Beaker:
I guess Dennis was right... ...I'd have to say he did have the advantage because it is easier to predict it won't show. There was no 20-43 either.
There was an LD of 9, 1 missing decade, a possible consecutive, at least 1 repeater, and a reasonable assortment of (HOT, warm, cool, and COLD) which my program tries to create when it generates sets for me... ...it worked to a degree fairly well this time. If those criteria are not true then it gets difficult to hit something.
Regards,
George
I guess Dennis was right... ...I'd have to say he did have the advantage because it is easier to predict it won't show. There was no 20-43 either.
There was an LD of 9, 1 missing decade, a possible consecutive, at least 1 repeater, and a reasonable assortment of (HOT, warm, cool, and COLD) which my program tries to create when it generates sets for me... ...it worked to a degree fairly well this time. If those criteria are not true then it gets difficult to hit something.
Regards,
George
gsobier said:Dennis:
One of you is correct on 45... ...we will see soon. 20-43 was in my sets 5 times... ...we will see!
Regards,
George![]()
Last edited: