins which for the limited UK draws is 745 so far.
See: -
THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLING
http://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGambling.aspx
On Oct 25, 1:17 pm, Colin Fairbrother <colin.fairbrot...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Apart from the plagiarism of Ion Saliu in laying claim to break throughs in understanding probabality dating back to the 17th century the irony is his understanding is only half baked.
>
> Consider his assertion earlier in this thread where he claims that playing all the combinations of 6 integers for a partial Pool of 20 in a 6/49 Lotto game where the full Pool is 49 will for 361 draws only have a 63.2% chance of ONE Jackpot match. By simple arithmetic multiplying 361 by 158 gives 57,038 draws or 2,210,792,880 plays are required according to fake degree Ion Saliu to be sure of a Jackpot match, which does not accord with reality.
>
> Using integers 1 to 20 for the 38760 combinations of six integers played each draw to the UK 6/49 Lotto game starting from November 19, 1994 we find that there are 4 Jackpot matches at ID's 386, 432, 706 and 1451 giving an average of 363 draws which is pretty close to 13,983,816/38760 ie 361. The 4th appearance is after an absence of 745 draws and multiplying this by 13 to give 9,685 is a long way from 57,038.
>
> See -
> THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
> TO THE SO CALLED FUNDAMENTAL FORMULA OF GAMBLINGhttp://www.colinfairbrother.com/IonSaliuandhisFundamentalFormulaOfGam...
>
> Consider his assertion earlier in this thread where he claims that playing all the combinations of 6 integers for a partial Pool of 20 in a 6/49 Lotto game where the full Pool is 49 will for 361 draws only have a 63.2% chance of ONE Jackpot match. By simple arithmetic multiplying 361 by 158 gives 57,038 draws or 2,210,792,880 plays are required according to fake degree Ion Saliu to be sure of a Jackpot match, which does not accord with reality.
>
> Using integers 1 to 20 for the 38760 combinations of six integers played each draw to the UK 6/49 Lotto game starting from November 19, 1994 we find that there are 4 Jackpot matches at ID's 386, 432, 706 and 1451 giving an average of 363 draws which is pretty close to 13,983,816/38760 ie 361. The 4th appearance is after an absence of 745 draws and multiplying this by 13 to give 9,685 is a long way from 57,038.
>
> See -
> THE MADNESS OF ION SALIU AND HIS SPURIOUS CLAIM
0 new messages