Optimum Set

[Karnac]

I'm looking for an optimum set of 15 numbers. By optimum I mean finding a set of 15 numbers that has more hits than any other set.

For example: This set : 4 7 8 17 20 26 30 32 35 38 40 41 43 45 46 has hit:
6 numbers 12 times
5 numbers 52 times
4 numbers 215 "
3 numbers 550 " ,
In 2186 draws.
Bonus included. These totals are correct as far as I know, however they are only as good as the data entered.

Is there a better set than this? My software is capable of doing it but it is time consuming and then I'm still not 100% certain I've got the right one. Please don't tell me to use one of Nicks' programs, as I have no luck at all with them. No offense Nick, I just can't get them to work for me.

 

[GillesD]

Optimum set

Karnac,

As far as I can determine, your data is good.

But how do you define the optimum set?

Do you add the numbers of 3 to 7 wins (829 in your example) or give a weight to all 3-7 wins (like 550+10x215+100x52+1000x12+10000x0) or any other method?

Obviously, a set that gives more 5, 6 or 7 wins is better than one that gives only 3 wins but in large quantities.

 

[Beaker]

Goswinus has done this

Search that name for some gems

 

[Karnac]

Re: Optimum set

Karnac,

Obviously, a set that gives more 5, 6 or 7 wins is better than one that gives only 3 wins but in large quantities.

Hi GillesD and a happy new year to you and yours,... you hit the nail on the head. I'm looking for an optimum set with the greatest number of 5,6 and 7 number hits. I did come across a couple of sets that had 2 seven number hits but fewer 6 number sets than the one I selected. I couldn't find a set with more than 12x6 numbers hitting , so that was the one I used. You said my data was good ,....did you mean the set was what I can consider optimum or did you mean the hit counts were correct. Or both?

 

[GillesD]

What is good

Sorry, Karnac, my last post was not precise.

Your hit count for your 15-number set was good. I never look at developping a set for optimum results, but I may give it a try.

That's why I was asking about what should be considered the best set.

 

[Karnac]

Goswinus has done this

Search that name for some gems

Thanks Beaker.... this was where my interest in a optimum set began...reading the archives. Goswinus did a lot of work as did others on this concept, and I was basically looking to update the numbers. I think I'll do the same for ON 49 and S7. I wonder if you were to take 12 or 15 optimum numbers and put them in a full wheel what would you find when you checked the sums of each line. Would it establish credible parameters you could use when you parse the individual lines of the combination so as to come up with a smaller set of lines for a more economical combination? Looks like I have to study some more.
Incidently, did Goswinus disappear completely or did he drift off to more important things?

 

[PAB]

Hi Karnac and GillesD,

Did you Use Excel to come up with the Results?, and if so, what Formula did you Use?.
This Sounds like an Interesting Idea.
I will Look at what Goswinus has Done as Suggested by Beaker.

All the Best
PAB

 

[Karnac]

Hi Karnac and GillesD,

Did you Use Excel to come up with the Results?, and if so, what Formula did you Use?.
This Sounds like an Interesting Idea.
I will Look at what Goswinus has Done as Suggested by Beaker.

All the Best
PAB

Hi Pab

I used the Gail Howard program....time consuming, but accurate so far.

 

[GillesD]

Work habits

I do use Excel for all calculations. I have gained solid experience with this software when using lottery data and trying to figure out various statistics or other lottery-related information. It has proven to be worthwhile for my own work but never got anything lottery-wise.

In this case, I have one file where I can plug in up to 20 numbers and immediately obtain this set's performance including or excluding the bonus number.

 

[Nick Koutras]

I'm looking for an optimum set of 15 numbers. By optimum I mean finding a set of 15 numbers that has more hits than any other set.

For example: This set : 4 7 8 17 20 26 30 32 35 38 40 41 43 45 46 has hit:
6 numbers 12 times
5 numbers 52 times
4 numbers 215 "
3 numbers 550 " ,
In 2186 draws.
Bonus included. These totals are correct as far as I know, however they are only as good as the data entered.

Is there a better set than this? My software is capable of doing it but it is time consuming and then I'm still not 100% certain I've got the right one. Please don't tell me to use one of Nicks' programs, as I have no luck at all with them. No offense Nick, I just can't get them to work for me.

LottoStatisticsXL can do better than that but the algorithm is time consuming:

So I'm rewriting the algorithm so that an optimum set can be produced.

Some initial results indicate that the following set has 19 hits

311327433446404530190729490115

The other hits are:
3=553
4=226
5=40
6=19



I do not know yet if this is the "best" set.


Soon as I finish the procedure and I'm satisfied as of its speed and quality
I'll revise LottoStatisticsXL to include the aforementioned.

 

[Nick Koutras]

The procedure took 42 seconds
on my 2.53 GHz computer.

 

[Nick Koutras]

At the same time the set below
is the "worst" for 3 hits

150648222428024619110712080533

It has only 425 hits out of the expected 537


The algorithm can select the Best or Worst set

 

[BushHappy]

Nick,

These Best and Worst Optimum sets are all based on past draws.

Please can you advise if the Worst set should be used for future draws on the assumption that it will start hitting higher matches or should the Best set be used for future draws on the assumption that it will carry on hitting the higher matches.

Cheers,
BushHappy

 

[Karnac]

Re: Re: Optimum Set

Some initial results indicate that the following set has 19 hits

311327433446404530190729490115

The other hits are:
3=553
4=226
5=40
6=19

Nick, thank you very, very much. I've had this idea of finding the optimum set for some time and now it is reality. Until such time you tell me otherwise, I will consider this set optimum. I have a number of ideas I wish to play out, but I needed the optimum set.
Here's a breakdown of the hits in 500 draw increments.

1st 500 draws
2 x 6 hits
8 x 5 hits
54 x 4 hits
131 x 3 hits
39% money hits

2nd 500 draws
3 x 6 hits
12 x 5 hits
56 x 4 hits
112 x 3 hits
36.6% money hits

3rd 500 draws
4 x 6 hits
11 x 5 hits
48 x 4 hits
125 x 3 hits
37.6% money hits

4th 500 draws
8 x 6 hits
7 x 5 hits
44 x 4 hits
131 x 3 hits
38% money hits

Remaining 186 draws to Jan 1 2005
2 x 6 hits
2 x 5 hits
25 x 4 hits
55 x 3 hits
45.16% money hits

That's currently a minimum 3/15 almost 50% of the time. I like.
I'll play them in a serotic wheel, with good overlap, substituting any numbers with more than 10 skips with recent hitting primes and see what happens. The 11 odd numbers should make it attractive to use when expecting an odd bias draw as well.

Thanks again.

 

[veronica21]

NICK KOUTRAS

At the same time the set below
is the "worst" for 3 hits

150648222428024619110712080533

It has only 425 hits out of the expected 537


The algorithm can select the Best or Worst set

NICK, You replied to my post that you wanted to send me information of the lotto program Predictor?

what is your website to contact you?

thank you, Elizabeth

 

[BushHappy]

Karnac,

It does not seem as if Nick is going to answer my question.

Can you or anyone else answer it or express an opinion.

Cheers,
BushHappy

 

[Karnac]

Karnac,

It does not seem as if Nick is going to answer my question.

Can you or anyone else answer it or express an opinion.

Cheers,
BushHappy

Hi BushHappy,
Personally I think playing the Best set of numbers is the way to go. Gail Howard, when flogging her system , has always said and I quote from her website, "That which is MOST POSSIBLE happens MOST OFTEN.
That which is LEAST POSSIBLE happens LEAST OFTEN." I think this says it all and although I have little math or probability theory training in my backround, after playing lotteries for 20+ years this statement is true more often than not. The fact that a set of 15 numbers has performed extremely well gives me far more incentive to play them than a set which has only marginal or mediocre success. Now some may say play the poor set because it's due to catch up.......that's fine and dandy, but it could take a lifetime for the hits to catch up to the optimum set. The same idea when you're choosing individual numbers.....do you play a number that has skipped 25 draws or do you play the number that has hit 4 times in the last ten draws? I'll always play the hot number, and I'll usually avoid a longshot.....sure I get burned sometimes, but more often than not I get it right. The times I do play the LS would be when say it has an extremely high skip total for the number of games it has skipped when compared to other numbers. That's the time to play the longshot. This brings us back to the GH statement, "That which is MOST POSSIBLE happens MOST OFTEN."
Good Luck

 

[BushHappy]

Karnac,

The last draw for the SA Lottery seems to support your statements:
#6 Skipped last 3 Draws
#13 Skipped last 5 Draws
#32 appeared in previous draw
#36 Skipped last 4 Draws
#44 Skipped last 2 Draws
#48 Skipped last 10 Draws
This does not always happen - if only the lottery was more consistent!

At present there are quite a few numbers that have not appeared for 25 or more draws. these are:
#5 has not appeared for last 25 Draws
#10 has not appeared for last 39 Draws
#34 has not appeared for last 45 Draws
#37 has not appeared for last 27 Draws
#45 has not appeared for last 29 Draws
When do you start treating these numbers as longshots?
The previous Highest Skip interval was 46 - this has only occurred once. If #34 does not appear at the next Draw, the Highest skip interval of 46 will be equalled. Should #34 be treated as a longshot for the next draw?

Cheers,
BushHappy

 

[Karnac]

Karnac,

Should #34 be treated as a longshot for the next draw?

Cheers,
BushHappy

Absolutely, it would be a longshot, and I wouldn't play it. I consider any number out 10 or more games a longshot. I wouldn't want to really play any of those high skip numbers. There's just no % in playing them to hit. I might play longshots like these in a pair with a number the longshot has appeared with the most.
In your SA lottery , I did a little diggin' and this is what I found.

Number 5 has hit most often with 2,13,14,36.
Number 10 with 9,30,45
Number 34 with 29,2,41,45
Number 37 with 22,1
Number 45 with 46

Now if any of these numbers on the right are really hot (2 or more hits in the last 5 draws, then I would play the longshot paired with the hot number. At least there's a fighting chance at hitting them together. That would probably be the only way I'd play these longshots. Sometimes when you have a hot last digit on a roll you might want to play the longshot with the same LD, again your odds go up if the trend continues. I looked at the chart and next draw in your lottery 6 of numbers drawn should be from the last 10 games. This is based on the complete history of your lotto. Look for odd numbers this coming draw for sure. You have a high even bias now that should go the other way.

 

[Nick Koutras]

Nick,

These Best and Worst Optimum sets are all based on past draws.

Please can you advise if the Worst set should be used for future draws on the assumption that it will start hitting higher matches or should the Best set be used for future draws on the assumption that it will carry on hitting the higher matches.

Cheers,
BushHappy

Sorry for not answering the question sooner
but here is my knowledge on the matter.

Most of the times ( I do not have exact figures, but ~80%+ )
the next draw is a combination of numbers from the Best & Worst sets.

I have seen that using the BPS of the last 30 draws
and with settings of 2-4 hits
and of size 12-14
gives the best starting set for the next Draw.

For example:
Last CAN 649 draw
Best Set of 12 numbers was:
020516172630353637404348
with Total Hits for the last 30 Draws of
2=18
3=9
Total of 27 Draws with 2+ Hits


It had 4 Hits...



The sets below were of equal value to the above (same number of Total Hits=27)
5 9 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 43 48
5 14 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 43 48
5 16 17 26 30 31 35 36 37 40 43 48
5 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 43 45 48
2 5 17 26 30 34 35 36 37 40 43 48
2 5 15 16 26 30 35 36 37 40 43 48
2 5 16 20 26 30 35 36 37 40 43 48
2 5 16 26 30 31 35 36 37 40 43 48
2 5 8 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 48
2 5 16 17 18 26 30 35 36 37 40 48
2 5 16 17 26 27 30 35 36 37 40 48
2 5 16 17 26 29 30 35 36 37 40 48
2 5 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 45 48
2 3 5 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 16 17 18 26 30 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 16 17 20 26 30 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 16 17 26 27 30 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 16 17 26 29 30 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 16 17 26 30 31 35 36 37 43 48
2 5 15 16 17 26 30 35 36 37 40 43
2 5 16 17 26 27 30 35 36 37 40 43




I hope that this answers your question?