Using a pool a numbers from recent draws for the next one!

[Dennis Bassboss]

Since the beginning with bonus the Canadian 6/49 has for repeaters a values of 1,00749625187406 repeat on back to back draw...by looking at 4 draws back that value would definitely increase a lot....

This was counting with bonus included....But with no bonus I have this value 0,745627186406797 for the Canadian 6/49(not including the last draw or yesterday's draw)

When adding the bonus you would get even higher figures...In the last 4 draws...

 

[thornc]

Olá Thornc,

Yes, I'm from Portugal and my intention is to update results of last 4 draws from time to time.

Hehe it seemed so, I'm also Portugueese from Algarve...
We can communicate in English to honor our hosts and fellow
members.

I think in next update better conclusions will come , so that we can use last 4 draws numbers when they seem good.

So are you looking for what can be called triggers, information that the strategy will happen soon....
I think I found one that will suit for low prizes, but I'll have to double and triple check it!!

Anyway, hope that you visit here often and that we can continue to exchange ideas with our fellow Canadian(and others) friends!

 

[hot4]

Hehe it seemed so, I'm also Portugueese from Algarve...
We can communicate in English to honor our hosts and fellow
members.

Good, Algarve ...

So are you looking for what can be called triggers, information that the strategy will happen soon....
I think I found one that will suit for low prizes, but I'll have to double and triple check it!!

Anyway, hope that you visit here often and that we can continue to exchange ideas with our fellow Canadian(and others) friends!

Yes, it's important not to play last 4 draws numbers as they will be ever winners or the most of time. They beat the odds sometimes and sometimes they are beated by the odds.

What I'm searching is some rule that has beated the odds ever in the past. While this can not repeat in future, it seems a good try.

Frank

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Thanks Hot4,

interesting results, at first glance they're very similar to mine. I'll take a closer look when I have time.



I saw a site many moons ago that used the same approach, and used 'trigger draws' (my term, they called it something diff). Looking at what happened say 50,100,200 ... etc. draws ago, one could supposedly find a cycle and thus predict when to apply the system ... haven't found one for BC49, yet. I lost the link to that site ...

Yes and the site posted above is not that site or the site that I am talking about above...But it is very significant because...the total pool numbers is not always the same...Let me clarify...if you have 2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third, you only have to deal with a pool of 19 numbers...
The values given are average...now my question would be ...
How many times does 4 numbers have hit from the last 4 draws when at the same time the size of the pool was reduced under 19 numbers???...

 

[Brad]

originally posted by Dennis .... <snip> ... Let me clarify...if you have 2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third, you only have to deal with a pool of 19 numbers...
The values given are average...now my question would be ...
How many times does 4 numbers have hit from the last 4 draws when at the same time the size of the pool was reduced under 19 numbers???...

Very good point Dennis, but I could not find a reliable/consistent way not to throw out the baby with the bath water when reducing the pool size ... but once I get more familiar with WINHunter and customize some processors , I will try some ideas I've not implemented so far 'cuz they were too labour intensive without sw.

 

[Nick Koutras]

to GillesD

we wrote:

I do not know if we measure the same thing but using the Lotto 6/49 (2002 draws), I get the following results:

--------------------
Yes we do measure the same quantity.
Your results are the "actual" score.

1 draw: 0.746 repeats
2 draws: 1.484 repeats
3 draws: 2.233 repeats
4 draws: 2.960 repeats
5 draws: 3.713 repeats
6 draws: 4.462 repeats
7 draws: 5.199 repeats
8 draws: 5.921 repeats

Results are fairly near your own results but always slightly higher; differences range from 0.011 to 0.056. Maybe it is because I include multiple repeats in my calculations.

------------
That is true for Can 6/49
More numbers have repeat from the average.


By the way, Nick K. you must be the same guy that put out the Probability Calculator. I found that on the web quite a few years ago but I still use it on a fairly regular basis.

----------
That is correct too!


Nick

 

[GillesD]

To D.B.

...Let me clarify...if you have 2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third, you only have to deal with a pool of 19 numbers...

That could be an interesting challenge to set up but I do not understand how you get a "pool of 19 numbers" when you have "2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third," and I assume 0 in the fourth. Are you considering the bonus number? Can you be more explicit and give an example.

 

[hot4]

Yes and the site posted above is not that site or the site that I am talking about above...But it is very significant because...the total pool numbers is not always the same...Let me clarify...if you have 2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third, you only have to deal with a pool of 19 numbers...
The values given are average...now my question would be ...
How many times does 4 numbers have hit from the last 4 draws when at the same time the size of the pool was reduced under 19 numbers???...

If you check in UK (bonus+) there has been only 6 times that 19 numbers happened in last 4 draws. However, 5 times they hit 4 and once they hit 5 numbers. Better than the odds!

In Uk (bonus-) it happened 126 times that, last 4 draws had 19 numbers. They hit4 12 times (0,79), hit5 5 times (1,59) and twice 6hit (8,18).

Now the problem: how to wheel these 19 numbers? Max=4 Min=4? Max=5 Min=4?

One thing we know: to wheel them alone could give us the chance to win 6hits only twice.

Frank

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Re: To D.B.

That could be an interesting challenge to set up but I do not understand how you get a "pool of 19 numbers" when you have "2 repeats on the first draw, 3 on the second, 1 in the third," and I assume 0 in the fourth. Are you considering the bonus number? Can you be more explicit and give an example.

Yes I'm taking the bonus but only the bonus from the immediate preceding draw...
Example these 4 fictionnal draw...
02-10-20-37-43-44
02-10-21-33-35-41
04-13- 21-33-35-46
04-15-16-27-29-49 bonus 19

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Re: Re: To D.B.

Yes I'm taking the bonus but only the bonus from the immediate preceding draw...
Example these 4 fictionnal draw...
first=02-10-20-37-43-44
second=02-10-21-33-35-41
third=04-13- 21-33-35-46
fourth=04-15-16-27-29-49 bonus 19
fifth=??

Sorry for the wait...I would have fix that example earlyer but like everyone else I guess I had a hard time posting this morning...

 

[winhunter]

need to get out more

I need to watch other forums on here to see what you guys are talking about!!

Thornc,

I have implemented your "Additive" selector, which allows the user to -add- numbers back in that were previously eliminated. There are some quirks with this procecss, but you will understand once I explain it in more detail in the WINHunter section.

Also, I have goen through and changed the MIN/MAX values as mentioned in the WINHunter Forum.

Anyway....

I'm glad to hear that WINHunter has helped you guys figure out the best # of previous draws to utilize. But have you tried added a second filter to that same group and adding a different processor in there? Perhaps you could add a single hit processor, and score the Cold numbers using the HOT-COLD rule (lower in the setup window than the High-Avg-Low.) This will score the cold numbers slightly more than the numbers from the previous draws, and possibly bump them into the selection group. Use the Optimizer as before on this second filter, but keep the other filter in place, and leave it as "use filter".

A note on triggers:

The triggers in WINHunter are still very simple, and very basic (only two exist thus far). BUT, this is one of the tools I think WINHunter needs to have more of. I noticed with a stack I designed at the beginning of the Trial period that it would hit Jackpots in clusters, and then go low on hits. Given the "plug-inable" nature of triggers, adding more is no problem!

We need to get Dennis into using WINHunter..... *grin*


Andrew

 

[Brad]

searching the furthest cerebral recesses

Originally posted by Brad
... <snip> ... I saw a site many moons ago that used the same approach ... <snip> ... I lost the link to that site ...

Originally posted by Dennis Bassboss
Nothing is new here I once saw a site where this was debated...but I can't find it anymore ....

Hey Dennis, is this it ?

 

[thornc]

Re: searching the furthest cerebral recesses

Hey Dennis, is this it ?

Nice link Brad!

 

[Brad]

Hi thornc,

I think so too, maybe it'll lead to the triggers we talked about earlier, if we could somehow get WH to look for them ... just wish I had more time !

 

[thornc]

maybe it'll lead to the triggers we talked about earlier, if we could somehow get WH to look for them

Hehe this would be sweet, but I think that WH is not there yet when it comes to triggers, then again neither are we , we first need to get a theory right and then pass it along to andrew!

... just wish I had more time !

Well the way I see it we shouldn't spend to much time looking at this or will get insain , but anyway any time spent is quality time!

 

[Brad]

... my turn to chuckle ... wouldn't do it if I didn't enjoy it, I like playing with numbers, there are worse ways to go insane.

However, my candle is burning out as you are starting your day ... c u later !

 

[thornc]

However, my candle is burning out as you are starting your day ... c u later !

Yap, sometimes I tend to forget about that we're all in different timezones!
I'm 5 hours ahead of you, next week I'll be 6 hours ahead!

 

[Dennis Bassboss]

Re: searching the furthest cerebral recesses

Hey Dennis, is this it ?

No Brad that is not the one either....

 

[Beaker]

Re: Re: searching the furthest cerebral recesses

Nice link Brad!

Indeed thanks for that one Brad - I hadn't seen that

 

[Brad]

Thornc ... Dennis ... Beaker

Yap, sometimes I tend to forget about that we're all in different timezones!
I'm 5 hours ahead of you, next week I'll be 6 hours ahead!

Hehe ... you're 8 hrs ahead !

No Brad that is not the one either....

Sheesh ... picky, picky, picky !

Indeed thanks for that one Brad - I hadn't seen that

No prob ... glad you like it !