Im seeking a program that will generate and filter all 5/56 combinations

[RonnieG]

Im wondering if anyone can lead me to (or write) a program that will generate all the 5/56 combinations and then be able to filter all of them. Lotto Pro can only filter 10k combinations at a time.

I suppose there is no demand for such a thing but my idea is to start with a "total number" filter that (if I understand correctly) will capture the middle 50% of all the combinations. With 50% of the combos eliminated on a 5/56 game that would leave some 1.2 million combos that could then be filtered based on odd/even, consecutives, and maybe a couple of others.

Any suggestions or help?

Ronnie

 

[Frank]

Im wondering if anyone can lead me to (or write) a program that will generate all the 5/56 combinations and then be able to filter all of them. Lotto Pro can only filter 10k combinations at a time.

I suppose there is no demand for such a thing but my idea is to start with a "total number" filter that (if I understand correctly) will capture the middle 50% of all the combinations. With 50% of the combos eliminated on a 5/56 game that would leave some 1.2 million combos that could then be filtered based on odd/even, consecutives, and maybe a couple of others.

Any suggestions or help?

Ronnie

Well I don't use software filters (other than Excel) any more so perhaps I'm not the best person to advise. I do recall there was (and still is) an old DOS based program called amfilter which could do pretty much anything but I do not recall if it had any limits on how many combinations it could filter (I don't think it had). I haven't used it for 10 years and don't even know if it will install on modern machines but it is still available at :-
http://www.lotto-logix.com/download.html (The first one on the list). There are others on that page I have not tried.

I don't think you get much in the way of instructions with amfilter, its a bit trial and error as I recall. I think the problem and I assume this is common to all such programs is how & where do you display a million results , and what's the point anyway ? Amfilter could print out filtered results to a text file as I recall. It might take you a few months to scroll through and inspect them all, so good luck with that. You can of course apply loads of filters simultaneously and get the list down to a few thousand or even a few dozen, but by then you've made so many assumptions that what you are left with is garbage in my opinion. Perhaps others may take a different view.

Regards,
Frank

 

[RonnieG]

Hi Frank, So whats to point? Good question.

Everything we talk about here is almost pointless to start with but that doesnt seem to stop us from taking about it. lol.

In your post you assumed I would be making assumption to produce a final product and nothing could be further from the truth.

Let my ask a question to try and help clarify.

If I gave you two combiations to choose from for play, and I told you the first combiation had a 3 times better chance of being the winner, which would you choose to play?

Well, the very first filter I used above seperates all the combos into 2 pools. One of the pools has a 3 times better chance of containing the winning number combo. So if I was going to use one of the pools to grab a quick pick or two, which pool do you think I would choose from?

Its just an idea, but I was thinking in terms of maybe getting down to 200k (higher probability) combos and then using the pool for quick picks. It seems I may have better odds picking 8500 of these combos than playing a full 18 number wheel on a 5/56 game. (8500 combos)

I have noticed you playing 18 numbers in a 6 number lotto game. The total number of combos played in that game must be way more than 8500?

 

[Frank]

Hi Frank, So whats to point? Good question.

Everything we talk about here is almost pointless to start with but that doesnt seem to stop us from taking about it. lol.

In your post you assumed I would be making assumption to produce a final product and nothing could be further from the truth.

Let my ask a question to try and help clarify.

If I gave you two combiations to choose from for play, and I told you the first combiation had a 3 times better chance of being the winner, which would you choose to play?

Well, the very first filter I used above seperates all the combos into 2 pools. One of the pools has a 3 times better chance of containing the winning number combo. So if I was going to use one of the pools to grab a quick pick or two, which pool do you think I would choose from?

Its just an idea, but I was thinking in terms of maybe getting down to 200k (higher probability) combos and then using the pool for quick picks. It seems I may have better odds picking 8500 of these combos than playing a full 18 number wheel on a 5/56 game. (8500 combos)

I have noticed you playing 18 numbers in a 6 number lotto game. The total number of combos played in that game must be way more than 8500?

Hi Ronnie,

You are right, I assumed you were starting from a full house of combinations and diluting them down using loads of filters to end up with a 'managable', viewable, playable list. As I said, to do that would throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Well I see where you are coming from in creating 2 lists of combos, but "One of the pools has a 3 times better chance of containing the winning number combo" is a big assumption isn't it ? You can't possibly know that. Nothing wrong with making the assumption though, based on what you think is due, you have to start with something. When you get down to your 200k combinations you still need other criteria to enable you to choose which to pick. Its a matter of luck whether the critieria you choose works for you on the day.
I'm not sure you've seen me playing 18 numbers in the 6/49 game. You may have seen me create a shortlist of 18 numbers using one particular system, but as you say there needs to be more refinement since normally one cannot afford to to play all combinations. I wouldn't use a filter or a wheel (at that stage) to do so though. I would use another system to create another shortlist and cross reference the 2 shortlists. Where they intersect with the same balls would give me a reduced set. Yes we are back to assumptions again but that way there is no need for filters and you can get it down to an affordable wheel.

 

[RonnieG]

Thanks for the reply Fronk,

Communication is not one of my stong suits. lol. But I will keep trying.

The "total number" filter is displayed as a bell curve in which the winning numbers fall in the middle 50% of the curve 75% of the time.

It is pure math to say that one pool (each pool has half the combos) will have the winnier 3 times, to every 1 time the other pool has the winner.

Assumtions wiil obviously need to be made at some point in order to play, but it seems using tested filters (like the one above) would be a good place to start in order to eliminate all "lower" probability combinations and then go forward from there.

 

[jack]

Hello, Ron, it's just my idea, making 56 / 5 = 100% we 3819.816
Now if you take the ends (the final digit of each number) we have 100,000 (hundred thousand) to 100%, and to filter these 100 000 endings, ranging from the 0th 9 (of course then you'll have to add the digit in front of number). example 26 digit is the digit 2 front ok. Turns out the front of the digit from 0 to 5.eu not know how many already have your lottery results
But bet that four endings (final digit) failed twice (there is a good filter)

 

[ExpertLotto]

Im wondering if anyone can lead me to (or write) a program that will generate all the 5/56 combinations and then be able to filter all of them.

the free version of Expert Lotto software can filter any amount of combinations.

 

[Frank]

Ronnie you are right to assume that statistically on average over time that the group occupying the middle of the bell curve will contain the winning result the most times, but it also contains the most combinations to choose from. Even then there is no guarantee that your middle set will get a hit in the next draw.
I've been there done that, my analysis of the UK lotto sums performance has been running on my website (lotterygen.co.uk) for 17 years and it plots when a sum group (in increments of 10 ) is expected, and when it is overdue. In the 6/49 you can stasitically expect a result in the sum range 141 to 150 every 8.54 draws, but unfortunately there are still 1,638,159 combinations in that narrow sum band alone ! So you've a one in eight and a half chance of capturing the result in that band, and also a one in 1,638,159 chance of choosing the right result from the band. The true odds are thus 1,638,159 x 8.54 =13,983,816 to 1- a figure which should look familiar to all 6/49 players.

With your 5/56 your most prolific sum band is the 138 to 147 band which contains 422,948 combinations and which on average should get a hit every 9.03 draws. The same chances apply, one in 9.3 of that specific band containing the result and additionally one in 422,948 of you chooing the exact result in it were you that lucky. that of course equals one in 3,819,816 - the number you first started with.
For your lottery, the 101 to 180 sum band contains 74% of the combinations - 2,827,007 and an expectation of a hit on average every 1.35 draws which is good. Still a lot of combinations to whittle down though.

This image hopefully should explain what you are up against.

Good luck, Frank

 

[Frank]

By the way, I can't edit the above but the multiplication I just did doesn't exactly match the end result exact because I'm dealing with rounded figures from tables and multiplying.

 

[Frank]

double post deleted .

 

[Icewynd]

Ronnie,

LotWin Lottery Line Builder software will allow you to do what you wish. It lets you establish ranges for a large number of lottery parameters, eg. sums, decades, etc. So you could pick your range of sums and then filter with other parameters til you reached the number of combinations you wanted -- the software tells you how many combinations are still in the running after each new rule is added.

Problem is, it is NOT cheap! Can't purchase the software, but must take a subscription to the online system. However, you can 'try before you buy' with a free trial.

 

[RonnieG]

Thank Ice, Im looking at Lotto Expert and will look at LotWin.

Frank, how can the 75% group "also contains the most combinations to choose from" if the filter divides everything into 2 equally sized groups?

Each group has 50% (the middle 50% and all the rest) 50/50 Right?

Im not sure if Im doing a awful job of explaining my point, or you are just missing the simplicity of the math? (or Im just crazy. lol.)

Your system may be way better than anything I could ever come up with, but in theory (this is strickly theory/speculation) 5 equally effective filters would bring the 5/56 total combos down to about 119K and come in 3 out of 4 times! lol.

3,819,816 - 50% = 1,909,908
1,909,908 - 50% = 954,954
954,954 - 50% = 477,477
477,477 - 50% = 238,738
238,738 - 50% = 119,369

I guess I can only dream that it would work this well. A pool of 119,369 combos that wins 3 out of 4 times would be a dream come true considering 5 white balls on Mega pays $250k lol. You cant blame a guy for dreaming. lol.

Thats $750k in winnings for every $480k played, lol, plus having a 75% chance of hitting the Mega ball once out of every 46 games. lol.

I wish I had thought of this sooner!

 

[Frank]

Each group has 50% (the middle 50% and all the rest) 50/50 Right?

Wrong.

You said yourself this is a bell curve. The area under the curve represents ALL the combinations. If you take the middle 50% of the width of the curve you will see that the area beneath it is a lot more than 50% of the area ! That's where you are going wrong. If you take the trouble of looking at my sums analysis on my website or even just looking at the table image I posted above and do some simple arithmetic with the middle sets of figures you should see for yourself. Theres 25 bands of sums all of equal span (10) apart from the first one. So the middle 50% of the curve that that table plots ranges from spans (81 to 90) TO (191 to 200) thats 12 equal spans. Leaving at the edges of the table the rest, 6 spans at the top and seven spans at the bottom.

Surely you can see that when you total up the number of combinations in the 2 outer sectors and total up the combinations in the middle 50% sector there are a lot more of them ? I'll leave you to think about it.