Not right on target with many of these ....maybe these bonus draws are affecting them???Nick Koutras said:LottoSelectorXL
picks
version 4.0
Algorithm Hypotheses & BellCurve
27,29,10,21,15,22,13,49,43,46
Generated Lines:
10 13 15 21 46 49
10 13 15 22 43 46
10 13 15 27 29 46
10 13 15 27 29 49
10 13 21 22 29 43
10 13 21 27 43 49
10 13 22 27 46 49
10 15 21 22 27 29
10 15 21 29 43 49
10 15 22 27 43 49
10 21 22 29 46 49
10 21 27 29 43 46
13 15 21 22 29 46
13 15 21 22 43 49
13 15 21 27 43 46
13 15 22 27 29 43
13 15 29 43 46 49
13 21 22 27 29 49
15 21 22 27 46 49
22 27 29 43 46 49
Originally posted by Lootoman
Here we are again with that # 32 ,is the 29 -47 on the doorstep this time ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what I was affraid of....originally posted by the great one
Maybe and maybe not...Do you know that there are bonus draws going on?? You might very well see them in one of those...
hot4 said:Peter,
<snip> ...
However, if I'd to choose just one number, I think *16* has my choice. I remember you considered 16 and 46, a very good pair.
This choice came while looking to the chart of all numbers, but as I told here before, don't trust my guess, because I don't use to test this kind of choices.
Frank
Dennis Bassboss said:...And many that I would have played....![]()
Dennis Bassboss said:They didn't fooled me this time....I took a look at these bonus's draws...They are flooded with the 28-29 open pair...And many that I would have played....Now tell me if these have no incidences in the actual draw.....
I am not surprized that it didn't go....![]()
Beaker said:George,
I think we can use the data for some short term analysis but I won't be incorporating these draws into the regular history - I didn't last October either
Strictly speaking, there are 2 BIG problems - the first is it's only 6 numbers and this can skew overall percentages for some stats if you incorporate them. The second problem is these draws come from the same ball set, not different ones, so if there is some small bias in the ball set, you may be able to see it. This, of course, doesn't help with the regular draw but if that ball set is chosen a few times it could really mess things up.![]()
I think what I will do is the following:
1) short-term analysis (say upto 20 draws) with all 7 numbers/regular draws
2) short-term analysis with regular draws + bonus draws included (upto say 20 draws)
3) Complete histroy analysis with regular 7 numbers - no bonus draws included.
Basically, I won't use the bonus draws in 'all history' stats and I will compare 1) & 2) just to see if it shows me anything
my .02![]()
The best way to adapt is simple ...don't play too much in the short term strategy...gsobier said:Dennis:
This was almost another Birthday Draw is how I look at it... ...if 39 was 29 we'd be back to $2M. This is the reason why we have carry over the way I see it.
This is the first time with bonus draws so I'm learning as we go. Why not look at the bonus draws and pretend they were regular draws? From the last bonus draw, you should be able to do your usual stuff. We all know there is no bonus number in these draws... ...in my mind (this is not an attack on anyone, just my opinion), a good player could find a way and adapt to compensate for the duration.
My software/process can operate with or without bonus numbers.
The bottom line, use the last bonus draw as a the starting point for now. The content of the previous bonus draws (the other 4) will show you something, would it not?
Regards,
George![]()
This was the original post not that half crap that you posted jerk!Dennis Bassboss said:They didn't fooled me this time....I took a look at these bonus's draws...They are flooded with the 28-29 open pair...And many that I would have played....Now tell me if these have no incidences in the actual draw.....
I am not surprized that it didn't go....![]()
Originally posted by NmbrsDude on the current attack on my person
Sure, sure, Dennis. I'm certain everyone here was also thinking of playing all six winning numbers but we somehow just didn't get around to it. Look who's talking about posting crocks...
Oh and here's my Dennis impression just to make this post more easy to digest "respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, from the amazingly astonishing most credible guy on this forum, blah, blah, blah, blah... I'm the best... blah, blah blah... don't argue with me... blah, blah, blah... I know everything about lotteries... blah, blah, blah... the only reason I haven't won the big one yet is because I don't want to, it's beneath me.... blah, blah, blah... I actually have won the big one, I'm just not letting anyone know... blah, blah, blah... I just do this for fun to teach you little people something... blah, blah, blah... " there, that about covers it I think.![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
ND
PS And don't give me that other crock about the bonus draws. A good statistician would know to just ignore the output of the extra five draws and just get on with it. But hey, what do I know, I'm not the great Dennis (respectfully, respectfully, respectfully, etc... blah, blah, blah...)![]()
Leave it behind you ! Do you know what it means???NmbrsDude in his last prior attack on my person said:I'm all for it!!
This is the most impressive statement I have seen.NmbrsDude said:Alright, Dennis,
Maybe it's time for a more constructive approach.
<snip>
![]()
It's not your mission, nor anyone elses, to change someone's posting style or content and if you feel the need and you are 'over the edge' - walk away and come back another time.Here's what I propose. In the past, I've tried to not say anything for as long as I can stand it and then, finally, you put out a post that just puts me over the edge and I feel like I have to reign you in. This causes you to feel that I'm attacking you out of the blue out of some jealous impulse. This is not the case so no more of that!
Do ya think.Beaker said:
Sitting on the sidelines here, this is beginning to smell a little personal. Hopefully, this can end in peace - soon.![]()