Please... I need LD (25-15-14-14)
- Thread starter Mvicente
- Start date
Re: Question.... about LD(25-15-14-14).
The inverse of 25-15-14-14 = 25-10-10-11
If you require 25-10-7-7, you can find it at:-
http://www.ccrwest.org/cover/HIGH.html
Mvicente said:My question:
THIS wheel LD(25-15-14-14) = LD (25-10-7-7) ???
Thanks...
The inverse of 25-15-14-14 = 25-10-10-11
If you require 25-10-7-7, you can find it at:-
http://www.ccrwest.org/cover/HIGH.html
Re: OK...
This system also has theoretical bounds of 297160.
I am not aware of this system existing, or for that matter, know of any software that will generate it.
Mvicente said:OK...
Thank you for explanation!!!
I see that wheel at page.
But...
Do You have this wheel??
LD (25-10-10-11) ??
Can send me???
Thanks.
This system also has theoretical bounds of 297160.
I am not aware of this system existing, or for that matter, know of any software that will generate it.
tomtom,
if you do not use Ininuga - may I suggest that you try it.
It is free to download, with no limitations & [will not even cost 2 hamburgers.]
It was written some years back, by someone with a real understanding of maths, sadly limited only by the operating systems & compilers available at the time.
If run, you could easily be more concise with your statement of:-
"theoretical bounds somewhere between 306000 and 307000"
Ininuga will concisely show the exact theoretical bounds of the systems it covers - even if it can not create it.
Sadly if the bounds are over 8000 - it can not continue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you were to ask 100 Ininuga users to produce a system - most would just set the param's to the system - sit back and say the results are bad - what a useless piece of software.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A few, myself included, use ininuga as a tool & have developed methods to futher enhance the ability of Ininuga if used correctly.
Good luck...
if you do not use Ininuga - may I suggest that you try it.
It is free to download, with no limitations & [will not even cost 2 hamburgers.]
It was written some years back, by someone with a real understanding of maths, sadly limited only by the operating systems & compilers available at the time.
If run, you could easily be more concise with your statement of:-
"theoretical bounds somewhere between 306000 and 307000"
Ininuga will concisely show the exact theoretical bounds of the systems it covers - even if it can not create it.
Sadly if the bounds are over 8000 - it can not continue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you were to ask 100 Ininuga users to produce a system - most would just set the param's to the system - sit back and say the results are bad - what a useless piece of software.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A few, myself included, use ininuga as a tool & have developed methods to futher enhance the ability of Ininuga if used correctly.
Good luck...
Grandmaster
Member
Hi SRM,
I have Ininuga but I also have Covermaster, which setting do you reccommend in Ininuga to create a very good wheel with 18 numbers Pick 6 4if4 also 5if6 both 100%?
Which is the minimum theoretically of the above wheel ?
Regards
SRM said:
Hi SRM,
I believe Inungua is a quite good piece of software but there are some serious limitations in my opinion….the most serious is that a user can’t make use of any filters and get some more interesting than widely available abbreviated wheels. The same is with Covermaster. The only program that was rather interesting (IMO) was Nick’s Designer and unfortunately it seems it’s neither available nor Nick is eager about making or providing a new version..
These are just some limitations….
The other restrictions regarding wheels and wheeling are very expensive tickets and very high odds in majority of lotteries. That in my opinion makes lottery games lose their charm while developing into pure business. So, as in any business it’s crucial to observe real chances for any decent prize which in majority of lottery games are usually – rather slim to none…
Therefore, if a local lottery doesn’t run a few interesting lower odds lottery games (pick 4, 5/35, 6/25 or such) where a player may chose own numbers among those surely offered high odds ( 1: many millions) games then it seems it’s better to forget playing lottery at all …
Grandmaster said:
A lot of the good t=m systems are listed at:-
http://www.ccrwest.org/cover.html
Theoretical bounds?
Run Ininuga,
Set params to required, eg, 18,6,4,4
Ininuga will display Theor.total xxx middle left of the window.
Creating a good system?
95% time/effort/method & 5% luck
Rgds..
tomtom,
you are exactly right here, neither Covermaster of Ininuga are of any use for filtering.
They both forfill my own interests of maths & both have thier own individual benifits.
If you require filtering software, you will either have to write it or purchase it.
I have recently done some positional filtering on a large 49 system.
Cost - nothing - & I can easily add odd/even filters, or anything else to it.
I am not a programmer but get by, by using 'Basic' to answer my what if questions.
An example of my bad programming skills are listed below:-
OPEN "A", #1, "C:\filter\FILE1.TXT"
CLOSE #1
KILL "C:\filter\FILE1.TXT"
OPEN "A", #4, "C:\FILTER\FILE1.TXT"
OPEN "C:\filter\filter.TXT" FOR INPUT AS #5
INPUT "NUMBER OF LINES? ", MAX
INPUT "FILTER CRITERIA? ", FI
INPUT "N1 MIN? ", AA
INPUT "N1 MAX? ", AB
INPUT "N2 MIN? ", AC
INPUT "N2 MAX? ", AD
INPUT "N3 MIN? ", AE
INPUT "N3 MAX? ", AF
INPUT "N4 MIN? ", AG
INPUT "N4 MAX? ", AH
INPUT "N5 MIN? ", AI
INPUT "N5 MAX? ", AJ
INPUT "N6 MIN? ", AK
INPUT "N6 MAX? ", AL
100 FOR X = 1 TO MAX
110 INPUT #5, Q%(1), Q%(2), Q%(3), Q%(4), Q%(5), Q%(6)
PRINT Q%(1); ","; Q%(2); ","; Q%(3); ","; Q%(4); Q%(5); "," Q%(6):
200 IF Q%(1) >= AA AND Q%(1) <= AB THEN 210
205 MT = MT + 1
210 IF Q%(2) >= AC AND Q%(2) <= AD THEN 220
215 MT = MT + 1
220 IF Q%(3) >= AE AND Q%(3) <= AF THEN 230
225 MT = MT + 1
230 IF Q%(4) >= AG AND Q%(4) <= AH THEN 240
235 MT = MT + 1
240 IF Q%(5) >= AI AND Q%(5) <= AJ THEN 250
245 MT = MT + 1
250 IF Q%(6) >= AK AND Q%(6) <= AL THEN 300
255 MT = MT + 1
300 IF MT >= FI THEN 350
340 PRINT #4, Q%(1); ","; Q%(2); ","; Q%(3); ","; Q%(4); Q%(5); "," Q%(6):
350 MT = 0
360 NEXT X
CLOSE #1
CLOSE #4
CLOSE #5
SYSTEM
you are exactly right here, neither Covermaster of Ininuga are of any use for filtering.
They both forfill my own interests of maths & both have thier own individual benifits.
If you require filtering software, you will either have to write it or purchase it.
I have recently done some positional filtering on a large 49 system.
Cost - nothing - & I can easily add odd/even filters, or anything else to it.
I am not a programmer but get by, by using 'Basic' to answer my what if questions.
An example of my bad programming skills are listed below:-
OPEN "A", #1, "C:\filter\FILE1.TXT"
CLOSE #1
KILL "C:\filter\FILE1.TXT"
OPEN "A", #4, "C:\FILTER\FILE1.TXT"
OPEN "C:\filter\filter.TXT" FOR INPUT AS #5
INPUT "NUMBER OF LINES? ", MAX
INPUT "FILTER CRITERIA? ", FI
INPUT "N1 MIN? ", AA
INPUT "N1 MAX? ", AB
INPUT "N2 MIN? ", AC
INPUT "N2 MAX? ", AD
INPUT "N3 MIN? ", AE
INPUT "N3 MAX? ", AF
INPUT "N4 MIN? ", AG
INPUT "N4 MAX? ", AH
INPUT "N5 MIN? ", AI
INPUT "N5 MAX? ", AJ
INPUT "N6 MIN? ", AK
INPUT "N6 MAX? ", AL
100 FOR X = 1 TO MAX
110 INPUT #5, Q%(1), Q%(2), Q%(3), Q%(4), Q%(5), Q%(6)
PRINT Q%(1); ","; Q%(2); ","; Q%(3); ","; Q%(4); Q%(5); "," Q%(6):
200 IF Q%(1) >= AA AND Q%(1) <= AB THEN 210
205 MT = MT + 1
210 IF Q%(2) >= AC AND Q%(2) <= AD THEN 220
215 MT = MT + 1
220 IF Q%(3) >= AE AND Q%(3) <= AF THEN 230
225 MT = MT + 1
230 IF Q%(4) >= AG AND Q%(4) <= AH THEN 240
235 MT = MT + 1
240 IF Q%(5) >= AI AND Q%(5) <= AJ THEN 250
245 MT = MT + 1
250 IF Q%(6) >= AK AND Q%(6) <= AL THEN 300
255 MT = MT + 1
300 IF MT >= FI THEN 350
340 PRINT #4, Q%(1); ","; Q%(2); ","; Q%(3); ","; Q%(4); Q%(5); "," Q%(6):
350 MT = 0
360 NEXT X
CLOSE #1
CLOSE #4
CLOSE #5
SYSTEM
lottoarchitect
Member
Theoritical minimum
Hi Grandmaster,
the theoritical bound displayed in ININUGA uses the equation I have posted here
There isn't any simpler way to compute a minimum bound for any wheel by pure maths and this is the one used by ININUGA too.
Another way is to use Covermaster. Enter only one ticket in the desired wheel, click "test" and then
th.minimum=Tested/Covered displayed in the Covermaster's window. If a minimum returns a fraction, eg 15.5, then the minimum possible is 16 obviously as we cannot have 15.5 tickets lol!
lottoarchitect
Hi Grandmaster,
the theoritical bound displayed in ININUGA uses the equation I have posted here
There isn't any simpler way to compute a minimum bound for any wheel by pure maths and this is the one used by ININUGA too.
Another way is to use Covermaster. Enter only one ticket in the desired wheel, click "test" and then
th.minimum=Tested/Covered displayed in the Covermaster's window. If a minimum returns a fraction, eg 15.5, then the minimum possible is 16 obviously as we cannot have 15.5 tickets lol!
lottoarchitect
lottoarchitect
Member
SRM said:
...
Creating a good system?
95% time/effort/method & 5% luck
Rgds..
I totally agree with this SRM
Grandmaster
Member
Hi Lottoarchitect,
Thank's for explanation, maybe the theoretical minimum is hard to find for many wheels, example:
49,6,3,6=163
TM 49,6,3,6=86
Covermaster TM 49,6,3,6=54
Regards
Thank's for explanation, maybe the theoretical minimum is hard to find for many wheels, example:
49,6,3,6=163
TM 49,6,3,6=86
Covermaster TM 49,6,3,6=54
Regards
Last edited:
Grandmaster
Member
Hi LA,
Which of the above theoretical minimum is more accurate for wheel 49,6,3,6?
Regards
Which of the above theoretical minimum is more accurate for wheel 49,6,3,6?
Regards
lottoarchitect
Member
Given that Covermaster calculations are correct, we have
th.minimum=13,983,816/260,624=53.65->54 tickets. This will be the same result as the equation I have posted in the previous link. If the 49,6,3,6=86 bound comes from another more specific equation or determined somehow by other means, then definitely this is a more accurate measurement of the lowest bound. There are several specific formulas in technical papers for certain types of wheels that define a higher bound compared to the general lowest bound formula I have posted. Any specific formula will always suggest a minimum bound equal to or greater than the general bound formula but never less.
lottoarchitect
th.minimum=13,983,816/260,624=53.65->54 tickets. This will be the same result as the equation I have posted in the previous link. If the 49,6,3,6=86 bound comes from another more specific equation or determined somehow by other means, then definitely this is a more accurate measurement of the lowest bound. There are several specific formulas in technical papers for certain types of wheels that define a higher bound compared to the general lowest bound formula I have posted. Any specific formula will always suggest a minimum bound equal to or greater than the general bound formula but never less.
lottoarchitect
Last edited:
Grandmaster
Member
Hi LA,
The result 86 comes from LottodesignerXL, I think the formula is accurate.
Formula:
=INT(COMBIN(49,3)*(49-6+1)/(COMBIN(6-1,3-1)*(49-3+1)*COMBIN(6,3))*1+0.9)
Regards
SRM said:
Havent tried it but you just might need to put "," in the 340 between Q%(4); Q%(5);?
I’m not that familiar with BASIC but your algorhythm looks nice and is as short as possible. Therefore it seems your programming skills are quite fine, which again means you might need just a few weeks for learning a programming language (VB or such) that is more functional while working with contemporary computers….