Geometrical Draw Patterns

Hi Lotto Lovers:

I came across an interesting thing about picking lotto numbers extracted from a newsletter. Because HTML formatting is a problem here, I have posted it at another forum for clear reading.

You may find this idea below (I will post it a little later due to format problems on this site.

Hope you like it. If you have a different or a more innovative idea, please do not hesitate to share it!

GreenBacks to you all!
 
Last edited:

Beaker

Member
You know what DreamLotto, our host LT does NOT allow posting to other discussion groups. :no:

If you want, repost the entire concept text only.
 
Sorry, I did not know. I am new here.

Dear All,

I will do so after a bit of formatting so the topic is clear (it is actually in tables originally.

Regards
 

Brad

Member
Uh oh ... a major faux pas ... posting a link to another lotto forum is strictly prohibited and a punishable offence :dang:

Write 13,983,816 times: "I MUST read the rules" ...
then go stand in the corner for the rest of this century!!! :dunce:

You can edit out your link too DreamLotto
 
Here's It Again!

Hey Lotto Lovers:

Here's one for you all who play Pick-5. I got this extract from a lotto newsletter. Hope you like it. Please share more ideas if you improvize on this!

When you stand in the Lottery shop it is always not easy to make a quick decision on what to play. Here are ideas on how to come up with some decent numbers quick.

Let's take for example 5/39 California Fantasy 5: 6/7/2003 numbers were 08-09-32-36-39

Let's look at them in a table:

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

We see immediately that some regions on in the table are not even touched.

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Many numbers (not bolded) are not touched at all. But too many to play. The first thing is get rid of numbers around the hit areas. Two on both sides.

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Now let's only keep a eliminate one number with the same end digit, top to bottom: (e.g. leave 1 get rid of 21)

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Now we have 14 numbers left to wheel or to play:
1, 3, 4, 5, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25.

If you would have played a full wheel of those 13?
You would have won it all: Yesterday's numbers were:
01-05-16-23-24. Darn! Good Luck!

Sometimes it's almost too easy to win and we miss it!

GreenBacks To You...!!
 

Brad

Member
Beak, where's your post??

Beaker, something weird is going on here ... on the Home page I saw you as having posted at 10:40 PST (same time as my post) but the post is NOT there??

Hopefully we're not heading for a crash :dang:
 
Hi...! Don't Worry!!

Well,

Please don't be alarmed. May be because of time zone difference. I am online now, and it's 11:30 PM in India.

Thanks.
 

Brad

Member
DreamLotto

Not really worried

... BUT would like you to edit/delete the link in your first post ... also you are in the incorrect section, you should be in strategies
 

Beaker

Member
Decade analysis - revisited

DreamLotto, this analysis is nothing new - called decade elimination - and is very common in many lottos. Also, 7x7 elimination.

Here in Canada, for our 6/49 lotto a rough rule of thumb is , 6 out of 10 draws has 1 decade missing, 3 out of 10 has at least 2 decades missing and 1 out of 10 has all decades in the picks.

I'm certain if you wait a bit, someone will post the actual decade miss stats here.

We have extended this to determine what numbers announce the decades which will miss.

I routinely look at decade-announcers. Actually, if you look at delta analysis, very often you can eliminate 20 or more numbers - a decade plus numbers +/-

Thanks for posting :agree2:
 
Dear Brad,

I'm sorry for the inadvertant offense.

If you feel that the link conflicts with the interests of this forum and fellow members, please go ahead and edit my post.

Regards.
 

Beaker

Member
DreamLotto said:
Dear Brad,

I'm sorry for the inadvertant offense.

If you feel that the link conflicts with the interests of this forum and fellow members, please go ahead and edit my post.

Regards.
You can edit it yourself DreamLotto - no one except you and LT can modify a post. Just delete the url and that will be fine :agree:
 

Rebeckah

Member
what newsletter is this? Could you post a link to it? Or if it has a forum on the site, then just name the newsletter & I'll google it. thanks. :thumb:

I think this system is not much better than a RNG. What's the mathematical proof/logic of WHY this works? Adjacent & repeat #s hit quite frequently & this system eliminates those completely. This system will only win when you have a winning line that has ZERO adjacents and ZERO repeats. & That is more rare than having them hit.
:agree:
 

Irvin

Member
Rebeckah said:
what newsletter is this? Could you post a link to it? Or if it has a forum on the site, then just name the newsletter & I'll google it. thanks. :thumb:

I think this system is not much better than a RNG. What's the mathematical proof/logic of WHY this works? Adjacent & repeat #s hit quite frequently & this system eliminates those completely. This system will only win when you have a winning line that has ZERO adjacents and ZERO repeats. & That is more rare than having them hit.
:agree:
I agree with Rebeckah. In the last 50 draws of the NZ lotto there has only been 1 draw with no adjacent numbers.

And we regularly get 2 or 3 adjacent numbers.
 

GillesD

Member
Results for decades

Here is the data Beaker was refering to earlier:

For Lotto 6/49 after 2060 draws:

- 14.3% of the draws had numbers in 5 decades (14.2%):
- 53.3% of the draws had numbers in 4 decades (53.3%):
- 29.8% of the draws had numbers in 3 decades (30.1%):
- 2.9% of the draws had numbers in 2 decades (2.4%):
- 0.0% of the draws had numbers in 1 decade (0.0% but not 0).

The values in brackets at the end are the theorical values based on all 13,983,816 combinations. Not much difference in all cases.
 

gsobier

Member
Re: Results for decades

GillesD:

83.1% is at least 1 decade missing (putting 3 and 4 together). That is pretty good for me:agree:. Strategy is so very important.

If you want to play all decades and spread yourself too thin and then its your problem, ill advised too:no:. There are exceptions but the odds against you does increase.

Regards,
George:)
GillesD said:
Here is the data Beaker was refering to earlier:

For Lotto 6/49 after 2060 draws:

- 14.3% of the draws had numbers in 5 decades (14.2%):
- 53.3% of the draws had numbers in 4 decades (53.3%):
- 29.8% of the draws had numbers in 3 decades (30.1%):
- 2.9% of the draws had numbers in 2 decades (2.4%):
- 0.0% of the draws had numbers in 1 decade (0.0% but not 0).

The values in brackets at the end are the theorical values based on all 13,983,816 combinations. Not much difference in all cases.
 

Beaker

Member
Re: Re: Results for decades

gsobier said:
GillesD:

83.1% is at least 1 decade missing (putting 3 and 4 together). That is pretty good for me:agree:. Strategy is so very important.

If you want to play all decades and spread yourself too thin and then its your problem, ill advised too:no:. There are exceptions but the odds against you does increase.

Regards,
George:)
A little more than that George :agree: At least 1 is 100-14.3=85.7

Thats 8-9 draws out of 10 which is originally what I had (6 with one, 3 with at least 2 or more and 1 with all decades)

Bottom line is you need to try to eliminate these.
 
Top