March 5 DISCUSSION

What is this???
1994=12
1993=13
1992=17
1991=21
1990=13
1989=15
1988=11
1987=22
1986=24
1985=23
1984=15
1983=06
1982=14
1981=11
1980=17
1979=13
1978=09
1977=27
1976=12
1975=16
Well here it is it represent the largest gap inside the winning combinations (regular numbers only)of these draws...
example draw 1994=05-17-22-34-40-47
The largest gap is 17-05=12 and 34-22=12
so 12 is the largest gap in this draw....and generally speaking in the last draws when the largest gap is at 12 or under the next draw will have a higher highest gap...
It could be interesting to use for predicting the spread of lines within your picks... Do you see this Winhunter's users And Gilles would you give us all the history on this please...My eyes are hurting me badly now...
 

Beaker

Member
Dennis Bassboss said:
What is this???
1994=12
1993=13
1992=17
1991=21
1990=13
1989=15
1988=11
1987=22
1986=24
1985=23
1984=15
1983=06
1982=14
1981=11
1980=17
1979=13
1978=09
1977=27
1976=12
1975=16
Well here it is it represent the largest gap inside the winning combinations (regular numbers only)of these draws...
example draw 1994=05-17-22-34-40-47
The largest gap is 17-05=12 and 34-22=12
so 12 is the largest gap in this draw....and generally speaking in the last draws when the largest gap is at 12 or under the next draw will have a higher highest gap...
It could be interesting to use for predicting the spread of lines within your picks... Do you see this Winhunter's users And Gilles would you give us all the history on this please...My eyes are hurting me badly now...
Dennis, is this not the largest Delta number ? I thought we always got 2 deltas the same?

Maybe GillesD can analyze that one. :agree:

It would be interesting to refresh that one.

So,

1. all different deltas
2. one pair
3. two pairs
4. three pairs
5. triple.
6 one pair, one triple
7.quad

what else ?:confused:
 
Beaker said:
Dennis, is this not the largest Delta number ? I thought we always got 2 deltas the same?

Maybe GillesD can analyze that one. :agree:
Yes it is like compiling deltas but I do not compile them all only the highest and you do not always have 2 anyways Beaker...Yes I'll leave that one to Gilles... :agree:
 

Beaker

Member
Dennis Bassboss said:
But when counting only the highest it could be run inside the existing parameters of Winhunter Beaker! :agree:
THe way to use it is what you said - spread of line - or even with the positional grid.

you might get something like:

machine 1: 1,4,5,9,12
machine 2: 3,6,7,9
machine 3: 1,12
machine 4: 5,6,1
machine 5: 1,4,7,5
machine 6: 4,20

As with all delta analysis machine 1 is the seed, so you start to build your positional grid from there.

Could give us another view on high/low also from machine 1 :agree:
 

GillesD

Member
Largest gap analysis

This is basically a subset of the good old Delta theory.

Here is the distribution of the largest gap for 1994 draws:

01 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 0.00%
02 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 0.00%
03 -- 001 times -- 0.05% -- 0.05%
04 -- 002 times -- 0.10% -- 0.15%
05 -- 016 times -- 0.80% -- 0.95%
06 -- 015 times -- 0.75% -- 1.71%
07 -- 037 times -- 1.86% -- 3.56%
08 -- 052 times -- 2.61% -- 6.17%
09 -- 077 times -- 3.86% -- 10.03%
10 -- 097 times -- 4.86% -- 14.89%
11 -- 120 times -- 6.02% -- 20.91%
12 -- 148 times -- 7.42% -- 28.34%
13 -- 189 times -- 9.48% -- 37.81%
14 -- 158 times -- 7.92% -- 45.74%
15 -- 166 times -- 8.32% -- 54.06%
16 -- 168 times -- 8.43% -- 62.49%
17 -- 120 times -- 6.02% -- 68.51%
18 -- 110 times -- 5.52% -- 74.02%
19 -- 097 times -- 4.86% -- 78.89%
20 -- 075 times -- 3.76% -- 82.65%
21 -- 067 times -- 3.36% -- 86.01%
22 -- 056 times -- 2.81% -- 88.82%
23 -- 040 times -- 2.01% -- 90.82%
24 -- 039 times -- 1.96% -- 92.78%
25 -- 035 times -- 1.76% -- 94.53%
26 -- 024 times -- 1.20% -- 95.74%
27 -- 031 times -- 1.55% -- 97.29%
28 -- 013 times -- 0.65% -- 97.94%
29 -- 010 times -- 0.50% -- 98.45%
30 -- 012 times -- 0.60% -- 99.05%
31 -- 003 times -- 0.15% -- 99.20%
32 -- 006 times -- 0.30% -- 99.50%
33 -- 002 times -- 0.10% -- 99.60%
34 -- 003 times -- 0.15% -- 99.75%
35 -- 002 times -- 0.10% -- 99.85%
36 -- 001 times -- 0.05% -- 99.90%
37 -- 001 times -- 0.05% -- 99.95%
38 -- 001 times -- 0.05% -- 100.00%
39 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%
40 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%
41 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%
42 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%
43 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%
44 -- 000 times -- 0.00% -- 100.00%

The first column indicates the largest gap, the second one the number of times it occured, the third one the percentage it occured and finally the cumulative percentage.

The smallest value (3) was obtained in draw #932 with numbers 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20 and the largest one (38) in draw #1521 with numbers 1, 4, 8, 9, 47, 48

So saying that with the largest gap of 12 or lower for a draw, the next draw will have one over 12 makes sense but whatever the largest gap is, in the next draw it wil be higher than 12 more than 7 times out of 10
.
 
According to these stats...This could be a very awesome filter....for many lines created by Winhunter or any software!
As a general statement we can say that
68.885656% of the winning sets are having a highest gap from 10 to 19 including 10 and 19...
 

Beaker

Member
Dennis Bassboss said:
According to these stats...This could be a very awesome filter....for many lines created by Winhunter or any software!
As a general statement we can say that
68.885656% of the winning sets are having a highest gap from 10 to 19 including 10 and 19...
Yes, I was just looking at that one. :agree:

And the other one is that some % has total gaps between 1-6 - I can't remember that stat - maybe GillesD can do that one quickly. I think its that high - 68% - also.
 

GillesD

Member
Distribution of gaps

Beaker, you finally asked a challenging question (as far as my Excel skills are concerned). This is the distribution of gaps you wanted:

- 969 times (48.60%) with distribution 1-1-1-1-1 (all different gaps)
- 848 times (42.53%) with distribution 2-1-1-1 (twice one gap and the 3 other different)
- 79 times (3.96%) with distribution 2-2-1 (2 times 2 gap equal and the other one different)
- 89 times (4.46%) with distribution 3-1-1 (3 gaps equal and the other ones diferent)
- 6 times (0.30%) with distribution 3-2 (3 gaps equal and the other 2 also equal)
- 2 times (0.10%) with distribution 4-1 (4 gaps equal and the other one different)
- 1 time (0.05%) with all gaps equal

This last one is certainly most interesting one. The winning numbers for draw #670 are: 22 - 27 - 32 - 37 - 42 - 47

What a nice pattern! And I was always looking for a regular pattern but I sure missed that one. Thanks for the question, Beaker. I will now use this example to whoever says the 1-2-3-4-5-6 combination can not happen. This is as unlikely to happen as the 1-2-3-4-5-6 combination, just that the starting number is 22 and the gap is 5.
 

Beaker

Member
Re: Distribution of gaps

GillesD said:
Beaker, you finally asked a challenging question (as far as my Excel skills are concerned). This is the distribution of gaps you wanted:

- 969 times (48.60%) with distribution 1-1-1-1-1 (all different gaps)
- 848 times (42.53%) with distribution 2-1-1-1 (twice one gap and the 3 other different)
- 79 times (3.96%) with distribution 2-2-1 (2 times 2 gap equal and the other one different)
- 89 times (4.46%) with distribution 3-1-1 (3 gaps equal and the other ones diferent)
- 6 times (0.30%) with distribution 3-2 (3 gaps equal and the other 2 also equal)
- 2 times (0.10%) with distribution 4-1 (4 gaps equal and the other one different)
- 1 time (0.05%) with all gaps equal

This last one is certainly most interesting one. The winning numbers for draw #670 are: 22 - 27 - 32 - 37 - 42 - 47

What a nice pattern! And I was always looking for a regular pattern but I sure missed that one. Thanks for the question, Beaker. I will now use this example to whoever says the 1-2-3-4-5-6 combination can not happen. This is as unlikely to happen as the 1-2-3-4-5-6 combination, just that the starting number is 22 and the gap is 5.

:lol: I knew you'd like that one :agree2: Thanks for this.

Now, when you do your gap analysis, do you consider the first number the first gap or just 5 gaps?

For example last draw:

5-17-22-34-40-47

Gap1 definition = 5-12-5-12-6-7 with first number included OR
Gap2 definition = 12-5-12-6-7 without first number.

If you use Gap1 definition, your numbers will go up, obviously but I think you see more pairs/triples etc. Of course if you include bonus, these go up as well. :agree:
 

GillesD

Member
Total gaps

Beaker, I am not sure what you wanted to say but:

Out of the 9,970 gaps (1994 x 5), 5632 of them (or nearly 56.5%) are between 1 and 6. And 2642 of them (or nearly 26.5%) are from 7 to 12.
 

GillesD

Member
Use of lowest number

I have seen the Delta theory explained with or without the lowest number.

But for me when analyzing gaps, the lowest number should not be considered, a gap being the difference between two consecutive and increasing numbers. All calculations are based on this.
 

Beaker

Member
Re: Total gaps

GillesD said:
Beaker, I am not sure what you wanted to say but:

Out of the 9,970 gaps (1994 x 5), 5632 of them (or nearly 56.5%) are between 1 and 6. And 2642 of them (or nearly 26.5%) are from 7 to 12.
Sorry Gilles, I don't mean the value of the gaps, I am referring to the number of gaps

Consider this:
N1...Gap1...N2...Gap2...N3...Gap3...N4...Gap4..N5...Gap5...N6 = 5 gaps

OR

Gap1...N1...Gap2...N2...Gap3...N3...Gap4...N4...Gap5...N5...Gap6...N6 = 6 gaps

Where Gap1=N1
 

Beaker

Member
Re: Use of lowest number

GillesD said:
I have seen the Delta theory explained with or without the lowest number.

But for me when analyzing gaps, the lowest number should not be considered, a gap being the difference between two consecutive and increasing numbers. All calculations are based on this.
OK :agree2: thanks for the clarification and those great stats. :agree2:
 
Re: Re: Distribution of gaps

Beaker said:
:lol: I knew you'd like that one :agree2: Thanks for this.

Now, when you do your gap analysis, do you consider the first number the first gap or just 5 gaps?

For example last draw:

5-17-22-34-40-47

Gap1 definition = 5-12-5-12-6-7 with first number included OR
Gap2 definition = 12-5-12-6-7 without first number.

If you use Gap1 definition, your numbers will go up, obviously but I think you see more pairs/triples etc. Of course if you include bonus, these go up as well. :agree:
I was about to ask the same thing here....
When the first number is high lets say 22 ..Then we start by having a gap of 22...
22-00=22
Of course the delta ways of doing it always starts by looking at the first 2 numbers from the winning set...
This is where the gap system is different in my mind because the 00 value is the first one to be used to substract the first number appearing!
 

Sidebar

Top