EOL's Lottery Tracker & Wheeler
Wasy
committment to lottery information and his occasional suggestion that some
of you take a look at our software, The Lottery Tracker & Wheeler - Power
Player edition. We have been in business since 1986 and we have consistently
refined our software to be the best we can offer. Please visit our website
at www.eol.com and download a trial version of our latest 3.4 release.
If you are unfamiliar with our product, please take a moment to review the
feedback received from our many, many customers...
"I just wanted to let you know that last week I downloaded the new version
of your program and the databases. I used the numbers created and I won
$5,000.00 from the powerball numbers. I had 4 regular numbers and the
powerball. I normally run a straight 6 high and low and had I wheeled the 10
regular numbers I would have won the powerball AND 26 $5,000.00 winners!"
Tom Adamson, Oregon City, OR
"The book and program are by far and away a quantum leap better than the
Steve Player stuff I spent about a year saving for. It is also better than
the Prof Jones stuff I have, the Isaac Nwokogba book called Ea$y Dollar$
(junk) and the video "Winning Lotto/Lottery Strategies" by David Wilhite;
another piece of junk, the Gail Howard book of cookbook wheeling and on and
on... As I said before, your program is the BEST stuff I have seen, and I
have seen a bunch!"
Joe Buck, Tacoma, WA
Topper Wins 1 oz. Gold American Eagle Coin In Big Game Contest!!!
"I've tried several different lottery programs over the last couple of
years, without much success. With PPE I've picked enough winning lottery
numbers to pay for the PPE and Strategy Guide many times over... The Power
Player and Strategy Guide & Program Companion are great tools for selecting
winning lottery numbers."
Keith Turner, Pittsburg, CA - "Topper"
"If this [new software] is as good as your very first version it will be
well worth it as in August, 1991, I used your system to hit the Indiana
Lotto for $1 million."
Richard F. Denny, Greenwood, IN
"As I sit here at my keyboard I have $500 more in my pocket than I did 24
hours ago, and I know you'll be happy to hear that the Lottery Tracker &
Wheeler, Power Player Edition program is the sole reason. I won the daily
Pick 3 last night (7/8/99), with numbers given to me by your program, in a
game I had almost never played before.
Those numbers came straight out of your LTWPPE program, no interpretation
from me needed (really... if I'd changed anything I wouldn't have won). The
program has paid for itself -- and a few of my losing bets -- several times
over with this one win, not to mention renewal of my PPC membership. I'm so
new at this I'm still on the first free month of PPC membership, which I
want to renew. It's definititely worth it."
Alan Godin, San Antonio, TX
"I thought I would let you know that I really like your lottery program.
Just in the first few weeks, I'm winning. I used your program on the
PowerBall, just after 4 weeks I hit all the numbers, but I am using your
abbreviated wheeling program, so I knew we had a good chance to have the
winning ticket. No, I didn't have it, but I had one 4-5 ticket, lots of 3
tickets & the PowerBall with 1 & 2 numbers. Total money won, $213. "Not
Bad". Now I have more good news, I'm a member of your Power Player Club and
have really enjoyed all the information availabe to me. I had read some
helpful hints from some of your lottery hosts and got really interested in
what one had to say about the pick 3 games. I used some of his hints and in
2 weeks of using the program and applying his tips, I've won "3" exact
tickets. That's 3 X $500. You have a satisfied customer here. Six weeks,
$1713 in winnings and still going. Thanks again!"
Robert Downs, Derby, KS
"I bought the "Power Player Strategy Guide & Program Companion" last week
and read it from cover to cover. The proof of the book's worth is in the
results. I came up with a strategy, applied it and hit 13 winning tickets
out of 232 purchased. 1 5of6, 1 4of6 and 11 3of6 for a total of $1,915.00.
Needless to say, the program is great..."
Michael Bonney, El Paso, TX
"I have made $11,000 in the past 24 months using your software!"
Greg Barnes, Orangevale, CA
"I wanted to take a moment to let you know that I`ve read your new book:
'Power Player Strategy Guide and Program Companion'. A ***** (5 star)
rating! I`m working with a lottery strategy now with a much clearer
understanding of the work you [Mr Wadsworth & staff] put into this lotto
program. This is truly the best lotto program and strategy guide that I have
ever used. Working at a high stress job... your top quality lotto program
has given me many hours of stress free enjoyment. I have hit 4 of 5 in the
CO pick 5 lottery many times. My best regards."
M. Upschulte, Edgewater, CO
"Thought you would like to know that your software has been working fine for
me for the past two months. I've had two hits on the New York Take 5 with
4#'s (one for $520.00 and the other for $565.00). There were also quite a
few hits with 3 #'s (averaging $20.00 to $25.00) and multiple hits of 2 #'s
which gives us free tickets for the next Take 5 game. I was one of three
winners for the top prize in Take 5. I won $51,140.00!"
Joseph V. Kelly, Sr., Flushing, NY
"I'd like to express my appreciation of you having developed, what I
consider to be one of the most powerful and utilitarian lottery programs on
the market, and believe me, I have been through my share... and at a very
reasonable cost. ...I won my first Daily 3 winnings of $500.00..."
Frederick Reeves, Los Angeles, CA
"I purchased your Lottery Tracker & Wheeler program, and I must admit that I
was skeptical at first. When I read the testimonials on the back [of the
package box], I said, "Yeah, right." Was I wrong! I have not even won the
smallest prize in years, but I won on my first try with your program! I won
17 out of 22 tickets, 6 of them with 4 numbers each! Thank you again!"
Michael Freed, North Miami Beach, FL
"Best lotto program I've found for the $. Excellent features, easy to use!"
Thomas Wiedeman, Maple Grove, MN
"The best program on the market today!"
Allen Lee, Miami, FL
"So far I've hit two tickets with five numbers, within a five month period!"
Bill McInnis, Jacksonville, FL
"The Complete Lottery Tracker & Wheeler...has produced 48 winning tickets
for a total of $10,485.00. We have matched 1 ticket with 5 numbers, 6
tickets with 4 numbers, and 41 tickets with 3 numbers!"
Allen Beasley, Ozark, AL
"I have 4 other Lotto programs, but this is the one I prefer."
Bob Wing, Bellingham, WA
"I'm overwhelmed at my new lottery program. Words just about cannot express
my delight with my new Lottery Tracker & Wheeler! Thank you!"
Rick Pesek, St. Louis, MO
"Outstanding program for lottos!"
Rollin L. Peek, Titusville, FL
"I won a second place and two third places in the NY54 with your program
($2,599.00)."
Dan Sheugrud, Lafargeville, NY
"Best program out!"
Oliver T. Mayo, Portsmouth, VA
"Only had last 10 drawings in database, $2,000.00 on first play on $12.00
bet. Not bad!"
Harold G. Scott, Lakewood, CA
"Terrific program!"
M.A. Tillinger, Lebanon, PA
"Thanks very much EOL Staff: I like your software a lot. I'll definitely
recommend it to all of my friends. Much Success and thanks again for your
excellent service."
Mario Chavez, San Leonardo, CA
"I just won the CA Decco jackpot after using your program for 2 weeks!
Thanks!"
Lynne Olson, Littlerock, CA
"I bought the software and won 4 days later."
Horace Payne, Chicago, IL
"If you like money, you'll like the Tracker & Wheeler"
Michael Bentkowski, Blasdell, NY
"Love this program! Have won $2,000.00 on IA lottery the day after receiving
the program. And another $30.00 on the very next drawing."
M.L., Burlington, IA
"The first time... had 4 right numbers!!!"
Bill Vangundy, Jr., Commerce City, CO
"An outstanding program!"
Lazaro Fernandez, Miami, FL
"The best software ever made!"
Richard Cunningham, Lauderhill, FL
"Won 2nd prize in IL Pick 6 and 9 3rd prizes in the past 6 months!"
Eric W. Seib, Glen Ellyn, IL
"Excellent program. The best I have used and very friendly, have recommended
to my friends."
Ken Courtney
"Split $2.3 MILLION jackpot in Colorado!"
Gilda Flier, Westminster, CO
"Still not a millionaire but have stayed well ahead!"
H.L. Durall, Moro, OR
"Love it, very helpful!"
H.J. Brissette, Jr., Amelia, VA
"I installed your program in April. Since then I have hit Daily Game number
36 times for various amounts! Thank you!"
Herbert J. Tabachnick, Randolph, MA
"I would like any updates on this product. Note: I won $7,000.00 on my first
try with this program."
Robert L. Flint, Gainesville, FL
"It's a good system. I have won small jackpots."
Richard MacDuff, Kendall, NY
"I have 4 other lottery tracker programs. Yours is so superior I do not even
use the others."
M.L. Roberson, Henderson, NC
"I have been with EOL for years. Great programs. I have won thousands of
dollars. Thanks!!"
Lee Harrison, Bellport, NY
"Program has helped me win $$$ - Thanks!"
Van A Schultz, Bay St. Louis, MS
"As of January, won $850.00. Will let you know when BIG ONE comes in."
John Flanders, Medway, MA
"It's a great program and now with the update - the best tracker I've EVER
used!!"
Shawn Brateng, South Beach, OR
"First purchased EOL product in 1988. Have won over $11,000.00. Very
satisfied!"
Allen Beasley, Ozark, AL
"I have made money off your system. Graphics are clear and easy on the
eyes."
David Willingham, Euclid, OH
"The best program I have used."
Leon Campbell, Austin, IN
"Extremely helpful. Has helped win many 2nd & 3rd prizes."
F.J. Zaharek, Jr., Chester, VA
"Great product! As an employee of one of your dealers, I can honestly say
your program far outsells any other lottery program we carry!"
Steve Weisfeldt, Chelmsford, MA
"On my first lottery, I won $99.00 - Great software program!"
Randy Bradshaw, Bellevue, WA
"Purchased and won $112.00 on first try."
Marcie McNamara, Diamond Bar, CA
"Outstanding program! Software truly remarkable! Keep up the good work."
Michael J. Herczak, Syracuse, NY
"Everything I was looking for and more."
W.H. Generette, Miami Shores, FL
"Just won $4,900.00 in FL after playing the same numbers 20 times."
Frances Baillie, Tampa, FL
"I only use EOL software for my lottery club.... It pays!"
James L. Mull, Bristol, IN
"Excellent program. Very much satisfied."
Don Giovannoni, Stockton, CA
"Won on 9 of 22 tickets on the first try. Thanks."
Kenneth L. Gibson, Coral Springs, FL
"Like the disk said: It will make you a "WINNER". I believe in it, because I
already won with 5 numbers on the CA Pick 6."
Ronald Maagdenberg, Sunnyvale, CA
"The product is AMAZING!! It is simple to use, yet it is very powerful!"
Tony Grosso, Bronx, NY
"Please enter my membership in Power Player Club. I have enclosed copy of
check for $1,440.00 in MA Pick-4 game win. Thanks!"
James P. Salmon, Worcester, MA
"I've had 3 numbers 3 times in 5 drawings of the NY Take 5 - winning total
$85.00. And I still don't know how to use all of the program. Not bad.
Thanks!"
Kathy Lancione, Croton, NY
"I've already won with your program ($800.00+)!"
Manuel S. Felix, Bronx, NY
"Won small amount on second try."
John Jackson, Catlettsburg, KY
"Excellent program as usual. Thanks!"
Donald O'Connell, Kenosha, WI
"Won money on your program... disks have paid for itself!"
John Yzaguirre, Riverdale, NY
"The new OPTIMIZE feature is AMAZING!"
Hal Sigmond, Ottowa, Ontario, CANADA
"Bought it to try it for fun... 1st use won several free tickets and money
already :)!"
Vickie Long, Keny, WA
"A mathemeticians dream tool!"
Lester W. Wolff, Montvale, NJ
"Only used it three weeks and already had three third place wins on NY lotto
totaling $264.00."
D.L. Baker
"An excellent program! Lots of fun."
L.D. Blush, Bridgeport, OH
"Original program purchased netted me $2,600.00 in PA Pick-6."
George R. Stewart, Jr., Lower Pottsgrove, PA
"Bravo!"
Richard Garden, Brooklyn, NY
"Very impressive, great software!"
Charles Bonilla, Azusa, CA
"On the twelve occasions that I used (your program), I've won over
$7,000.00. Very pleased."
Ronson W. Britt, Washington, DC
"Super program!"
Verstraeten B, Aalst, BELGIUM
"Bought your software and won $123.00 the next day."
Robert G. Mills, Westchester, CA
"I really enjoy using it. It's better than any other one I have."
Richard Cichanowski, Prescott, AZ
"Made lots of $$$! Thanks!"
Ian Jablonski, New York, NY
"Comparing to other programs, yours is simply the best!"
F. Leo, Willowdale, Ontario, CANADA
"Love it!"
Craig R. Miller, North Adams, MA
"Excellent lottery analysis tool!"
Alexander Vega, Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico
"Noticed on the shelf at (local software store). Won $164.00 first time and
have won twice since then!"
Thomas P. Noble, Wheaton, IL
"Unbelievable! I've tried other lottery programs before but yours is
exceptional."
Adam Wyatt, Los Angeles, CA
"The best lotto software I have ever used."
Lorraine Zuniga, Riverside, CA
"I won a free ticket the first time, I hadn't won anything (before buying
your product) for 9 months. SUPER: I won 15 free tickets out of 25 tickets.
Keep up the good work. Thanks!"
Brian Leavitt, Oakland, ME
"The greatest!!"
D. Reichart, New Castle, IN
"Excellent product!"
Alex Foltushansky, Highland Park, IL
"Great!"
Homer Sellers, Newport News, VA
"Excellent, very easy to use."
John H. Young, Presque Isle, ME
"Excellent program. Paid for itself the first time we used it. I expect to
hit a jackpot soon. Thank you."
Ann Best, Germantown, NY
"Great product!"
D. Xamin, Whitby, Ontario, CANADA
"Excellent, I love it!!!"
Michael Dore', Oromocto, N.B., CANADA
"You guys have a VERY IMPRESSIVE PACKAGE - I am so glad I saw this program -
It has all I wanted and more!"
Mitchell L. Sanders, Hollywood, CA
"So far, we are thrilled. Certainly more analysis than we could ever do with
pen and paper!!!"
Barb Salsbury, Anderson, CA
"I have won over $500.00 using the numbers your program has come up with.
Thank you."
Alvin R. Wright, Flushing, MI
"Outstanding program!"
Tom Husted, Pensacola, FL
"The best."
Vinh Pham, Annandale, VA
"Easiest and most updated program I have found."
Joseph Dinard, Panama City, FL
"Very friendly. Excellent."
Clement Lee, Berkeley, CA
"Excellent program, easy to use, and a definite winner. I have won 4 times
already small amounts."
Bernardino Costa, Fall river, MA
"The best program on the market today."
Allen Lee, Miami, FL
"Best lottery program that I know of."
Maurice Morneault, Lyman, ME
"Excellent program!"
Jeff Gardner, Woodridge, IL
"Excellent program, best on the market today!"
Joseph Federico, Derry, NH
"We won the first time we used software. It's paid for itself already!"
James D. Learned, Utica, NY
"Read about your great program in many mail order catalogs - they all gave
it great reviews also!"
Barbara Demercurio, El Cerrito, CA
"Excellent - Just what I was looking for and reasonably priced!"
Carol A. Llewllyn, San Diego, CA
"It's a great program!!"
Juan B. Alvarez, Wheeling, IL
"Excellent product."
J.A. Armstrong, Anderson, IN
"I won $800.00 on 3rd drawing! Excellent software."
Ralph Stroup, Monticello, IN
"Very Impressive!!!"
Alan M. Oppenheim, South Eullio, OH
"Excellent time saving program."
Bob Fields, Rocky Hill, CT
"Excellent!"
Gerald B. Thomas, Mims, FL
"I have won a five out of six game for a total of $5,800.00... I ended up
with one bet slip with 5 numbers out of 6 and 10 tickets with 3 numbers out
of 6."
Edward W. McInnis, Jacksonville, FL
"Excellent - As in SUPERB!!"
L.C. Hatcher, Washington, DC
"Outstanding. Best lottery software yet."
Phillip Williams, Albuquerque, NM
"I just wanted to commend you for actually putting a real top quality
program on the market that's easy to understand and use. I only selected
$2.00 worth of tickets... I won $100.00!"
F.H. Frank, St. Louis, MO
"Great program!"
David Merrell, Euless, TX
"I really think its great!"
Arnie Huber, Rockford, MN
"Thanks to the Lottery Tracker & Wheeler and CA lottery my updates will be
paid for with free and clear winnings. I am ahead after 5 games. Thanks
again."
Bruce Hand, Stanton, CA
"Just won $1,245.00 in NY 6/54 lotto. Looks like a great program.... as
proof I have enclosed copy of winning ticket."
Andrew Zamojski, Perth Amboy, NJ
"Best lotto program I've found for the money. Excellent features, easy to
use."
Thomas Wiedman, Maple Grove, MN
"Excellent program - Best ever for this database application."
Brian Mouw, Hagaman, NY
"I'm very pleased with the software. It has already led me to 2 hits in
February alone."
Cyrns Whitman, Huntsville, GA
"Great program. I recommend to all players of lottery."
John Ferguson, Zephyrhills, FL
"Compared to other lottery software (yours) is the best on the market! I
made my own evaluations."
J.D. Tomasek, Lake Jackson, TX
"I really like the update, lots faster and easier. Won $600.00 2 weeks ago.
Looking forward to more!"
Richard Moore, Lake Worth, FL
"Excellent program."
Victor L. Ortiz, Orlando, FL
"Excellent Software!!"
Boaz H. Frankel, Los Angeles, CA
"I have been a regular direct EOL customer for several years and enjoy the
changes in each update I purchase."
Sheldon Bell, Nova Scotia, CANADA
"Great program - Superior to all others"
P.A. Spayd, Callao, VA
"On the second week that we used your Tracker & Wheeler program we more than
paid for the price of the software. In fact, we picked 5 of 6 numbers in the
Indiana lottery and won $592.00!"
Fred Reagan, Indianapolis, IN
"I love this program."
K.M. Hackman, Orange, CA
"Excellent program. Best lottery program I have ever seen or tried!"
Eric Barker, Seskinore, Omagh, N. IRELAND
"It's the best lottery program. This beats other lottery programs."
Americo Valentini, Weston, Ontario, CANADA
"Technical support outstanding!"
David Wagner, Plattsburg, NY
"I have not even won the smallest prize in years, but I won on my first try
with your program! I won 17 out of 22 tickets, 6 of them with 4 numbers
each! Thank you again!"
Michael Freed, North Miami Beach, FL
"I have tried other lottery software, I still find EOL's software to be the
best available."
Roland Alston, Baltimore, MD
"We tell everyone about it."
E.J. Gifford, Bertram, TX
"I would like to take this opportunity to inform you that using the Tracker
& Wheeler I have won $1,607.00 so far in the FL lottery."
Jorge Gonzalez, Dade County, FL
"Excellent software!"
P.L. Hartwell, Hermosa Beach, CA
"This is the best I've ever tried."
Bruce Lithgow, Torrance, CA
"Won $88.00 on $3.00 bet 1st time I used program."
Barry Warner, Vestal, NY
"Excellent product!"
Barry Monies, Greenwich, CT
"Good program."
Rich Zapor, Wiota, IA
"It's a great software."
Modesto Jimenez, Toa Baja, Puerto Rico
"Won 5 out of 6 on KS lottery. Had I had #3 instead of #1 in the line
sequence, would have won $770,000!! EOL outstanding product!!"
John Kartstetter, Olathe, KS
"Love it!"
Jeanne Cross, Gresham, OR
"Excellent program."
Richard Clemet, Washington DC
"Good program."
Jerome Hudlun, Richton, Park, IL
"Using the 10 number 5/5 50 games system I hit 21 $3.00 winning tickets and
3 four match winners. This was the first time I used this program.
Unbelievable! Up 'til now I had never won more than $3.00 in the lottery on
any given ticket. Thanks!"
Michael Canestvari, Ledyard, CT
"Awesome!"
Edward K. Hudnali, Jr., Milwaukee, WI
"Excellent!"
Carlos Maitret Parizot, Celaya, MEXICO
"I have been a user of EOL software since 1989 and have enjoyed them."
Frankie F. Medley, Hyattsville, MD
"I've enjoyed using your program. It has enabled me to enjoy better hits in
the larger lotto jackpots."
R. Goodwin, Jr., Wethersfield, CT
"This software is excellent (Thanks). I'm getting ready to win big."
Al Malone, Colorado Springs, CO
"Nice program. Already made me win $640.00."
Alex Almarza, Plantation, FL
"Very good. I enjoy it!!"
Robert Olin, Wellington, FL
"Excellent program."
Anthony Grasso, Methuen, MA
"Excellent program!"
Dennis Andreason, Mercer Island, WA
"Excellent programs."
James Mraz, San Francisco, CA
"We just played the first time with program and picked 4 numbers and several
threes by wheeling 14 numbers. Thanks!"
John Rice, Walnut Creek, CA
"Excellent."
Cote Jacques, La Baie, Quebec, CANADA
"Fun and easy to use."
Daniel Langevin, Montreal, Quebec, CANADA
"Excellent product."
John Goldsmith, Roswell, GA
"Excellent product."
Richard Mirawda, Boonton, NJ
"I won (first time ever) after only 2 weeks! Great product!"
Thomas Warren, Rochester, NY
"Great software."
Paul Steiner, Gloucester, VA
"Great program!!!"
William Wolters, Northglen, CO
"Excellent program."
Glenn Cornwell, Hermitage, TN
"I like your program very much."
George Dailey, Garden Grove, CA
"Like program very much - have won several small prizes."
Dan Salvatore, Philadelphia, PA
"I love it."
Clarence D. Davis, Washington, DC
"Great system. Keep up the good work."
Roger Chabert, Cut-Off, LA
"Great products and prices."
Charles L. Mathews, Baton Rouge, LA
"I love it."
Marcel Roy, Sherbrooke, Quebec, CANADA
"Neat!"
Al Kramer, Weatherford, TX
"Excellent."
Pat Parziale, Everett, WA
"Excellent wheeling systems!"
Alexander Vega, Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico
"Great!!!"
Ruben A. Amely-Velez, Lee's Summit, MO
"Looks great - Just what I wanted!"
Wayne Hill, Cordele, GA
"Your product is easy to use."
Glynn Scott, Bangs, TX
"All of your software versions of Lottery Tracker & Wheeler have been A-#1.
No complaints. Keep up the good work."
Virginia M. Hill, Louisville, KY
"I absolutely love it and appreciate the upgrades. Thanks!"
Paul Uber, LaGrosse, WI
"This is my 4th update and all have been worthwhile. Thanks."
Eugene P. Markoff, Sr., Enterprise, AL
"Excellent software."
J. Patti, Lakehurst, NJ
"A friend and I won $35,861.31 on a single ticket playing Fantasy 5 using
the Tracker & Wheeler system. We had won about $950.00 on another occasion
playing the FL Pick 6."
L.W. Hey, Pembroke Pines, FL
"May I begin in saying you have a very good number program. In the last week
I have hit a $500.00 win in the West Virginia lotto."
Carl E. Samples, Charleston, WV
"The first time I used your (program) on NY Cash 40 - I played 80 tickets
and had 14 winners. Spent $40.00 - collected $749.00 - $709.00 profit."
Dennis Udell, Westerlo, NY
"The lottery products we order from Entertainment-On-Line are the fastest
selling line of software we carry. In the last 4 months we have sold in
excess of 80 copies of the Tracker & Wheeler. Of all packages sold we have
not had a SINGLE copy returned for ANY reason. For a town the size of
Albany, GA, this is a tremendous amount of a single software package for us
to have moved. To make it even more unbelievable, we have not advertised
this product at all. I would like to thank you again for a top-notch product
and look forward to a profitable relationship."
Jim Holland, President, Computer Showcase
Albany, GA
"I have 4 other lotto programs, but this is the one I prefer."
Bob Wing, Bellingham, WA
"I recently received my copy of the Tracker & Wheeler. My sincere
congratulations on an outstanding concept and implementation."
Howard G. Merowit, Tustin, CA
"Your Tracker & Wheeler and User's Guide is really terrific."
R. Armour, San Diego, CA
"I have had the Tracker & Wheeler program for about 6 months and have won
about $4,000.00 so far."
Gary L. Swearingen, Urbana, IL
"I have won over 160 small cash prizes in less than 6 months. Again, I would
like to say thank you."
Alvin Johnson, APO, NY
"When I received your program, the first day I won $500.00, by playing
number 764 straight, recommended by your program as a HOT number."
Laszlo Nagy, Lakelanf, FL
"I'm overwhelmed at my new lottery program. Words just cannot express my
delight with my new Lottery Tracker & Wheeler... You just don't know how
happy you've made this lottery player."
Rick Pesek, St. Louis, MO
"I can't delay any more to tell you what a delight the Tracker & Wheeler is.
It is a powerhouse, with all the critical search programs that help one to
select numbers to play. I recently got $545.00 on one day's play."
Eunice M. DuFour, New York, NY
"I have been a user of your Tracker & Wheeler since January, 1989, and find
it much superior to any other method or system that I have tried. I have
fielded 5 of the 6 winning numbers in a wheel on several occasions."
J.R. Brooks, Bridgeton, MO
"As a programmer myself, I compliment you on your efforts."
Wayne T. Topa, Stormville, NY
"To date I have purchased tickets in 8 of the past 9 Canadian 6/36
lottery... with a total winnings of $2,947.00. Total winnings have been 54
(tickets) with numerous 3#, & 4# winners and one 5# ticket."
Bruce Crow, El Paso, TX
"My investment has definitely paid off. I used the 8 number full 6/6
wheeling system using numbers (selected by your program.) I hit 4 of the
eight numbers. I had 6 winning tickets with 4 numbers each, and 16 tickets
with 3 numbers. Grand total: $491.00."
Wayne P. Dixon, Eight Mile, AL
"I wish to applaud you on your fine lottery software. I can see that a lot
of time and effort is involved in your product."
James Sullivan, Boca Raton, FL
Robert Perkis
What-So-Ever.
I do consider them among my lottery friends, as I do the
authors of any high quality lottery software I've spoken
well of over the years who I've been in contact with.
That was some ad, guess that's what I get for repeatedly
saying lottery authors may occasionally advertise, so keep
it occasional ok guys. :-)
Robert Perkis / r.g.l.faq
CDEX
The one fundamental, basic question that readers of a lottery software
advertisement should ask the advertiser is:
... "Do you assert that your software will consistently produce a higher
percentage of winning numbers than would be expected from the same amount of
numbers picked at random?"
The answer has to be either "Yes" or "No".
It can't be a diversion or side-step, as in "our winners can speak for
themselves", or the like.
It's "Yes" or "No".
Either the author does assert that his software will consistently produce
more winning numbers than random expectation, or else he does not assert
that it will do so.
... If it's "Yes": If he does assert that his software will
consistently produce more winning numbers than random expectation, then he
needs to prove it with data: Length of Trial; Multiple Games, Draws,
Numbers, Results. If he cannot prove it with data, then his advertisement
in RGL is meaningless.
... If it's "No": If he does not assert that his software will
consistently produce more winning numbers than random expectation, then his
advertisement in RGL is meaningless.
In addition to the above question, a corollary one is:
... "You have hundreds of software users in (State name). You advertise
a win by one player. If your software is the source of prediction of those
winning numbers (and the user's own individual choices are not the source of
those numbers), then why is it that every person who used your software in
that same drawing, did _not_ play the same numbers, and did _not_ win the
same prize? If one person won by using your software, and many persons lost
by using your software, what 'prediction' value do you claim for your
software?"
- - -
However the first question makes the point.
Advertisements in RGL which are meaningless to experienced players may be
misleading to novice players. Especially if they go unchallenged by
experienced players.
It's appropriate to challenge every person who runs an advertisement like
that in RGL, and to demand an outright "Yes" or "No" answer to that first
question.
If the answer comes back, "Yes", then proof data must be supplied.
If the answer comes back, "No", then the software does not exceed random
expectation in prediction.
If the answer comes back as anything but a direct "Yes" or "No", then the
software author either has not extensively tested the software against
random expectation or else the results of that testing were not encouraging.
In either case, advertisements in RGL which promote the software based on
wins and dollar amounts are misleading.
Joe Roberts
CDEX
gARY
We do talk sometimes. :)
"CDEX" wrote
> ... "You have hundreds of software users in (State name). You advertise
> a win by one player. If your software is the source of prediction of those
> winning numbers (and the user's own individual choices are not the source of
> those numbers), then why is it that every person who used your software in
> that same drawing, did _not_ play the same numbers, and did _not_ win the
> same prize? If one person won by using your software, and many persons lost
> by using your software, what 'prediction' value do you claim for your
> software?"
Quite agree, If I'm reading this correct and I'm sure I am.
Our 'Lotto Cheetah" (an why not, the reply would be fun).
Some bloke had a 5number hit using the software, I'm still on it an Challenge II
is devoted to it.
I think the trick is (and it must work) to give every player a different set of
numbers to play *no software required really* AND someone will have it
off...........easy!
Regards,
gARY
Robert Perkis
CDEX wrote:
>
> The one fundamental, basic question that readers of a lottery software
> advertisement should ask the advertiser is:
>
> ... "Do you assert that your software will consistently produce a higher
> percentage of winning numbers than would be expected from the same amount of
> numbers picked at random?"
>
> The answer has to be either "Yes" or "No".
>
I don't really care for this question because the
answer isn't necessarily helpful to lottery players.
Only an actual chart breakdown of winning numbers
picked by field size per game over time would be
meaningful.
If my software consistently produced more 3 and 4
winning numbers than expected in half the field I
could answer yes and yet might never have had all
the winning numbers in my field even once.
On the other hand a software could have fewer 3 and
4 winning numbers in it's field than expected, but
have more cases of all 5 or 6 than expected and still
be below average overall.
Neither tells us if software with multiple settings
was capable of putting the winning numbers within a
reduced field even if the defaults could not.
>
> It can't be a diversion or side-step, as in "our winners can speak for
> themselves", or the like.
>
> It's "Yes" or "No".
I find a software that has had big winners more interesting
than one that hasn't. Being capable of having a big winner
is important to me as a user. If a software has few or no
winners, maybe it does something to ruin your chance to win
like offering users split wheels.
>
> Either the author does assert that his software will consistently produce
> more winning numbers than random expectation, or else he does not assert
> that it will do so.
>
> ... If it's "Yes": If he does assert that his software will
> consistently produce more winning numbers than random expectation, then he
> needs to prove it with data: Length of Trial; Multiple Games, Draws,
> Numbers, Results. If he cannot prove it with data, then his advertisement
> in RGL is meaningless.
Interesting question as success in one game might be
counter balanced by failure in another. Ideally the
software should have running totals on display for
defaults and suggested settings for all supported
games.
I should be able to go to let's say Gail Howard and
see the best history/field/weight settings for my
Mega Ball game and how those settings have been doing
against the defaults.
If not on site, the software should be doing this kind
of number crunching for me. Otherwise it's just a set
of tools, not prediction software.
>
> ... If it's "No": If he does not assert that his software will
> consistently produce more winning numbers than random expectation, then his
> advertisement in RGL is meaningless.
>
> In addition to the above question, a corollary one is:
>
> ... "You have hundreds of software users in (State name). You advertise
> a win by one player. If your software is the source of prediction of those
> winning numbers (and the user's own individual choices are not the source of
> those numbers), then why is it that every person who used your software in
> that same drawing, did _not_ play the same numbers, and did _not_ win the
> same prize? If one person won by using your software, and many persons lost
> by using your software, what 'prediction' value do you claim for your
> software?"
>
> - - -
>
> However the first question makes the point.
>
> Advertisements in RGL which are meaningless to experienced players may be
> misleading to novice players. Especially if they go unchallenged by
> experienced players.
>
> It's appropriate to challenge every person who runs an advertisement like
> that in RGL, and to demand an outright "Yes" or "No" answer to that first
> question.
>
> If the answer comes back, "Yes", then proof data must be supplied.
Would have to be based on prize tier to be meaningful
to me. I couldn't care less if it gets more 3# hits
among 24 than expected if it doesn't get more 6# hits
which would count for a drop in the bucket among total
hits.
Wouldn't it be possible to exceed the expected number
of six hits in a field and still be below expectation
for hits overall? I learned to avoid averages a long
time ago when working with lottery, go with exact figures
for what happens.
Lottery software should be tested against history of a
game chosen at random, never against random results of
an r.n.g. Our whole purpose in being here is based on
the lottery being a flawed random number generator and
the lottery seems to agree by doing everything possible
to randomize their draws by switching their ballsets and
machines around. Otherwise why bother?
What a shame those lottery organizations that "test"
systems and give certain "experts" awards don't actually
exist to test the latest versions of lottery software.
Robert Perkis / http://www.lotto-logix.com/
CDEX
"Robert Perkis" wrote...
CDEX wrote:
> >
> > The one fundamental, basic question that readers of a lottery
> > software advertisement should ask the advertiser is:
> >
> > ... "Do you assert that your software will consistently produce
> > a higher percentage of winning numbers than would be expected
> > from the same amount of numbers picked at random?"
> >
> > The answer has to be either "Yes" or "No".
> >
> I don't really care for this question because the
> answer isn't necessarily helpful to lottery players.
>
Have it your own way, but I think you missed the context for asking the
question in the first place.
The context is: Somebody posts an advertisement in RGL. You have to decide
whether that advertisement is more helpful to the player than the question
above.
The question above is totally factual, and therefore it is helpful to the
player. Try applying the same criteria to the advertisement.
That advertisement promotes software by quoting players with substantial
wins. It does not state whether those wins are the direct result of the
software's prediction, or else they are the result of a one-time personal
choice by that one particular software user.
... If the software "predicted" those numbers then those results are
reproducible. That means they are reproducible for you and the next guy,
including the next guy who buys the software. That means they can be proved
to be reproducible in public testing of the software against random
expectation.
... If the user made a lucky, one-time choice of numbers using the
*same* screens and the *same* data that was seen by the other software
users, and those other software users did not make the same choice, then the
software was only a tool. In that context, simply pushing isolated "wins"
in an advertisement, emphasizing big-dollar amounts, is about as misleading
to other players as it can get.
If you really want to get to the root of whether or not the software is
responsible for predicting winning numbers, then you *must* begin by
challenging the software author to answer the question above.
Try it. See what kind of answer you get.
If the response is a personal attack, you got your answer. If the response
is a side-step, you got your answer.
- - - - - -
> Only an actual chart breakdown of winning numbers
> picked by field size per game over time would be
> meaningful.
>
Yes. Many games, over many draws.
Again, advertising isolated major wins does absolutely nothing to inform
you. It does not inform you or any other player about the "value" of the
software. It does not inform you about further use in that game or in any
other games. It only appeals to the natural gut urge to win. It does not
appeal to our brain for believing that the software does anything for
predicting winning numbers at a rate above random expectation.
If one buys the software based solely on that kind of advertisement, what
happens later on if he buys the software and uses it? His urge to win will
still be there, same as before. The advertisement will be long gone, and
useless. Was he an informed buyer based on that advertisement? Or was he a
naive, misinformed buyer?
Those are not rhetorical questions. Either you buy software based on full
specifications and on realistic expectations of what it will do for you, or
else you buy it based on fluffed-up, unreproducible win claims and you have
no expectation that it will perform likewise for you. In that case the
advertisement was worthless.
Then you need to decide whether you're going to let it skate in RGL, or
challenge the author per the question at the top of this post.
- - - - - -
> If my software consistently produced more 3 and 4
> winning numbers than expected in half the field I
> could answer yes and yet might never have had all
> the winning numbers in my field even once.
>
'Consistently' is the keyword.
> On the other hand a software could have fewer 3 and
> 4 winning numbers in it's field than expected, but
> have more cases of all 5 or 6 than expected and still
> be below average overall.
>
Even if it produces as little as 1 winning number at a rate that exceeds
random expectation in *consistent* play (that same keyword again), then
it's still of value to the player.
That 1 number could be wheeled as a Key number. A 6/20 wheel (38,720
combinations) would be reduced down to a 5/19 wheel (11,628 combinations).
A 6/16 wheel (8,008 combinations) is reduced to a 5/15 wheel (3,003
combinations). And so on.
Besides wheeling, if the software produced just that 1 winning number at a
rate better than random expectation, then you have increased your chances of
winning with Pairs, Positional Limits, and in other ways.
The point is this. It is in _proving_ whether or not the software can do
better than plain random expectation in _consistent_ play. Whether it's
3 or 4 numbers, 5 or 6, or just 1 number -- the software author needs to
prove it with data.
No data? Then, there is no basis for accepting an advertisement for that
software which pushes only isolated big wins. What does it do for the next
player, next Saturday night? That's the point.
Again, if the software author can't give you a direct "Yes" or "No"
answer to the question at the top of this post, he's only playing with you.
- - - - - -
> Neither tells us if software with multiple settings
> was capable of putting the winning numbers within a
> reduced field even if the defaults could not.
>
Exactly the point.
- - - - - -
> > It can't be a diversion or side-step, as in "our winners can speak
> > for themselves", or the like.
> >
> > It's "Yes" or "No".
> I find a software that has had big winners more interesting
> than one that hasn't. Being capable of having a big winner
> is important to me as a user. If a software has few or no
> winners, maybe it does something to ruin your chance to win
> like offering users split wheels.
>
Every software that has been in wide circulation since the 1980s has big
winners, as well as many small winners.
The question is whether or not you advertise the software today in a way
that reflects what a typical player might reasonably expect to achieve in
his or her lifetime, at a reasonable cost for buying his or her lottery
tickets.
Plain as that.
If you are going to put an ethical software advertisement in a public forum,
then you simply do not push non-reproducible wins.
Simple as that.
Your documented winners of 5-and 6-number prizes stay shut up in the office
file drawer. So do double winners. So do winners who hit their big prize
immediately after buying the software. So do winners using a "4 if 4"
wheel who happened to hit the jackpot with one of those wheeled lines.
You find something else to talk about.
If you claim, say, 200,000 users of your software worldwide, and you
promote just 200 testimonials of isolated big wins, and you do not supply
data showing performance versus random expectation, what does that suggest
to you about the reproducible value of "prediction" in the software?
Basically you have to decide.
... If the software picks winners consistently at better than the random
rate for the numbers field size, then its wins are reproducible by multiple
players and the author owes you two things: a clean, plain "Yes" to the
question above, and proof data.
... If the software doesn't do that, then the author owes you two
things: a clean, plain "No" to the question above, and responsible
advertisements in the newsgroup.
- - - - - -
> >
> > Either the author does assert that his software will consistently
produce
> > more winning numbers than random expectation, or else he does not assert
> > that it will do so.
> >
> > ... If it's "Yes": If he does assert that his software will
> > consistently produce more winning numbers than random expectation, then
he
> > needs to prove it with data: Length of Trial; Multiple Games, Draws,
> > Numbers, Results. If he cannot prove it with data, then his
advertisement
> > in RGL is meaningless.
> Interesting question as success in one game might be
> counter balanced by failure in another. Ideally the
> software should have running totals on display for
> defaults and suggested settings for all supported
> games.
>
Exactly the point.
- - - - - -
> I should be able to go to let's say Gail Howard and
> see the best history/field/weight settings for my
> Mega Ball game and how those settings have been doing
> against the defaults.
>
More than that. The software must not simply show past results. It must
select, say "N" draws and calculate picks for the next draw "N+1", and
then test those picks in that next draw. Then it must do it iteratively
over a substantial range of draws.
And it damned sure better do it for you over multiple games of a similar
kind. For example if it wins big in the UK 6/49 over one calendar year, and
it crashes in flames in the Canada National 6/49 or BC49, or Michigan 6/49
or Germany Samstag 6/49, or the Spain pair of 6/49s, or the Portugal 6/49,
or the Maryland or Massachusetts 6/49s, or the Ohio or Wisconsin 6/49s over
that same calendar year, you can't be sure it's going to do anything better
for you in the UK 6/49 next year. Promoting a win in one game, and never
proving how the software croaked in other similar games, misses the whole
point about using the software.
Some software does that routinely, deals with it factually, and never
promotes it. Other software doesn't do it at all.
Think data, think proof, and then read advertisements in RGL.
> If not on site, the software should be doing this kind
> of number crunching for me. Otherwise it's just a set
> of tools, not prediction software.
>
Exactly the point again.
And ... If you do not see that data on-site, ... and if you do not see
that data in the software,
... then,
How do you respond when an advertisement appears in RGL promoting big wins
by that software?
- - - - - -
> Lottery software should be tested against history of a
> game chosen at random, never against random results of
> an r.n.g. Our whole purpose in being here is based on
> the lottery being a flawed random number generator and
> the lottery seems to agree by doing everything possible
> to randomize their draws by switching their ballsets and
> machines around. Otherwise why bother?
>
Not just against the history of one game chosen at random. Against the
histories of *many* games chosen at random, including Pick-5 and Pick-6.
Here's a suggestion.
... (1) You name a team of players in RGL to test software "prediction"
value.
... (2) Software authors ship software (free) to those team members.
... (3) *Important* step. The software author states, in advance,
what method the team will use to test his software's prediction value. He
tells you, in advance, the _exact_ series of steps and screens your team
will use in picking the numbers. He _does NOT_ have the option of simply
throwing the software at you, and then claiming afterward that you "did not
know how to use it properly" if the test results are poor. There is *NO*
wiggle room for the author. If the software cannot perform better than
random expectation, using the software author's own steps for selecting
numbers, then what value is it supposed to have to the player? If the one
person who knows the software better than any other person cannot tell you
how to make it perform better than random expectation, then you just learned
more about that software and its author than you will ever find in an
advertisement. Again: there is _NO_ wiggle room for the software author.
... (4) After all of the above is in place, your team then selects the
games which will be used for testing. The software author _did NOT_ know
of that decision before submitting the information in step (3) above. And
he _does NOT_ have any role or input in selecting the games.
... (5) The team tests the software in those games and posts the
results publicly in RGL.
> What a shame those lottery organizations that "test"
> systems and give certain "experts" awards don't actually
> exist to test the latest versions of lottery software.
>
> Robert Perkis / http://www.lotto-logix.com/
See above.
Best regards,
Joe Roberts
CDEX
Nigel
>
> The one fundamental, basic question that readers of a lottery software
> advertisement should ask the advertiser is:
>
> ... "Do you assert that your software will consistently produce a higher
> percentage of winning numbers than would be expected from the same amount of
> numbers picked at random?"
>
I've just read a recent lottery software advert on this newsgroup, and
it doesn't actually claim that its users will do better than choosing
numbers at random, although that is implied by the way the testimonials
are slanted.
There are other types of software than number predictors to which your
criterion doesn't apply, for example wheel generators or software that
analyses past draws for criteria that the user specifies eg decade
elimination, hit/skip combinations.
However I think the basic point of your posting is valid. The law
forces many product suppliers to print warnings on their product that
most people consider ludicrous (for example 'may contain nuts' on a
packet of peanuts), so it's a little surprising that this hasn't
caught up with the software industry. You'd expect a warning like
'this product does not increase your return expectations' (although
even that could be circumvented by simply including an anti-birthday
number filter in the product).
Evil Nigel
CDEX
Nigel wrote...
> CDEX wrote:
> >
> > The one fundamental, basic question that readers of a lottery software
> > advertisement should ask the advertiser is:
> >
> > ... "Do you assert that your software will consistently produce
> > a higher percentage of winning numbers than would be expected
> > from the same amount of numbers picked at random?"
>
> I've just read a recent lottery software advert on this newsgroup, and
> it doesn't actually claim that its users will do better than choosing
> numbers at random, although that is implied by the way the testimonials
> are slanted.
>
> There are other types of software than number predictors to which your
> criterion doesn't apply, for example wheel generators or software that
> analyses past draws for criteria that the user specifies eg decade
> elimination, hit/skip combinations.
>
You're right. It was in the context of the RGL advertisement which touts
winners and contains nothing else.
Robert Perkis mentioned that the RGL FAQ specifies that advertisements
should be "occasional", i.e. not spewed or spammed.
The FAQ also specifies that advertisements should be posted by persons who
are willing to join RGL in exciting discussions of their ideas, systems and
programs.
ADVERTISING: R.G.L. does not allow commercial advertising.
However, in an effort to attract participation in the group by
responsible authors of systems and software, some advertising
with lotto informational content, will be allowed by those
willing to join with us in exciting discussions of their ideas,
systems and programs.
Now one is waiting to see if that specific advertiser will honor the FAQ of
the newsgroup he posted his ad into.
Getting the direct answer to the question at the top of this post will be
part of the "exciting discussions of their ideas, systems and programs".
> However I think the basic point of your posting is valid. The law
> forces many product suppliers to print warnings on their product that
> most people consider ludicrous (for example 'may contain nuts' on a
> packet of peanuts), so it's a little surprising that this hasn't
> caught up with the software industry. You'd expect a warning like
> 'this product does not increase your return expectations' (although
> even that could be circumvented by simply including an anti-birthday
> number filter in the product).
>
> Evil Nigel
Yes, indeed.
Cheers,
Joe Roberts
CDEX