Repeaters

[Beaker]

This is Nick's SW based on bclc data:

01 49
02 37
03 49
04 39
05 42
06 42
07 53
08 48
09 41
10 39
11 39
12 43
13 46
14 41
15 28
16 44
17 35
18 47
19 34
20 42
21 29
22 35
23 45
24 28
25 38
26 43
27 52
28 39
29 47
30 37
31 62
32 42
33 42
34 60
35 34
36 50
37 46
38 43
39 40
40 41
41 41
42 49
43 55
44 40
45 47
46 40
47 53
48 31
49 63

Hits/Location 2110

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

This is Nick's SW based on bclc data:

01 49
02 37
03 49
04 39
05 42
06 42
07 53
08 48
09 41
10 39
11 39
12 43
13 46
14 41
15 28
16 44
17 35
18 47
19 34
20 42
21 29
22 35
23 45
24 28
25 38
26 43
27 52
28 39
29 47
30 37
31 62
32 42
33 42
34 60
35 34
36 50
37 46
38 43
39 40
40 41
41 41
42 49
43 55
44 40
45 47
46 40
47 53
48 31
49 63

Hits/Location 2110

Interesting....I'll double check that!

 

[Beaker]

Interesting....I'll double check that!

Please

Still looking

 

[gsobier]

Beaker:

Oh dear... ...looks there is something we must take a closer look at... ...I'll get back to this later on today or for the morning at the latest.

If I need to, we will have to go line by line until everything is checked... ...we might need to use e-Mail for this.

Regards,
George

This is Nick's SW based on bclc data:

01 49
02 37
03 49
04 39
05 42
06 42
07 53
08 48
09 41
10 39
11 39
12 43
13 46
14 41
15 28
16 44
17 35
18 47
19 34
20 42
21 29
22 35
23 45
24 28
25 38
26 43
27 52
28 39
29 47
30 37
31 62
32 42
33 42
34 60
35 34
36 50
37 46
38 43
39 40
40 41
41 41
42 49
43 55
44 40
45 47
46 40
47 53
48 31
49 63

Hits/Location 2110

 

[Beaker]

Beaker:

Oh dear... ...looks there is something we must take a closer look at... ...I'll get back to this later on today or for the morning at the latest.

If I need to, we will have to go line by line until everything is checked... ...we might need to use e-Mail for this.

Regards,
George

I have another program that I'm running to check my discrepencies. Dennis can confirm that bclc data with Nick's SW

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Are you sure it is from BCLC...I originally downloaded the database from Nick's site...I do get your figures with this database...
Did you load yours from The British corporation from scratch?

 

[gsobier]

Dennis:

Here is what I do in my sanity check... ...I grab the 649.cvs file from BCLC and a program I wrote checks line for line in my history data against BCLC data... ...when there is anything different, it screams... ...I made a change to my history data to make sure the program works properly.

I just did this confirmation data error test and it works like a charm. Any change I made to create an error on purpose gets reported.

I really does not matter to me who is right or wrong... ...it looks like there is a data integrity problem and we must discover where the errors are. I'm wondering about Nick's data right now. Could you please send me a copy in an E-Mail so I can look at it?

Regards,
George

Are you sure it is from BCLC...I originally downloaded the database from Nick's site...I do get your figures with this database...
Did you load yours from The British corporation from scratch?

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

My feeling is that Nick's database has the errors....
I have a few more databases and all are like George and Gilles data...to the dot!

 

[gsobier]

Dennis:

That sounds about right... ...we should alert Nick about possible errors... ...my data is simply BCLC which has been the bible standard in my mind.

Good thing you realized this which makes much less work for me.

Regards,
George

My feeling is that Nick's database has the errors....
I have a few more databases and all are like George and Gilles data...to the dot!

 

[peter]

This is why I post this stuff, some players may not have, and those of us who do, can compare lists, thx go out to Gilles again, I just started to look for my problems, and so far after my corrections the match what Gilles has posted, I'll confirm this tonight when I'm complete.

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

You should have a copy of that database now George!

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

I will find the mistakes in Nick's data...

 

[gsobier]

Dennis:

Yes, I've noticed this and have a program telling me what is advertised to hit based on prior activity... ...its usually good for a few hits but, I've never seen all six hits in the ones I checked (this was more that a few hundred draws).

Regards,
George

Repeaters and jumping numbers for Canadian 6/49
Some numbers seem to specialize in repeating more after jumping the immediate following draw

 

[Beaker]

Are you sure it is from BCLC...I originally downloaded the database from Nick's site...I do get your figures with this database...
Did you load yours from The British corporation from scratch?

Yes, directly from the bclc site

From my point of view, this is a little bug with how you handle the early draws ie when each of the numbers hit first.

For example draw 2. Have those numbers skipped 1 draw or not??

 

[gsobier]

Dennis:

I got it, thanks... ...I've got a few things to attend to and then I'll take a look... ...let me know the possible errors when known please.

Regards,
George

I will find the mistakes in Nick's data...

 

[gsobier]

Beaker:

Good point... ...you could start counting skips from the last draw to the beginnig or from the first draw to the last one... ...I start counting from draw #1. I'm not sure what the difference would be... ...repeaters always starts from draw #1.

Regards,
George

Yes, directly from the bclc site

From my point of view, this is a little bug with how you handle the early draws ie when each of the numbers hit first.

For example draw 2. Have those numbers skipped 1 draw or not??

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Yes, directly from the bclc site

From my point of view, this is a little bug with how you handle the early draws ie when each of the numbers hit first.

For example draw 2. Have those numbers skipped 1 draw or not??

All the numbers from the first draw are showing differences by one when compared to my other data...There is a bug in Nick's software for this...When you start counting the skip..The number must hit first...in this case it seems like Nick software is double counting these...2110 minus 2103 here's the mistake!

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

We have to tell Nick...It is just a little bug...

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Beaker if you get rid of these 7 numbers from the first draw you end up having the same count as myself,Gilles and George...

 

[Beaker]

Beaker:

Good point... ...you could start counting skips from the last draw to the beginnig or from the first draw to the last one... ...I start counting from draw #1. I'm not sure what the difference would be... ...repeaters always starts from draw #1.

Regards,
George

OK,

I agree with the hit-first-then-count-the-skip approach but the first time is a special condition.

Draw 1 is given - you can't count any skips for those but I think you can make a case for counting any number after draw 1 - the first time it hits- as a skip count from draw 1

Any thoughts??