comparing won combinations

[mirage]

Well isn't that interesting...! So I was not far off in my last post. Hmmm.... I suppose it's almost common place now, or soon will be. (There goes lotto as we knew it. No wonder the lotto corps are resorting to price and odds increases... and goodness knows what else. )

Do you really think going wide open with a web based syndicate is a good idea? It spreads the risk around but you might run into other problems... If we have a lotto "industry" which is dominated by syndicates of players on one hand and the lotto corps on the other, well if it's just a matter of "odds", then it will become infrequently that one or handfuls of individuals are going home with a sweet dream of a huge jackpot very often. It just becomes just another strange, marginal and risky investment process in which a bunch of rich people have the money to maybe get a bit richer. Where's the excitement in this? I don't think the lotto corps will stand for much of this-they will fight back. They probably are, and have been.

Also, you seem to be suggesting that even after increase in price factor, statistically the win factor has decreased. It's been about 16 months or so that we've been living with the increase. Am I understanding you correctly? Is this statistically anomalous, or is it because odds so steep who knows?

Let us know when you are ready to launch...

(Originally posted by millsy)

...Wei (sic) do run a small syndicate presently..we used to play around
$1000 per draw...when the ticket went to $2 we cut back to
about $300 per draw...for some reason doubling the price has
a worse effect on out comes at 1/2 the tickets..we actually had
to cut the number back a little ( to about 150) in order to maintain
a return on investment - we average 1.4357 roi
BUT still have not won big one....all of my strategies still point
to playing less more often,,vs playing more once in a while...
still playing against enormous odds.
i want to build a web based syndicate eventually.
p.s. we print the tickets on computer and drop the stacks
off at two kiosks...they seem to like the business !
good luck tonight to all !

 

[mirage]

millsy,

Your technical info is interesting though.

However, if one doesn't have the capability of comparing all the 6/49 lotteries in North America, or in the world, then what have you found is the percentage of combos of 3 or 4 having occurred before in a single lottery, i.e. Canada 6/49 only?

Thanks!

 

[johnph77]

Re: ODDS...

WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT THESE #'S CAME UP WITHIN A YEAR A PART ..I BELIEVE IN THE ODDS OF PROBABILITY...SO WHAT ARE THEY ODDS THAT THESE FIVE #'S MAY COME AGAIN....OR EVEN SIX...??????????

12..16..20..26..43..44..

12..16..20..27..43..44..

I BELIEVE IT WAS EITHER 88/89.....or...98/99.....

luckystrike -

The odds of this occurance would be what you'd expect - 365 out of 13,983,816 or 1::38.311.825. And, since you're looking at a specific occurance rather than the occurance of any duplicate draw, that would also be the method used to calculate the probability, which is the reciprocal of the odds - 0.000026.

 

[millsy]

i probably should not have used the word 'syndicate'..not really
worth the trouble if you spread the money anongst thousands..
i was thinking more along the line of say..producing a "short"
file of 100,000 tickets or so....then 'members' could download
say 10 or 20 'tickets to play'...then those tickets would be removed from the file..so no one else gets the same numbers..
for instance, i have a file of 2.8m numbers..let's say 1/5 of 14m..
every winning number so far (2250+) has been in this file..and
it has been capturing every winner for months...don't get me wrong..i have not had this file for long....worked it out about a year ago...it is where i begin each draw before filtering...
eventually, as i filter down past 100,000...50,000, 10,000 etc
i lose more and more winners...eventually usually lose the jackpot
..but say you were to buy 5 tickets out of your 14m..$10...
wouldn't you be better off buying 1 from my file ??? same odds..
so perhaps it costs 10 cents....you play the 1 ticket..it likely
saved you $7.90 and has the same odds or better to win.
my 'syndicate' would rely upon each member to not 'overbuy' or
'overplay'...don't download if you aren't going to buy it..that way
some member(s) should come out big winners ! and it's easy to
check..put the file to the test...after draw closing..open it up..
let the members see who bought what..who won etc !
regardsing our "649"..give me a few minutes..i run the updated
reports and give you the combo 3, 4 and 5 details
bfn

 

[millsy]

OK..HERE IS SOME INFO...all calcs include the bonus...
combo 3s - 1x 1120, 2x 2301, 3x 3327, 4x 3578, 5x 3002,
6x 2191, 7x 1350, 8x 716 9x 358, 10x 139, 11x 52, 12x 28,
13x 7...should be around 18424 total ..so far =2 18169...don't
play the ones that have not come up...play the more common ones...play tickets which contain 'well used' groups of combos of 3

combo 4's - 53966 -1x, 10285 -2x, 1299- 3x, 115 -4x, 11- 5x, 2 -6x
i look at c4's differently,,you want some duplicates...82,17 % are
one timers..so usually best to pick tickets with only 1 previously
used c4

combo 5 - 46086 1 x , 630 - 2x , 10 - 3x recall - using the bonus...
i have looked at them using and not using the bonus...for c5's
you can eliminate 3x and 2x - choose all new c5's or possible one
from a file of c5's using bonus less the c5 without the bonus file.
(subset of c5's ) 98 % ocurrances of c5's are fresh brand new.

re: end of lotto as we know it..NO WAY !..they make way too much money off this tax on stupidity...it is their best interest to
disregard our attempts to 'beat' the odds and merely call us
gamblers or addicts ! the 649 may have doubled the cost but
that was to increase the jackpot..their "market research" told
them people wanted bigger jackpots...sounds like "new coke"
market research ! it will be around long after i'm gone ...too many
suits getting big paychecks from the olc..they won't kill the golden goose.

 

[mirage]

i probably should not have used the word 'syndicate'..not really
worth the trouble if you spread the money anongst thousands..
i was thinking more along the line of say..producing a "short"
file of 100,000 tickets or so....then 'members' could download
say 10 or 20 'tickets to play'...then those tickets would be removed from the file..so no one else gets the same numbers..
for instance, i have a file of 2.8m numbers..let's say 1/5 of 14m..
every winning number so far (2250+) has been in this file..and
it has been capturing every winner for months...don't get me wrong..i have not had this file for long....worked it out about a year ago...it is where i begin each draw before filtering...
eventually, as i filter down past 100,000...50,000, 10,000 etc
i lose more and more winners...eventually usually lose the jackpot
..but say you were to buy 5 tickets out of your 14m..$10...
wouldn't you be better off buying 1 from my file ??? same odds..
so perhaps it costs 10 cents....you play the 1 ticket..it likely
saved you $7.90 and has the same odds or better to win.
my 'syndicate' would rely upon each member to not 'overbuy' or
'overplay'...don't download if you aren't going to buy it..that way
some member(s) should come out big winners ! and it's easy to
check..put the file to the test...after draw closing..open it up..
let the members see who bought what..who won etc !
regardsing our "649"..give me a few minutes..i run the updated
reports and give you the combo 3, 4 and 5 details
bfn

Interesting twist. Kind of like a quik pik but with better odds, isn't it? And what would you do if one, a few, or a lot out of the many who downloaded from your file won big-and they tried to keep all their money? I don't know how the lotto corp would view this .. expanded pool of lotto players, legally.

 

[mirage]

(Originally posted by millsy)
OK..HERE IS SOME INFO...all calcs include the bonus...
combo 3s - 1x 1120, 2x 2301, 3x 3327, 4x 3578, 5x 3002,
6x 2191, 7x 1350, 8x 716 9x 358, 10x 139, 11x 52, 12x 28,
13x 7...should be around 18424 total ..so far =2 18169...don't
play the ones that have not come up...play the more common ones...play tickets which contain 'well used' groups of combos of 3

combo 4's - 53966 -1x, 10285 -2x, 1299- 3x, 115 -4x, 11- 5x, 2 -6x
i look at c4's differently,,you want some duplicates...82,17 % are
one timers..so usually best to pick tickets with only 1 previously
used c4

combo 5 - 46086 1 x , 630 - 2x , 10 - 3x recall - using the bonus...
i have looked at them using and not using the bonus...for c5's
you can eliminate 3x and 2x - choose all new c5's or possible one
from a file of c5's using bonus less the c5 without the bonus file.
(subset of c5's ) 98 % ocurrances of c5's are fresh brand new.

re: end of lotto as we know it..NO WAY !..they make way too much money off this tax on stupidity...it is their best interest to
disregard our attempts to 'beat' the odds and merely call us
gamblers or addicts ! the 649 may have doubled the cost but
that was to increase the jackpot..their "market research" told
them people wanted bigger jackpots...sounds like "new coke"
market research ! it will be around long after i'm gone ...too many
suits getting big paychecks from the olc..they won't kill the golden goose.

This is really Cool! Gotta love it! (-I do anyway.) I think U R right. Btw, thanks for the reminder about the triples. And thanks for the other stats info. Yes I did a little figuring also. U R so right! It is a very good filter.

 

[kosteczki]

Good stuff.
I was thinking of using a couple of filters based on the ods of certain patterns playing.
For example
Numbers in the same tens group.
all 6 - 0.01%
5 - 0.11%
4 - 0.71%
3 - 3.83%
so automatically I will not play a combination that has 3 4 5 or 6 of their numbers in the same tens group.
Samething goes for numbers ending in the same digit, as long as there isn't 4 numbers ending in the same digit I will clear the combination to move on to the next filter.

Then I would check if the combination has even won, has had 5 of the numbers on a 5 or 5+B or has had numberous 4 numbers picked, then I won't play it.

forgot to add that even if the combination has had low occurences of 1 2 or 3 numbers I still wouldn't play it if 3 or more numbers in the combination have been chosen in the last 2 draws. (From my stats it's about about a 3.3% chance of a winning combination having 3 or more digits the same as the last or the second last draw.)

Ohh yeah combinations are picked randomnly first, I am trying to figure out how to set this up in excel, so eveyrhting would automatically get done and leave me with a list of all combinations that pass the above filters. Then I could randomnly pick out of that list not having to run filters manually.

 

[kosteczki]

Also forgot, no combination that all numbers are odds or all numbers are even. It eliminates just over 300k combinations or about 2.2% of combos.
Can't eliminate more based on this as 5 odd or 5 even count for over 2million combinations would be bad to eliminate them.

And of course I also make sure that out of the combinations being played there is about 52% of tickets having more ods than evens and about 48% having more evens than odds

 

[mirage]

Also forgot, no combination that all numbers are odds or all numbers are even. It eliminates just over 300k combinations or about 2.2% of combos.
Can't eliminate more based on this as 5 odd or 5 even count for over 2million combinations would be bad to eliminate them.

And of course I also make sure that out of the combinations being played there is about 52% of tickets having more ods than evens and about 48% having more evens than odds

Why not eliminate 5 odd or 5 even?
5 numbers odd or 5 numbers even, are just shy of 17% of possible combos only. The winning tickets of all odds or all evens, i.e. all 6 either/or, is only about 2% total. Together these two groups are less than 20%. The remainder of the jackpot winners are in the remaining, better than 80% category.

Furthermore, (not totally sure about this), but I think the actual history of the winning tickets show an odd/even ratio of 2/4 odd, or 2/4 even, or 3/3 each, that is actually greaterthan the statistical expectancy. This slighly statistical anomaly is true for both Can 6/49 and Ont 6/49 in the history of their draws. This is true for the jackpot numbers only and excludes the bonus. Anyway, I filter out all 5 or 6 odd, or all 5 or 6 even myself. I try for a balance. The odds are obviously better. This is I would say one of your main, most reliable filters...

 

[kosteczki]

I have been filtering out those as well, but 17% I am still undecided if it's too many to throw out or just enough. You do have a point it seems it happens a lot less than 17% of the time.

 

[mirage]

Originally posted by kosteczki

...I was thinking of using a couple of filters based on the ods of certain patterns playing.
For example
Numbers in the same tens group.
all 6 - 0.01%
5 - 0.11%
4 - 0.71%
3 - 3.83%
so automatically I will not play a combination that has 3 4 5 or 6 of their numbers in the same tens group.
Samething goes for numbers ending in the same digit, as long as there isn't 4 numbers ending in the same digit I will clear the combination to move on to the next filter.

Then I would check if the combination has even won, has had 5 of the numbers on a 5 or 5+B or has had numberous 4 numbers picked, then I won't play it.

forgot to add that even if the combination has had low occurences of 1 2 or 3 numbers I still wouldn't play it if 3 or more numbers in the combination have been chosen in the last 2 draws. (From my stats it's about about a 3.3% chance of a winning combination having 3 or more digits the same as the last or the second last draw.)...

Not clear about what you are commenting about above but, I think one of the things that trips ppl up a lot is that the decades (or tens) in winning combos break down as follows:

22110 pattern of numbers from any decade: 37% (aprox)
and
32100 pattern of numbers from any decade: 22% (aprox)
31110 pattern of numbers from any decade: 17% (aprox)
That's 76% at least of winning combos in patterns where you have either 2 and 2 from 2 diffent decades, with a decade missed, or else 3 from same decade with 2 decades or 1 decade missed. These are the decades patterns that make the most sense to play as majority of winning tickets are above patterns.

This is tricky- creating number combos with above decades patterns. The decades should switch around but this seem to depend upon which lottery and its habits. The possibilities are numerous. In recent draws in 6/49, 22110 even though 37% of draws, has been hitting consistently again and again, with only sometimes a change.

Only 14% (aprox) of winning combos drawn have all 5 decades represented.

The remaining decades patterns are practically miniscule by comparison, for example any combo with 4 numbers in the same decade.

(The above figures exclude the bonus number.)

 

[kosteczki]

I was talking about the total combinations out there not which ones have been drawn. There have only been 2250 or so darws in the Canadian 6/49 and stats based on previous performance can change drastically.

I will make some calculations later and try to explain better.

 

[millsy]

not to take anything away from your "decades" work, but here is
another way to look at the 'closeness' (?) of numbers...
consider the numbers which fall..and then look at (record) the
gaps between them..ie..1 8 15 27 35 45 bb (w/o bonus)
would have a gap of 7 7 12 8 10
..i have looked at gaps and there are many repeaters...
i use gaps as a filter..i play gaps which have already occured.
incidently, the sum of the gaps is equal to #6-#1 so you can
also use this as a filter..including the bonus in all possible combos
of 6 to date, the sum of gaps...or #6-#1...if 19 or less eliminate..
19 or less is 2.47% of occurances to date !

 

[mirage]

......
i use gaps as a filter..i play gaps which have already occured.
incidently, the sum of the gaps is equal to #6-#1 so you can
also use this as a filter..including the bonus in all possible combos
of 6 to date, the sum of gaps...or #6-#1...if 19 or less eliminate..
19 or less is 2.47% of occurances to date !...

millsy,
Please explain in more detail-not obvious what you mean here at all! At least not to me. Thanks! Otherwise, it's true-there are repeaters. Never looked at repeater gaps before as a filter. Interesting.

 

[millsy]

..one of the problems i had in justifying using decades for filtering is that they are kind of arbitrary...kind of like using the ticket
itself and saying ..how many fall in a row, or how many fall in one
column....if the ticket changed, so would the analysis..or it could anyway...so what i looked at, is not classifying by column, or group or decade but by the difference between adjacent numbers..take 9/17/2005 for example..04,07,13,33,40,47
the gaps are 3, 6, 20, 7, 7 save this as a pattern
now do all the draws such as;
(#2-#1), (#3-#2),(#4-#3), (#5-#4), (#6-#5)
gap 1 gap 2 gap 3 gap 4 gap 5

save all of these for all winning outcomes...then bubble sort...
but MAINTAIN the order ie..above ex; save 3, 6, 20, 7, 7
DO NOT sort as 3, 6, 7, 7, 20

you will end up with a file of 5 numbers like
1,2,6,8,5
1,2,6,8,5
1,5,4,8,7
1,5,5,8,5
2,6,4,7,5
2,6,4,7,5
etc
but record the number of times each pattern comes up...
1,2,6,8,5 2x
1,5,4,8,7 1x
1,5,5,8,5 1x
2,6,4,7,5 2x
etc
then sort according to # of times this "gap" pattern came up...
you will find there are..i forget...10 or twenty that come up all
the time....this is almost like changing the 649 into a 5 number
lottery !! really improves your odds...you then read potential
tickets to play....check for the gap patterns...perhaps play the most popular ones to get a nice %age of occurance...and use
it as a filter....it works great.....i just can't remember the
%ages..i wrote this one a long time ago..my program recalculates
the gaps every time, then takes the top %age ( i forget what
%age i used )..then uses this set of gaps as a filter.

 

[mirage]

<snip>take 9/17/2005 for example..04,07,13,33,40,47
the gaps are 3, 6, 20, 7, 7 save this as a pattern
now do all the draws such as;
(#2-#1), (#3-#2),(#4-#3), (#5-#4), (#6-#5)
gap 1 gap 2 gap 3 gap 4 gap 5

save all of these for all winning outcomes...then bubble sort...
but MAINTAIN the order ie..above ex; save 3, 6, 20, 7, 7
DO NOT sort as 3, 6, 7, 7, 20

you will end up with a file of 5 numbers like
1,2,6,8,5
1,2,6,8,5
1,5,4,8,7
1,5,5,8,5
2,6,4,7,5
2,6,4,7,5
etc
but record the number of times each pattern comes up...
1,2,6,8,5 2x
1,5,4,8,7 1x
1,5,5,8,5 1x
2,6,4,7,5 2x
etc
then sort according to # of times this "gap" pattern came up...
you will find there are..i forget...10 or twenty that come up all
the time<snip>

millsy,
Thank you, this explanation makes it much more clear. (Didn't quote it all because it was lengthy). However, you must have a heck of a lot of computing power and computing resources to do this. (I just have my humble PC and I'm no programmer.)

I'm not sure about the Can 6/49 but did a brief sample check of the Ont 6/49 winning results and the gaps are all over the place-
-- wild swings from gaps of 19 or greater, to all the different types of consecutives-about 63%, and everything in between. The number of draws that have at least one gap of 19 + for the Ont 6/49 based on my small sampling appears to be about 45%.

The only gaps that occurred with any useful regularity, and sometimes repeating, are 2, 3, 4, and 5, 6 and 7. Consecutives repeat a lot. Using the gap filter (and this you could do if you have a lot of computing power) for this lotto you would have to have a large set of numerous, different most popular gaps and all their permutations and use that as a filter but you could wait for the winning numbers to fall into your set of gap combos for a very long time. (Seems to me.) It's true that it takes it from a 6 number lotto down to sort of "a 5 number lotto", or something like that, but with all the different filters, unless you are playing a lot of tickets, you are still up against difficult odds.

But the repeater factor is interesting.

Personally I dislike consecutives (just 2 in a row is about 39-40%), because they could be anywhere... and then there are the 2 sets of 2 (7%), or 3 in a row(about 2%)...
I prefer the opposide filter of no consecutives.

Thanks again though for your info!

 

[millsy]

mirage - perhaps try this angle...look at the freq dist's by column
only...ie..a number like 4, 7, 13, 33, 40, 47 ( no bonus )...
put occurance of 4 in column 1 only..7 in col 2 only, 13 in col 3
only, etc...six columns..treat all winning numbers to date the
same...then calculated freq dist of each column....
col1 col2 col3 col4 col5 col6
1 14 21 31 43 49
2 12 20 34 38 47
4 9 22 28 40 48
3 8 25 27 41 45
etc,
i take three numbers from the top 4 of any column...usually
2 or more per winning ticket..i usually use 3 /6
..also..go back 3 draws...total n = 21 or less ( for duplicates)
again...as a filter, i use 2/21...again pretty reliable...

 

[mirage]

mirage - perhaps try this angle...look at the freq dist's by column
only...ie..a number like 4, 7, 13, 33, 40, 47 ( no bonus )...
put occurance of 4 in column 1 only..7 in col 2 only, 13 in col 3
only, etc...six columns..treat all winning numbers to date the
same...then calculated freq dist of each column....
col1 col2 col3 col4 col5 col6
1 14 21 31 43 49
2 12 20 34 38 47
4 9 22 28 40 48
3 8 25 27 41 45
<snip>

Sorry for being dense, but can you rephrase this somehow please?... Maybe in trying to simplify you are making it more confusing-
What do you mean here by "frequency distribution"?
You appear to state some actual draw numbers 4, 7, 13, 33, 40, 47 etc,
Then I can't see any relationship between the draw numbers given here and numbers shown under col1, col2, col3, col4, col5, or col6(?)
But I thought we had been discussing gaps as a filter- So wouldn't that be 5 columns(?)...
OK, backing up, being real slow--what do you mean again by "freq dist"? Thanks!


etc,
i take three numbers from the top 4 of any column...usually
2 or more per winning ticket..i usually use 3 /6
..also..go back 3 draws...total n = 21 or less ( for duplicates)
again...as a filter, i use 2/21...again pretty reliable...

If I were to guess at what might be useful here, are you saying just compile a list of gaps between each number per draw, and take 3 of those gaps from the top 4 draws...?

Or if what you are meaning is the statistical meaning of frequency distribution... I have a filter for those, and the averages over all draws but you are saying oftentimes there will be a repeat of 3 of those gaps corresponding with position from the last 4 draws?

 

[millsy]

sorry if i confused you...i was previously talking about gaps...
i have found you can use gaps quite reliably for the following;
all 6 numbers which create gap patterns of 5, and the "inside"
4 numbers ( omit column 1 and column 6 occurance ) just use
inside 4 numbers to get a gap pattern of 3.

..the stuff i mentioned more recently was a different 'angle'...
a different line of thought...it involves looking at the winning
results in terms of "columns" rather than rows,,,
for instance, sat night has 15 20 32 39 40 47 b30..
if you take all historic occurances, you will observe that
(obviously) #1 lands in column 1 all the time...never anywhere
else....also 49 lands in column 6 all the time..never anywhere else..ordinarily, when you do a frequency distribution (f/d) you'll
get 47, 31, 27, 32, etc...( these are by memory so they'll be
not exact)..so although 31 is 1st or second most common #,
it only ocurrs in column 4 - 107 x vs 01 which has fallen in col 1
285 x ! same with 49...falls in col 6 262 x !...i find that looking
at where a number usually or should fall ( ie column) will assist
in picking numbers...there are usually 2 or 3 in the top 4 of
any column which fall in the next draw...the set is relatively
stable..does not change much....looks like this..
col 1 col2 col3 col4 col5 col6
1 14 21 31 43 49
2 12 20 34 38 47
4 9 22 28 40 48
3 8 25 27 41 45
etc..
so use this as a filter...take the set of 24..play a ticket with
3 or more of them...
also...take last 3 draws..possible set of 21...and take any 2/21
as a filter as well...
these two work very well together