Still looking to put together macro for sum of skips!

[Nick Koutras]

I guess I got bored while feeding my brain some vintage crown royal.. I started the program already.. here's a sampling.. and oops, I included the bonus... no worries, that's easy to fix..

2108 04/03/04 01 01 13 04 11 01 06 = 37
2109 04/07/04 10 16 02 10 02 01 06 = 47
2110 04/10/04 01 06 04 04 02 15 08 = 40
2111 04/14/04 07 11 18 04 05 05 09 = 59
2112 04/17/04 35 08 03 02 07 37 21 = 113
2113 04/21/04 02 01 02 03 03 03 02 = 16
2114 04/24/04 18 31 09 06 11 06 06 = 87
2115 04/28/04 16 06 02 02 05 02 01 = 34
2116 05/01/04 04 12 03 11 07 12 05 = 54
2117 05/05/04 12 05 02 05 24 06 03 = 57
2118 05/08/04 01 12 02 03 05 18 04 = 45
2119 05/12/04 10 10 03 07 10 04 07 = 51
2120 05/15/04 04 02 05 07 01 16 02 = 37
2121 05/19/04 04 04 01 02 11 20 09 = 51
2122 05/22/04 03 01 09 08 02 01 05 = 29
2123 05/26/04 07 22 26 05 01 02 06 = 69
2124 05/29/04 03 05 04 07 08 01 08 = 36
2125 06/02/04 03 07 03 05 04 07 05 = 34
2126 06/05/04 04 03 18 01 01 07 04 = 38
2127 06/09/04 02 09 03 13 07 44 21 = 99
sum skip 7 1
sum skip 12 1
sum skip 13 2
sum skip 14 1
sum skip 15 1
sum skip 16 6
sum skip 17 2
sum skip 18 1
sum skip 19 14
sum skip 20 10
sum skip 21 10
sum skip 22 16
sum skip 23 13
sum skip 24 17
sum skip 25 12
sum skip 26 15
sum skip 27 28
sum skip 28 30
sum skip 29 35
sum skip 30 30
sum skip 31 43
sum skip 32 38
sum skip 33 49
sum skip 34 52
sum skip 35 45
sum skip 36 42
sum skip 37 42
sum skip 38 52
sum skip 39 44
sum skip 40 56
sum skip 41 45
sum skip 42 57
sum skip 43 55
sum skip 44 49
sum skip 45 71
sum skip 46 50
sum skip 47 58
sum skip 48 52
sum skip 49 51
sum skip 50 55
sum skip 51 51
sum skip 52 51
sum skip 53 46
sum skip 54 40
sum skip 55 37
sum skip 56 43
sum skip 57 39
sum skip 58 41
sum skip 59 43
sum skip 60 32
sum skip 61 37
sum skip 62 22
sum skip 63 24
sum skip 64 38
sum skip 65 29
sum skip 66 20
sum skip 67 22
sum skip 68 13
sum skip 69 19
sum skip 70 16
sum skip 71 15
sum skip 72 14
sum skip 73 15
sum skip 74 7
sum skip 75 17
sum skip 76 7
sum skip 77 9
sum skip 78 9
sum skip 79 7
sum skip 80 11
sum skip 81 6
sum skip 82 9
sum skip 83 7
sum skip 84 5
sum skip 85 9
sum skip 86 3
sum skip 87 3
sum skip 88 8
sum skip 89 3
sum skip 90 4
sum skip 91 2
sum skip 92 2
sum skip 93 6
sum skip 94 6
sum skip 95 1
sum skip 96 3
sum skip 97 4
sum skip 98 5
sum skip 99 3
sum skip 100 1
sum skip 102 1
sum skip 104 1
sum skip 105 3
sum skip 106 2
sum skip 113 1
sum skip 114 1
sum skip 120 1
sum skip 124 1
sum skip 132 1

You report a sum of Skips=7
This means that there shall exist a result
that it was the same as the last draw's.
This is an error...

 

[mirage]

Hello Snides,
Yes, thanks for that info.
Btw, Yesterday's Can 6/49 sum of skips was "35".
You posted skip sums for 20.5 years worth of draws, I assume.

Actually, you already posted rough "bell curve" of skips in the "to Maggie" thread, March 31. At that time you commented skip sums range peak out at 30 to 43. After a few more months and more draws, this still seems the case, as also in my sampling of last 115 draws. "41" seems to have highest hits overall, and this also continues to appear true. My sampling of last 115 draws show, I think, approx. 43% of sums of skips hit in the 30 to 43 range. (That got me excited.) Over 2 decades worth of draws, looks to be closer to 26.73%(is this correct?) I guess this is still statistically significant. However, considering correlation of possible numbers of combos... (?)
I still think it's worth developing a program or macro to do this or developing as a filter. (Why not? or, What the heck?)
Does anybody have any idea what % of sums of skips between 30 and 43 would be theoretically expected? Any smart folks willing to comment?

 

[hot4]

Hello Snides,
Yes, thanks for that info.
Btw, Yesterday's Can 6/49 sum of skips was "35".
You posted skip sums for 20.5 years worth of draws, I assume.

Actually, you already posted rough "bell curve" of skips in the "to Maggie" thread, March 31. At that time you commented skip sums range peak out at 30 to 43. After a few more months and more draws, this still seems the case, as also in my sampling of last 115 draws. "41" seems to have highest hits overall, and this also continues to appear true. My sampling of last 115 draws show, I think, approx. 43% of sums of skips hit in the 30 to 43 range. (That got me excited.) Over 2 decades worth of draws, looks to be closer to 26.73%(is this correct?) I guess this is still statistically significant. However, considering correlation of possible numbers of combos... (?)
I still think it's worth developing a program or macro to do this or developing as a filter. (Why not? or, What the heck?)
Does anybody have any idea what % of sums of skips between 30 and 43 would be theoretically expected? Any smart folks willing to comment?

Until proofed, you may consider that 30-43 is one of the most expected group of sumsofskips. Of course it depends how you group the remaining.
As I told before, it seems to me that, only testing all the 13,983,816 combinations you can know really, but I feel that, as in other filters, the total amount is more or less the expected.

 

[Beaker]

You report a sum of Skips=7
This means that there shall exist a result
that it was the same as the last draw's.
This is an error...

Nick,

draw 1 and 2 would cause this condition depending on how you interpret both those draws.

Both would be all skip 1's

I think this analysis should bypass those draws or start at draw 2

 

[Nick Koutras]

Nick,

draw 1 and 2 would cause this condition depending on how you interpret both those draws.

Both would be all skip 1's

I think this analysis should bypass those draws or start at draw 2

Beaker,

I follow this thread by curiosity only.
Whatever is said here is done by LottoStatisticsXL.

As for the low draws, do generate the
"Trivial Report" with Duration= the total draws of the database.

Go to the bottom of the report and see the effect of the first Draws on the output.

The only significant point of this thread
will be the ability to generate the multitude
of combinations that a range of Skips permits
and the ability to map them in such a way
that a wheeling system can guarantee smaller wins
(like a 3-win or 4-win) with the minimum possible number of combinations.

 

[Snides]

You report a sum of Skips=7
This means that there shall exist a result
that it was the same as the last draw's.
This is an error...

I also said this..

oh ya.. you can probably ignore the first few low sum skip totals, they would be there because of the lack of skip history from the first few draws till all the numbers actually came up..

I guess to get the most accurate readings I should start the counter after all 49 numbers have come up..

 

[mirage]

Originally posted by Nick Koutras

The only significant point of this thread
will be the ability to generate the multitude
of combinations that a range of Skips permits
and the ability to map them in such a way
that a wheeling system can guarantee smaller wins
(like a 3-win or 4-win) with the minimum possible number of combinations.

Nick's idea complex but something like what he is proposing is do-able. My petty human mind does a form of this, in a small way, laboriously, before each and every draw.

 

[hot4]

Nick's idea complex but something like what he is proposing is do-able. My petty human mind does a form of this, in a small way, laboriously, before each and every draw.

But you are not sure of which range of skips is more frequent do you? To know that, you need to check every possible combination; however you may play lines satisfying the range you like or you forecast.

 

[mirage]

But you are not sure of which range of skips is more frequent do you? To know that, you need to check every possible combination; however you may play lines satisfying the range you like or you forecast.

b]I do check every combination that I play. The range that I play is usually within the preferred range of skips, maybe on the high side or the low side, depending on previous history. It is a laborious process.

 

[mirage]

(Originally posted by hot4)
But you are not sure of which range of skips is more frequent do you? To know that, you need to check every possible combination; however you may play lines satisfying the range you like or you forecast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Previously posted by mirage
(Please excuse typo "b]" in previous post.)
I do check every combination that I play. The range that I play is usually within the preferred range of skips, maybe on the high side or the low side, depending on previous history. It is a laborious process.

Hot4: In reality range of skips that are more frequent varies. There is the theoretical expectancy vs there is the local time trend given limited historical data. Using combinations based on range of skips that are more frequent may or may not be a good strategy. You and everybody else probably is wondering, so what is the point? I keep a chart for a few lottos of high and low movements in range of skips. To predict exactly the sum skip value for the next draw is very difficult, but I am often able to predict the approx. range. Of course, just like with any other filter, one is often wrong.

A key appeal of this approach is that it is a dimension of lotto that is usually overlooked by everyone.

Btw, I have not kept track of 6/49 data from start, but that doesn't matter. I have not kept track at all of the regional 6/49 so am not doing skip checking for that lottery. (I don't have that much time.) The other regional lotto I do calculate the sum skip value for all played numbers to make sure all combos match chosen range. It helps to make choices of which numbers to play vs which combos to discard.

 

[hot4]

(Originally posted by hot4)
But you are not sure of which range of skips is more frequent do you? To know that, you need to check every possible combination; however you may play lines satisfying the range you like or you forecast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Previously posted by mirage
(Please excuse typo "b]" in previous post.)
I do check every combination that I play. The range that I play is usually within the preferred range of skips, maybe on the high side or the low side, depending on previous history. It is a laborious process.

Hot4: In reality range of skips that are more frequent varies. There is the theoretical expectancy vs there is the local time trend given limited historical data. Using combinations based on range of skips that are more frequent may or may not be a good strategy. You and everybody else probably is wondering, so what is the point? I keep a chart for a few lottos of high and low movements in range of skips. To predict exactly the sum skip value for the next draw is very difficult, but I am often able to predict the approx. range. Of course, just like with any other filter, one is often wrong.

A key appeal of this approach is that it is a dimension of lotto that is usually overlooked by everyone.

Btw, I have not kept track of 6/49 data from start, but that doesn't matter. I have not kept track at all of the regional 6/49 so am not doing skip checking for that lottery. (I don't have that much time.) The other regional lotto I do calculate the sum skip value for all played numbers to make sure all combos match chosen range. It helps to make choices of which numbers to play vs which combos to discard.

Keep going mirage,

 

[Snides]

your program is almost ready Mirage..

I've got it going through all possible combinations, you can select the sum of skips that you are looking for for any draw, it will show on-screen what the current skip is for each number for the draw you're aiming for, then it lists all the combinations that match that sum of skips, and at the end it lists how many combinations there were in each sum of skips value..

As an example, I requested a sum of skips of 50 for draw number 1852 in 6/49. It listed all 294322 different combinations that totalled that sum of skips, and of course the jackpot was in the list. 9 10 22 38 43 and 44 were all there.. I don't think it captured any 5+B wins though.. Sum skip totals from 24 to 58 were all above 200,000 combinations.

There are no filters applied to the combinations yet, once those are in, the amount of combinations should drop significantly, but I won't know by how much till I apply them..

If these are the type of results you were hoping for I'll add the filters and continue the project..

 

[Snides]

Ok, i just ran it again, looking for a sum skip total of 42 for the last draw (june 16th's) and, of course it nailed the jackpot again, but the total amount of combinations for a sum skip total of 42 was 389,686.

Trying to figure out which sum skip totals could be a bit of a pain, but if you do pick the right one, you could buy under half a million tickets and win the jackpot

I think I'll try to add the filters in anyway, and see how much that cuts it down, cus it should do a fairly decent job..

 

[Snides]

wow, running with filters seems to slow the program down a fair bit.. and lousy results for the last draw too..

it dropped the amount of combinations for sum skip total of 42 from 389,686 to 366,235 and it also lost the jackpot due to 3 repeaters from the last draw showing up...

The filter I used was no more than 2 numbers with the same skip. So 4 30 and 46 all had a skip of 1, thus it only allowed 2 of those numbers in the combinations..

I'll clean the program up and make it easier to use or provide documentation on how to use it if you want to give it a whirl..

 

[mirage]

wow, running with filters seems to slow the program down a fair bit.. and lousy results for the last draw too..

it dropped the amount of combinations for sum skip total of 42 from 389,686 to 366,235 and it also lost the jackpot due to 3 repeaters from the last draw showing up...

The filter I used was no more than 2 numbers with the same skip. So 4 30 and 46 all had a skip of 1, thus it only allowed 2 of those numbers in the combinations..

I'll clean the program up and make it easier to use or provide documentation on how to use it if you want to give it a whirl..

Hello Snides, Hope you are having a good vacation!
Thanks for putting so much effort into this. I hope it has been interesting experiment(?) for you, at least...
389,686 is a lotta combinations, lotta combos as was expected... but with filters even more than I would have expected. Some of the time, the winners would fall within range of all of the filters as well as preferred range of sum of skips. I don't know that many mega-multi-millionaires that would be willing to get together as a group to gample, and if they were that rich, they wouldn't need to gample, and they'd probably be in Monte Carlo, or at least Vegas, rather than playing the poor mans' lotto.
How many filters did you use?
It is interesting, at least on the surface, that winning numbers so often fall within range of the various filters, considering how many combinations are possible.
(Could pose a question to the BB regarding this seeming fact).
1). What are the possibilities of adapting your program so that intended plays could be checked to ensure that they fall into a preferred range of sum of skips? I do this anyway, and it is a very tedious process to manually check all my plays.
2) A long shot strategy, is to try for extreme ends of skip ranges, even though as Beaker pointed out they too run into the thousands of combos, and then filter, somewhat. (i.e. choosing 2 evens 4 odds, or vice versa, or equally divided 3/3., etc. etc.) Probably once a year 6/49 would have sum <23, or >95. In the case of Lottario, 6/45, < 20, or >60. (More than 100 came up once in 2 1/2 years, may take many years before such an extreme sum shows again. Who knows if Lottario will even exist long enough for this to show itself again?).
What do you think? Are you going through too much trouble? Would LT be willing to put this in his free lotto section?

 

[Snides]

I could add in a spot for you to enter tickets of 6 numbers you choose to see what the skip sum is, wouldn't be too hard..

I could also add in more filters than the one that I added in.. stuff like <=2 from each decade, inner/outer filters, odd/even, rows/columns, last digits, spread of line, certain amount of consecutives.. the list goes on, each filter wouldn't take long to add, a few minutes a piece.. if this is what you are looking for, let me know.. I'll likely be too busy tomorrow, i think I'm heading off to Wonderland if the weather is nice.. and I'm not sure what the weekend holds, I'd like to stain my entire deck sometime soon.. I just redid some of the stairs on the deck this evening.. but as time permits, I can finish off this program to your liking. It gives me an opportunity to work on new ideas and test them out to see how they perform.

Even if it is too hard to pick a certain skip sum for the next draw, like you said, some are less frequent than others, so maybe we can work in reverse too, and eliminate a few million combinations that are less likely to hit a jackpot..

 

[mirage]

I could add in a spot for you to enter tickets of 6 numbers you choose to see what the skip sum is, wouldn't be too hard..

I could also add in more filters than the one that I added in.. stuff like <=2 from each decade, inner/outer filters, odd/even, rows/columns, last digits, spread of line, certain amount of consecutives.. the list goes on, each filter wouldn't take long to add, a few minutes a piece.. if this is what you are looking for, let me know.. I'll likely be too busy tomorrow, i think I'm heading off to Wonderland if the weather is nice.. and I'm not sure what the weekend holds, I'd like to stain my entire deck sometime soon.. I just redid some of the stairs on the deck this evening.. but as time permits, I can finish off this program to your liking. It gives me an opportunity to work on new ideas and test them out to see how they perform.

Even if it is too hard to pick a certain skip sum for the next draw, like you said, some are less frequent than others, so maybe we can work in reverse too, and eliminate a few million combinations
that are less likely to hit a jackpot..

Good Evening Snides,
Hope you had a fun time at Wonderland, if you went. Weather would have been good for such activity.
Been thinking about your post, but have been tied up with a number of other things today. Will put down a few thoughts now then get back.
Yes, your idea of working in reverse was my original intention when I came up with this idea, that is, finding a way to eliminate some few ..millions.. of combinations that are less likely to hit a jackpot.
i.e. it is another, filter.
I could add in a few more ideas about possible filters that I think are useful. I have just briefly reviewed about last 5 months worth of draws (a sampling) but I have been looking at lotto numbers for years..
... I was going to go on here but I've just changed my mind. I've just thought of a strategy that I think just might pull off the .....
! and I'm hesitant about giving away any more information. I don't think I'm completely delusional...

Anyway, I will get back to you tomorrow with some ideas about filters.

In answer to your question, would I like to see a spot to enter the sum of skips against which I could check tickets to play, the answer is yes, that it would be a time and labour saver, for the way I have been playing lotto to-date.

I have some questions regarding the filters you mention:
for example, what are:
inner/outer filters?
rows/columns?
Thanks!

 

[Snides]

hesitant about giving out more info? aren't we all here to help each other?

about the inner/outer and rows/columns filter.. you are in ontario, so look at your play slips.. See how it's divided into a 7x7 grid? the outside of that grid is your "outer", the inside is the "inner", and rows/columns, that should be obvious now, you mentioned you were more "visual" than mathmatical before.. each row and column would be a filter. Generally you get 2 or less per row or column, with a few occassions of 3 in some (including bonus).

As for wonderland, yes, I had a good time there.. even though I was only there for about 6 hours. saw some of the shows, went on a few rides.. and it was all free cus I was given some free season's passes.. So I will go back again this summer. Had to keep the visit short because we had to get back to attend to our dog's needs

I will try to add in the ability to check you tickets for sum skip as soon as i can. I'm hoping to pressure wash my deck tomorrow to prepare for some stain on tuesday. It shouldn't be too hard to add in, so it should be available soon.. One question i would like to ask first, what is your preferred screen resolution? I'm trying to design it for 800x600, but if you use 1024x768, that would be great, i can increase the size of the form and add more stuff in then..

 

[mirage]

hesitant about giving out more info? aren't we all here to help each other?

Hello Snides,

Have a lot to say but don't want to get into humongous postings. Too much to write/read at once. Would not be .

Also, re: your above quote: "hesitant about giving out more info? aren't we all here to help each other?"
- I sincerely appologize for having said that. Yes of course you are right. It was out of line, contrary to purpose of this board.
Also extremely NOT . Mea Culpa!
It was premature to have mentioned it in any case. In that moment I was in a flow of thinking, and it momentarily popped in merely as a germ of an idea. It is seed form only at this stage. Let me think about it more, please. Very sorry!!!
(To be continued....)

 

[peter]

Well lets plant the seed, and spill the beans, and lets see what grows.