ON/49 Discussion for Feb 19 2005

[Snides]

Some of you 'ol timers might recognize this, those that are new to it, try to figure it out before asking questions...

01 08 15 22 29 36 43 | 04 02 01 13 10 06 20 Draw # 767 2 6 33 35 45 47 1
02 09 16 23 30 37 44 | 11 07 06 20 09 08 01 Last Hit per # 11 3 12 23 3 6 4
03 10 17 24 31 38 45 | 02 09 01 02 13 03 03 Delta's 2 4 27 2 10 2
04 11 18 25 32 39 46 | 03 18 03 05 10 09 02
05 12 19 26 33 40 47 | 19 06 04 03 12 02 06
06 13 20 27 34 41 48 | 03 02 09 05 16 01 01
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 | 05 01 07 04 23 05 01

01 08 15 22 29 36 43 | 01 03 02 14 11 07 21 Draw # 768 4 6 20 34 43 46 25
02 09 16 23 30 37 44 | 01 08 07 21 10 09 02 Last Hit per # 4 1 10 17 21 3 6
03 10 17 24 31 38 45 | 03 10 02 03 14 04 01 Delta's 4 2 14 14 9 3
04 11 18 25 32 39 46 | 04 19 04 06 11 10 03
05 12 19 26 33 40 47 | 20 07 05 04 01 03 01
06 13 20 27 34 41 48 | 01 03 10 06 17 02 02
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 | 06 02 08 05 01 06 02

01 08 15 22 29 36 43 | 02 04 03 15 12 08 01 Draw # 769 9 23 24 25 35 48 12
02 09 16 23 30 37 44 | 02 09 08 22 11 10 03 Last Hit per # 9 22 4 1 2 3 8
03 10 17 24 31 38 45 | 04 11 03 04 15 05 02 Delta's 9 14 1 1 10 13
04 11 18 25 32 39 46 | 01 20 05 01 12 11 01
05 12 19 26 33 40 47 | 21 08 06 05 02 04 02
06 13 20 27 34 41 48 | 01 04 01 07 01 03 03
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 | 07 03 09 06 02 07 03

01 08 15 22 29 36 43 | 03 05 04 16 13 09 02 Draw # 770 5 18 22 37 41 46 3
02 09 16 23 30 37 44 | 03 01 09 01 12 11 04 Last Hit per # 22 6 16 11 4 2 5
03 10 17 24 31 38 45 | 05 12 04 01 16 06 03 Delta's 5 13 4 15 4 5
04 11 18 25 32 39 46 | 02 21 06 01 13 12 02
05 12 19 26 33 40 47 | 22 01 07 06 03 05 03
06 13 20 27 34 41 48 | 02 05 02 08 02 04 01
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 | 08 04 10 07 01 08 04

01 08 15 22 29 36 43 | 04 06 05 01 14 10 03 Draw # 771 23 27 36 38 43 48 44
02 09 16 23 30 37 44 | 04 02 10 02 13 01 05 Last Hit per # 2 9 10 7 3 2 5
03 10 17 24 31 38 45 | 01 13 05 02 17 07 04 Delta's 23 4 9 2 5 5
04 11 18 25 32 39 46 | 03 22 01 02 14 13 01
05 12 19 26 33 40 47 | 01 02 08 07 04 06 04
06 13 20 27 34 41 48 | 03 06 03 09 03 01 02
07 14 21 28 35 42 49 | 09 05 11 08 02 09 05

 

[mirage]

Snides,
I'm not going to do the "quote" of your stats sheet/graph. I can see what it is and what it's about but how do you use it?
Anyway, that's interesting.....(?)
Maybe I need to look somemore and the answer will jump out at me. Hmmm.....

 

[Snides]

It's a graphical way of looking at the last 5 draws.. I can tell you how I use it, but that may not spark your thoughts about new ideas.. If you can't figure out the basics, or come up with some ideas by friday night, let me know and I'll explain a bit more of it..

I'm trying to post some of the other colourful postingss I used to do in another corner of the internet, but I have to re-write a bunch of it first because this forum won't allow more than 10,000 characters per post

 

[mirage]

It's a graphical way of looking at the last 5 draws.. I can tell you how I use it, but that may not spark your thoughts about new ideas.. If you can't figure out the basics, or come up with some ideas by friday night, let me know and I'll explain a bit more of it..

I'm trying to post some of the other colourful postingss I used to do in another corner of the internet, but I have to re-write a bunch of it first because this forum won't allow more than 10,000 characters per post

Thanks but,
Last 5 draws - is it enough to get a handle on something useful? This is just an example for demonstration purposes? - Because forum wont allow more characters - OK, but if you had the same format in say 30 draws, then it would be more useful? And you find that it works for you? Please explain how you use it - would be most interesting.

Looking at it reminds me of a Rubiks cube in 2D. Only way more complex. (You were probably a wiz at Rubiks, right?)

For the last 20 years I confess I've been used to looking at the draw numbers marked in the squares on plain old graph paper. That way I can easily see which numbers/decade, see hot & hot skips, and cold numbers and cold areas. It's easier on the eyes than looking at actual numbers, at least I find. I try to find what looks like a hot number and build around that number using various methods.

My personal guesses at hot numbers including repeats would be 1, 4, 6, 25, 40, 41, 44, 45, 46, 47. 27 or 38 & 48 also look good for repeats. There's been a lot of numbers drawn in the 40's decade, oh, for at least the past 8 draws. Will stay with this trend until over, which could be any time real soon now. Seems like every 2nd draw there's one number that's been out for at least 18 draws or more. I think it used to be practically every draw. (edited: that still seems to be the rule.) Last Sat's draw 2 very cold and one cold. Wed's reversal of this trend. I am going to guess this Sat. no really cold #'s again - nothing colder than 10 out. (edited: not sure about this now.)

 

[Snides]

The main part of the post that I use, is the red and blue grid..

the numbers in red are the rows and columns that didn't contain a winning number in the previous draw. The green numbers are obviously the numbers that were drawn..

I call this my "scratch" method. If a number didn't show up from certain columns or rows, will one for the next draw?

Take a look at the first grid for draw number 767
2 6 33 35 47 and the bonus number 1, all came from rows or columns from the last draw that didn't have numbers in them.. Thus you could have gotten 5+B from 29 numbers..

Then you also have what I call the "intersection numbers" this is where red rows and columns meet. So in those five draws you have;
767 - 4 5 25 26 32 33 as intersection numbers, and 33 showed up
768 - 11 18 25 39 and 25 showed up
769 - 9 10 12 14 37 38 40 42 and 9 and 12 showed up
770 - 1 15 36 but none showed up..
771 - 14 35, but none showed up..

The rest of the information in the posting is just some stats type stuff.. The black and green grid shows the skip of each number in the grid on the left.. I've tried to come up with some good theories to use on that grid, but havn't gotten anything too consistant from it yet..

 

[mirage]

The main part of the post that I use, is the red and blue grid..

the numbers in red are the rows and columns that didn't contain a winning number in the previous draw. The green numbers are obviously the numbers that were drawn..

I call this my "scratch" method. If a number didn't show up from certain columns or rows, will one for the next draw?

Take a look at the first grid for draw number 767
2 6 33 35 47 and the bonus number 1, all came from rows or columns from the last draw that didn't have numbers in them.. Thus you could have gotten 5+B from 29 numbers..
Then you also have what I call the "intersection numbers" this is where red rows and columns meet. So in those five draws you have;
767 - 4 5 25 26 32 33 as intersection numbers, and 33 showed up
768 - 11 18 25 39 and 25 showed up
769 - 9 10 12 14 37 38 40 42 and 9 and 12 showed up
770 - 1 15 36 but none showed up..
771 - 14 35, but none showed up..

The rest of the information in the posting is just some stats type stuff.. The black and green grid shows the skip of each number in the grid on the left.. I've tried to come up with some good theories to use on that grid, but havn't gotten anything too consistant from it yet..

Snides:
It's kind of ingenious!
It's an elaboration on the vertical/horizontal filter, yes?
I can get stats on columns and rows filters if you want.
(I don't know about anybody else but the densely packed numbers on the computer screen visually I found it a little hard to look at even with the brightness turned down and it was interferring with my ability to concentrate.) Anyway, to better reflect on your idea, I transcribed the 7 X 7 squares with the numbers as depicted on the VDS onto my lowly graph paper.

And OK, now I get part of your drift....I think... draw 767 but these blank rows and columns gave 29 numbers - that's still a lot of numbers to play! It is possible.... worth a shot!
Intersecting numbers as annoucers? Good idea but how do you predict? Still thinking about this one obviously (I keep editing my posts here! Don't know if anyone's noticed...) and work to be done to find percentage of time this would work.

However, I think idea of the blank columns/rows practical as a filter, or as a starting place from which to choose possible numbers! I can see how this fits with your Snides O Gizmo program.
Excellent!

 

[mirage]

OK, so now using Snides "scratch" method, last draw left 3 columns and 2 rows completely blank, which means 1 to 7, 8 to 14, 15 to 21, columns open, plus, rows 4 to 46 and 5 to 47, and 7 to 49, open for picking! (I think).

 

[mirage]

(Originally posted by Snides)

Originally posted by Snides
...
I'm trying to post some of the other colourful postingss I used to do in another corner of the internet, but I have to re-write a bunch of it first because this forum won't allow more than 10,000 characters per post

Are you allowed to mention or do you want to mention where on the internet you have these other postings?

Still thinking about your graphical 'scratch" method. Again, Excellent and thanks! Sorry I was so slow...

 

[mirage]

Snides,

I see that you are on the board. I tried your method - this time the intersectings came up with nothing. There were otherwise a total of (edited) 37 numbers I think it was in the empty columns and rows, which interested me because, (edited) 37 out of 49 numbers, might be pretty good odds... one would think. But I had to cut the numbers I played down by quite a bit. Last draw was pretty skewed to the high numbers. I should know by now that the draw following a highly skewed draw usually normalizes back to a more typical pattern. Have you done any stats counts of what percentage of the time the blank rows/columns actually captures any 6 of the 7 numbers? If you can't tell me then I will do some work on this myself, probably by hand and laboriously. Just wondering if you had already looked into this?

 

[Snides]

Sure I have stats.. as of, and including this draw, here's the results

0 winning number - 3 times
1 winner - 14 times
2 - 58
3 - 156
4 - 227
5 - 219
6 - 94

94 / 771 * 104 = 12.67 Or, on average once a month..

Intersection Hits? did you want those stats too?

0 intersection hits - 532 times
1 - 83
2 - 106
3 - 48
4 - 3
5 - 0
6 - 0

How many numbers are usually in the scratch set? boy you ask a lot of questions..

It varies from 20 to 40, Low to Mid 30's is the most common..

 

[mirage]

Sure I have stats.. as of, and including this draw, here's the results

0 winning number - 3 times
1 winner - 14 times
2 - 58
3 - 156
4 - 227
5 - 219
6 - 94

94 / 771 * 104 = 12.67 Or, on average once a month..

Intersection Hits? did you want those stats too?

0 intersection hits - 532 times
1 - 83
2 - 106
3 - 48
4 - 3
5 - 0
6 - 0

How many numbers are usually in the scratch set? boy you ask a lot of questions..

It varies from 20 to 40, Low to Mid 30's is the most common..

hehe, I didn't ask the last question. But thanks for answering it anyway. OK, so those are pretty interesting stats!
Adding also, based on your stats, why would you want to play the intersection numbers? Wouldn't avoiding those numbers be the way to go? Just curious.

 

[mirage]

<deleted>(sorry, it was dumb.)

 

[Snides]

Intersection numbers are a funny thing.. sometimes I expect them, and sometimes I don't, so occassionally I do filter them out, other times I force 1 or 2 into my wheels..

and what was the thing that was dumb? no questions or suggestions are dumb.. isn't that how the whole skip sum program got started?

 

[mirage]

Snides, another question if you don't mind.
(My I do ask for a lot, don't I )?) I've noticed that with the lottery as with many events things don't happen regularly, i.e. "once a month". Therefore, one might expect to go maybe several months with no 6 winning numbers, then have a cluster of 6 winning numbers within a couple of months. What do you think and/or where is the Ont 6/49 at now with regard to "scratch" method? Are we in a "valley" or a "peak", in terms of numbers of 5 or 6 hits? Thanks!

 

[mirage]

No it really was dumb, believe me - it was about doing the converse to your scratch, - and then I re-read your stats...

(Originally posted by Snides)

...and what was the thing that was dumb? no questions or suggestions are dumb.. isn't that how the whole skip sum program got started?

 

[Snides]

They do tend to cluster together.. Before I post the last 6 months of stats. I'll answer your next question

The scratch method makes it impossible to have a repeat number from the last draw, so the following stats, hmm and probably the ones I already posted.. include all the numbers from the last draw, along with the scratched rows/columns..

Ok then, here's the last half a years worth of Scratch/Repeats set hits! It shows Draw #, # of winners, and what the numbers were that were in the set..

720 | 4 | 29 43 44 47 18
721 | 5 | 10 17 23 27 47
722 | 4 | 10 37 38 46
723 | 6 | 10 15 18 20 22 27 46
724 | 6 | 3 12 21 31 36 44 4
725 | 2 | 12 20
726 | 3 | 10 12 25 37
727 | 5 | 7 29 30 35 48 2
728 | 6 | 9 23 27 29 44 48
729 | 3 | 2 6 45 37
730 | 4 | 11 24 25 46 5
731 | 6 | 1 14 20 22 24 43 19
732 | 2 | 39 42
733 | 3 | 2 7 16
734 | 5 | 2 7 10 15 38 28
735 | 2 | 6 32 2
736 | 3 | 1 2 37 36
737 | 6 | 2 7 8 27 34 44
738 | 4 | 10 16 27 39 34
739 | 3 | 39 47 49 34
740 | 4 | 1 4 15 36
741 | 5 | 10 14 15 22 29 41
742 | 4 | 15 19 47 48 37
743 | 3 | 11 19 49 6
744 | 2 | 9 35 23
745 | 3 | 5 20 36 9
746 | 4 | 9 13 39 43 28
747 | 3 | 9 31 43
748 | 4 | 1 5 27 37
749 | 5 | 9 17 20 36 42 11
750 | 2 | 33 48
751 | 3 | 37 38 48 1
752 | 3 | 7 27 46 38
753 | 5 | 9 18 29 30 46 26
754 | 4 | 3 25 27 40 31
755 | 4 | 3 13 42 49 25
756 | 3 | 2 15 25
757 | 5 | 9 10 29 32 40
758 | 2 | 10 26 46
759 | 2 | 8 14
760 | 3 | 4 13 26 14
761 | 1 | 41 36
762 | 6 | 4 7 25 26 27 42
763 | 4 | 1 8 14 44 19
764 | 3 | 4 18 45 38
765 | 2 | 8 13
766 | 5 | 14 15 17 44 49 48
767 | 5 | 2 6 33 35 47 1
768 | 4 | 4 6 20 46 25
769 | 5 | 9 23 24 25 35 12
770 | 5 | 5 18 22 37 41 3
771 | 0 |
772 | 5 | 3 10 13 36 47 43

 

[Snides]

Snides:
Anyway, to better reflect on your idea, I transcribed the 7 X 7 squares with the numbers as depicted on the VDS onto my lowly graph paper.

I dunno if you'll like this better than using your graph paper, but this is what i used to do before I started doing this on the computer.. The selection slips in Ontario are set up in this same 7x7 grid formation.. you can just tick the winning numbers, then circle the rows and columns that don't have any winners, and that's your 'scratch' grid to use for the next draw.. might be easier than writing all the numbers on the graph paper..

 

[mirage]

I dunno if you'll like this better than using your graph paper, but this is what i used to do before I started doing this on the computer.. The selection slips in Ontario are set up in this same 7x7 grid formation.. you can just tick the winning numbers, then circle the rows and columns that don't have any winners, and that's your 'scratch' grid to use for the next draw.. might be easier than writing all the numbers on the graph paper..

True, very true - thanks for pointing that out. OK, works for me. I was looking at the last of part of your list of stats Saturday night, and.. there are some issues... with the numbers you've listed they don't quite jibe (for me). It doesn't really matter the basics are there and whether I use yours or mine - so maybe it's a non-issue - at the very, very least, your idea is an awesome filtering technique..<edited: - that is, I think so, however I've been too tired or distracted to think clearly since Sat. night. needs more looking at. >.

- And how is your health these days? Did you get your ear tubes back in or how's that going? Talk to you soon.

 

[mirage]

Hello Snides,

Thanks again for those stats! I have a few hours of brief respite from my current life chaos to actually look at them for a few minutes. (Many many apologies that this is best can do under circumstances right now and sorry if I seem close to out of my mind on occasion.)

Anyways, I guess you are projecting your draw numbers forward to reflect the next draw (?) as for the last one listed on your list
( 3 10 13 36 47 43) I have that as being draw number 771 not 772. Not a big deal &/or I'm missing a stats for one of the draws somewhere. What is a little more confusing is that you mix the "scratch" numbers with the "repeaters" and that becomes your set of winning numbers. This makes it a lot more difficult to pick numbers to play.
And, for your draw 772, I have 4 "scratch" numbers + 2 "repeaters" - this equals either 4, or 6, depending on how you count what's in your winning set, but under your # of winners list, you show 5. This inconsistency is either something I don't understand, or what?

Never mind, I went up the list to draw 762, and it's the real deal, but the scratch numbers from draw prior to that are 37 in total. Which is a lot, but Still, Not Bad!

Thank you thank you thank you!

 

[Snides]

in draw 772, 43 was the bonus.. the count of winning numbers doesn't include the bonus. so if you see that 772 had 5 winners, but there is 6 listed, that mean 5+B was also possible for that draw..

as for draw 762, ya, 37 numbers is still a high set, but 6/37 is only 2.3 million combinations instead of 13.9 million. and if you use that program I made you, hmm, maybe 762 is a bad example, but by using the 0 to 2 limit on the rows and columns will drop a lot of 'unlikely' combinations.. Ahh, just noticed too that you aren't using the bonus number when you scratch rows/columns.. The way I do it, the top row would be scratched too, so that would only be 33 numbers without using the 'repeats' 6/33 is only 1.1 million combinations