phileight
Warning!!! this may be a long post.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? If you say chicken then my next question would be
which part, if you say the egg then my next question would be was it fertilized and if so, how?
It's easy to answer the "when" part but very hard to answer the "why". The when is any time
my analysis leads me to conclude/believe one of the choices has a greater possibility of showing.
If we ask if President Trump is a good president then some will say NO WAY!!! and others will
say YES!!!! and others will not say anything. IMHO it's the same thing when we try to choose
a value to play.
Bear with me.
First I don't believe true random exist and I also don't believe luck is anything but a made up word
some use to explain a favorable outcome. I can win any lottery by simply playing every combination
which would not be possible if it were random. It's the order in which the balls fall out of the hopper
that's said to be random but that too is simply a product of combined events within a 3-dimensional
space.
I have said many times that I don't play while I am developing a software as that's when I have to cross
every T and dot every i. My math also has to be exact or the end product will be flawed. It's very hard
for me to switch / adjust my thinking from strict mathematics to what I call random-logic. Mathematics
is very useful in just about everything but falls short when we try to use it to predict something that is
designed to be unpredictable. Predicting the values to play often requires one to form a belief that is not
based entirely on math. Predicting lottery values requires part math, part supernatural, I call it random-
logic.
Two people can look at the same data and come to different conclusions what to play. The difference IMHO
is the level math plays in the decision. The more math based, the more incorrect choices we will make.
In conclusion to answer the why part, I would say that it requires we place more value on belief than on the
mathematics. The more math skills we process into our choices the worse the outcome will be. I thought
about your questions quite a while before posting my reply. At first I thought about making a video but then
it became apparent to me that while I could give examples for doing a setup, it would not be something that
would translate game to game.
Winsum once made the comment to me "analysis to paralysis" which I have found to be sooo true. When we
over analyze the data all the choices look good or bad. Whenever you find yourself in this situation then your
over analyzing the data. Find the data points that work best then look for them. When you don't see one of
them in the data your analyzing then skip it and move to the next. It may not always work out the way we want
but over time our skills improve. When it comes to predicting the lottery all we can really do is make a best guess
regardless of the method we use. The ultra-34 reduces the pool of choices we pick from but at the same time
increases the number of choices we have to make, no getting around the overall odds. It all boils down to can
we choose from the smaller pool more often than from the larger.
RL