Convergence

Reply #11

Lottonomics — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:21:17 GMT

Ahh, I didn't consider the advanced play vs having to fill out a different line every day. I guess I was in the mega millions mindset where it would only be 2 draws a week, doh! Although, if someone had a daily routine of always having to go somewhere that happens to sell lottery tickets I suppose it wouldn't seem like such a chore, haha.

The idea still has some promise though

Reply #10

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:58:29 GMT

LN

The advantage of playing the same set would be that you could buy up to 14 plays at a time, at least in MO

they give you that option so you would only need to buy a ticket once every 2 weeks. The above would require

you to purchase a ticket every day. I would hate to play every day for 6 months and the one day I skipped the

numbers come in.

RL

Reply #9

Lottonomics — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:16:57 GMT

It sounds like a good idea if there are enough consistent results to back it up!

You said Most people don't have that kind of commitment to something that might not work. To me it would be similar to the person that plays the same favorite combination every draw for years and years hoping that today will be the day without ever really knowing IF it'll ever hit in their lifetime.

With your idea it wouldn't be a matter of IF, it'd be just a matter of WHEN. I like it

Reply #8

jimjwright — Thu, 27 Jun 2013 00:36:58 GMT

I have dabbled with the approach that say you arranged the numbers in some predetermined random order as a string. Then after each draw you pull the numbers out of string and re-insert them back at various pre-determined points into the string. The hopes that after doing this pseudo-random shuffling for say n draws you push the winning numbers to either one end of the string or the other end or maybe to the middle where you would play those numbers for the next draw. Then hopefully this pseudo-r... [ More ]

Reply #7

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 23:20:26 GMT

JW

It all comes down to rather a back-test can be trusted. Most of the time I have found that it not a good

means to test something like this. The past hits could be just chance and the program might not hit again

for a couple years. Most people don't have that kind of commitment to something that might not work. The

program only takes a couple seconds to run but filling out the ticket driving to the lottery store and back

would get old after a few hundred trips, that is unless it... [ More ]

Reply #6

jimjwright — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:44:15 GMT

I understand, with the Lexi research you have done and are doing it will always reduce to 1 line. My approach will never reduce to 1 line. So yours is the superior approach if you can accomplish it. I'm rooting for you !!!

Jimmy

Reply #5

WIN D — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:50:11 GMT

This was a post that was fun and a blast from the past. At that point I'm not even sure I had actually played Pick 5 before.

Years ago we were playing with Pick 5 game angles and awkwardly poking around with ....wait and shoot strategies. There might be one very salient point in there ...somewhere.....if any. LOL

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/179047

Reply #4

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:37:37 GMT

JW

To better understand let's take a look at the lexicographic index for a 5-39. We have 000001 to 575757.

Much like a pick-3 only with 6 digits. A simple way to explain the process is to break up the six digits

and analyze each position using my special formula, lol which calculates a probability for each digit in each

position. This is not your normal probabilities.

For my 5-39 this gives me six possible choices for the first digit (0 to 5) and (0 to 9) for the remaining... [ More ]

Reply #3

WIN D — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:22:41 GMT

Here is a small part of the reference subject going pretty far back to 2002 .......wow eleven years ago.

https://www.lotterypost.com/thread/144598/710140?q=win+d rp=search

Reply #2

jimjwright — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:56:09 GMT

I have found something similar for the Pick5 games. I have come up with 2 filters that will reduce a 5/39 game from 575757 combos to around 50. These filters typically hit 1-2 times every 100 draws but are not really predictable when they will happen. It's a complicated heuristic algorithm that factors in more than the previous draw. So its more expensive than what you propose in converging to a single line to play. I am in the process of coding the same heuristic for pick3 and pick4 in hoping I... [ More ]

Reply #1

WIN D — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:01:26 GMT

Hello RL

I tried a search for a subject close to what your talking about that took place years ago on the Math forum ....with no luck. Although it was not called convergence ...it certainly was taking place all around the subject.

It had to do with waiting on those Perfect Storm conditions that take place just a few times a year on the pick 5 games. ALL ODD or ALL EVEN draw numbers were a big part of the needed conditions.

Perhaps Rjoh can remember the title or tag line. It was quit... [ More ]

Convergence

RL-RANDOMLOGIC — Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:58:32 GMT

Hi all

I wanted to ask if anyone has tried this idea for P-5, P-6 games. I suppose it would work for the bonus

games also with the exception of the bonus ball. Working with filters over the years I have found a few

that converge every so often. Let's say that I have 6 filters that are history based which when all set

to single values they produce 1 line. These filters are calculated in such a way that the line generated

will be different game to game because each new draw added to... [ More ]