LottoSync v1.7 issues !!

Reply #88

paul762 — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:26:26 GMT

guru, if results never even out then surely the sampling is very important to a specific game and perhaps there should be more emphasis placed on finding the correct sample for each game or even having later lottosync versions being able to work this out automatically to get the best results for whichever game you play.what do you think

Reply #87

Guru — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:12:58 GMT

The cumulated results would most likely become increasingly similar, but they would probably never truly even out.

Reply #86

paul762 — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 11:09:14 GMT

thanks guru, i think i get

Reply #85

Guru — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:57:59 GMT

I'll expand a little bit more on the above:suppose the surface on which the pingpong ball drops is perfectly flat. In that case the result will be difficult to trace. The ball will tend to land in very different places.But if the surface is filled with bumps and holes, the probable amount of end results will decrease. The result will become more predictable.Ultimately, if you would drop the pingpongball in a funnel shape, the end result would always be the same (deterministic).Given the circums... [ More ]

Reply #84

Guru — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:29:18 GMT

No Paul:It could very well have been the other way around. Even 2 testruns with the same sample size don't result in exactly the same prediction. There will in most cases be an overlap of numbers though. Just as your 2 runs at 269 and 270. (Read the manual carefully please)The calculations are not strict. there is no deterministic end result like 1+1 = 2. A lottosync prediction is probabilistic. That is the major issue here. Other softs calculate random dvents in a deterministic way. This is unl... [ More ]

Reply #83

paul762 — Sat, 28 Feb 2004 07:40:07 GMT

guru, earlier in this post you said that there would be no difference in predictions if i used 499 or 500 well ive got news, i just played uk 7/27 with sample 270 and then sample 269 and guess what? two different predictions!! take a look:-sample 269= 3-4-7-9-10-11-14-16-20-25sample 270= 2-3-6-7-9-11-12-13-14-26so i was right when i said about the person who wins the jackpot with 400 samples and the unlucky one who used 399 wasnt i

Reply #82

lottoarchitect — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 15:11:25 GMT

Ok Guru, let me rephrase it. At first what do we mean by reliable? A method that always produces 100% accurate results? There is not such a thing in lottery methods. Reliable should be a method that produces correct results far beyond of what we could consider it just luck. I'll ask you this question: is it reliable a method that produces 100% incorrect results (or more accurately, produces incorrect results far beyond of what we consider it luck)? I say YES! You just have to use it's negation t... [ More ]

Reply #81

Guru — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:05:44 GMT

No apagogeas I totally disagree with you: If you can determine what is unreliable and what is not, you can use only the reliable parts. So Reliable[2]+Reliable[4]=Reliable That's just the whole big deal. You would not come up with unreliable data in the first place if you knew how to determine reliable from unreliable. You are assuming things you cannot make real. Suppose there is a big pile of oranges and apples in front of you, and you are blind, have no touch and cannot smell.You need to co... [ More ]

Reply #80

lottoarchitect — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 02:29:47 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #79

spock — Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:11:32 GMT

PS sample 800.

Reply #78

spock — Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:09:40 GMT

Well Guru 6/49 lotto 3 of the 6 in the 10 picked numbers a result..

Reply #77

goose — Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:26:54 GMT

Guru,have you really succeed on lottery?If so,have you won for yourself?just checking something out~goose

Reply #76

vick — Wed, 11 Feb 2004 15:17:23 GMT

Excellent Guru, sounds like a great program when it's done, I'll be waitingps so the keno part can do both 70 and 80 number keno? and what would be the predicted numbers, ie can i tell it to give me 10 numbers or 20 numbers or 8 numbers etc etc?GoodWork Marco

Reply #75

Pick-4_Master — Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:08:20 GMT

When you say Pick-4 are you referring to the Daily games like the Pick-3 and Pick-4

Reply #74

Guru — Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:01:20 GMT

Vick:No release date yet for v1.8 (first i'll have to get the v1.7 rollin' perfectly)but it won't take too long after the release of 1.7Reddog:Yes v1.8 will also do pick 5 lotteries.You will have a choice when you open the program between keno, pick4, pick5, pick6. You will be able to save and load the settings for the different games you play.

Reply #73

lottoshlep — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 21:27:43 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #72

reddog — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:48:09 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by Guru on February 10, 2004 KENO will be for v1.8 I thought 1.8 was going to be for 5 number Lottos. Is that still true

Reply #71

vick — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:30:48 GMT

ok, thanks, what's the time frame for when ver 1.8 will be released

Reply #70

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:29:32 GMT

KENO will be for v1.8

Reply #69

vick — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 15:13:05 GMT

Guru wil ver 1.7 also handle Keno or will that be a totaly different program

Reply #68

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:41:56 GMT

I agree that it still can be improved a lot. That's what I am sacrificing all my spare time on.my sample tips are:for nomatter what lottogame. use at least 350.For games between 40 and 45 use 400 to 550For games between 45 and 60 use 500 to 800the sample difference between 499 or 500 will make no difference in the prediction at all.

Reply #67

paul762 — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:31:04 GMT

guru, i found that between 400 and 500 was right for the 27 number draw is this the same for every different draw eg 49 numbers also, is it that between 400 and 500 is the best for any draw? and perhaps there is no need for 150 to 2000 samples, there must be a reason why you decided to allow so many different sample options. the test you told me about when you did 100 draws on the belgian 42 number lotto, you used a 500 sample, i ask again why did you choose exactly 500 for your test? and did yo... [ More ]

Reply #66

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:00:37 GMT

Paul:when I figure it out well enough for winning the jackpot almost for sure within 10 to 20 tries. I'm going to stop the sales, but everyone who ever bought Lottosynchronizer will receive that final update.By the way. You don't have to choose the right sample setting. A setting of 400 could very well produce exactly the same result as 500. While on the other hand a setting of 80 would most likely produce a totally different result compared with a setting of 1000.

Reply #65

paul762 — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:46:05 GMT

guru, youre probably right, but random numbers COULD have won a 5 number win. just as i COULD have randomly chosen the right sample between 150 and 2000 set to play for the 5 number win also, because none of the other 68 samples chose 5 numbers. you made it hard on yourself by giving people an opportunity to select their own samples i think, and there should be no sample choice you, should be able to input the last 3 draw results and the program should work out the best sample to use based on

Reply #64

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:19:44 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by paul762 on February 10, 2004 if i had randomly chosen 69 sets of 7 numbers i would probably have had the same if not better results in a fraction of the time.You are misjudging your game Paul. If you had randomly chosen 69 sets of 7 numbers they would almost certainly not have produced a 5 win. These are some figures to illustrate why !!Your game with 27 balls has a total amount of 80730 possible 5 number combinationsEach set of 7 numbers can only mathematically cover... [ More ]

Reply #63

paul762 — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:11:01 GMT

guru, if i was impatient i wouldnt have purchased lottosync in the first place knowing how long it takes to produce a set of numbers, and as for only having lottosync for 8 days , youre right, but my pc has been doing overtime on the predictions for those 8 days and i can tell you that even though it selected 5 from 7 , i must say again this was from a 27 number draw, if i had randomly chosen 69 sets of 7 numbers i would probably have had the same if not better results in a fraction of the time.... [ More ]

Reply #62

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 06:28:46 GMT

Maybe it's time for those l

Reply #61

Guru — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 06:23:22 GMT

Paul:I see you getting a little impatient here.You bought lottosync just 8 days ago. How much did you expect to win in 8 days ?????? Isn't 8 days a very narrow timeframe to make your conclusions ?Tell me how often did you win a 5 out of 7 in your lottery before using lottosync, and if so how long did it take you to do that. Now it took you 8 days. And yes, maybe you needed several number sets. But you must agree that at least one of those sets was a very good one. And you even didn't wait for it... [ More ]

Reply #60

lottosyncman — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:19:22 GMT

i do believe that from what we have been told the version 1.7 is capable of this

Reply #59

Pick-4_Master — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 01:26:33 GMT

Any Prediction\Forecasting program must include possible repeat numbers.LottoMan software tells me when numbers are due to repeat in the Daily games,and Gail Howard's software has a feature that shows repeat number occurrence.

Reply #58

lottosyncman — Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:39:21 GMT

i will tell you now how important repeat numbers are they occur 60%of the time in a 6/49 draw A MUST HAVE IN SELECTION

Reply #57

Pick-4_Master — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 22:51:57 GMT

I wasn't aware it didn't select any numbers from the previous draw,that's not good at all because even though numbers repeat more often in the Daily games it does occurr enough in the Pick-5\6 to include them.Usually 1 or 2 numbers will repeat every so often but that so often could cause you to miss hitting the jackpot by 1 or 2 numbers if they were not included from the previous draw.That Gail Howard Chart is fairly accurate at trapping 4 or 5 numbers from a pool of 12 -18.It traps 3-4 more oft... [ More ]

Reply #56

paul762 — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:21:32 GMT

guru, even though i wo

Reply #55

EXCALIBUR — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 00:10:19 GMT

I hope that everybody is still willing to do the Free Jackpot chase ? I know that I am.

Reply #54

EXCALIBUR — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 00:05:33 GMT

Well! It's good, for the time being, but I still think that accurate preditions should preempt any other considerations, after all we all want winning numbers, if not, then we all should buy quick picks instead (?)I am sure that if we could help, we would.Well, let's have it, you can always make it better later.Thank You.

Reply #53

lottosyncman — Sun, 08 Feb 2004 13:55:39 GMT

great ! anytime frame like maybe 1 week or so

Reply #52

Guru — Sun, 08 Feb 2004 11:47:21 GMT

Hi,the dark clouds

Reply #51

spock — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:48:36 GMT

Well only one number right tonight not even the usual 2 lottosync fails yet again to get 3

Reply #50

Guru — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 18:13:47 GMT

Luckycat:Not all LottoSync players are people from this forum

Reply #49

luckycat — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 17:22:27 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #48

Guru — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 12:32:10 GMT

Hi,There is a reason why LS does not support multithreading on 2, 4 or more processors.When you do multithreading, each processor takes a part of the process for itself. When we are generating random numbers, we don't want different processors starting to intermix different random number flows into each other. This means that I'm afraid that 2 or 4 processors could mess up the entire process because then the results no longer come from 1 unique physical device.

Reply #47

lottoshlep — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 09:16:47 GMT

Oh boy ... good ol' vacuu

Reply #46

lottoshlep — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:45:52 GMT

Hmmmm ..... Interesting com

Reply #45

Pick-4_Master — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:42:13 GMT

That's a pretty good approach I was recently informed by a member(who will remain anonymous)that he met an individual in his hometown that wrote a program for selecting numbers in the Pick-3/4.This person makes around $7500-$10,000 a month but will not share or give out any information on how it works or the programming code used to develop it.

Reply #44

RJOh — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:34:34 GMT

I use software to track past drawings and profile the combinations, things I could do by hand but a computer does it in a faction of the time. I think of lottery games as random dvents that happen with in certain parameters, some more common than others but none exactly the same, and pick my numbers accordingly. Since I write most of my software myself, it is a collections of routines that I've done before with some success and can be quickly repeated with a difference set of numbers and I add n... [ More ]

Reply #43

dvdiva — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:30:16 GMT

i'm sure it's a limit on the program. if it were a multi-thread capible program or smp aware (2+ processors) then it would clip right along on a dual p4 xeon. or if it's more memory intensive than a nice opteron set up would be the way to go. if the program is not capable of taking advantage of at least smp than a supercomputer (assuming its even a x86 supercomputer) would run it about as fast as on an average dell/gateway ,etc

Reply #42

Pick-4_Master — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:12:31 GMT

You Could have fooled me the way some of you players attack the game with Computer Software Algorhythms,Mathematical Equations and other Scientific Analysis methods for Interpreting and Manipulating the Laws Of Probability for Random Numbers.It may not be Rocket Science but that's how everyone's approaching the game.

Reply #41

RJOh — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 00:29:48 GMT

Any lottery program that needs the speed and processing power of a Super Computer to work is worthless to the the average lottery players. Playing the lotteries is not like rocket science.RJOh

Reply #40

Pick-4_Master — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 21:51:15 GMT

It seems to me that Lotto-Synchronizer has a LOT OF POTENTIAL but it's being stifled due to Speed and Processing Power needs.I wonder how well it would do on the IBM Super Computer that played Chess with that Russian guy and won.

Reply #39

paul762 — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 20:39:40 GMT

5 from 7 correct in tonights uk daily play game using lottosync, used only 7 numbers instead of waiting for the whole 10, still quite a good result though.good luck all.

Reply #38

RJOh — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 19:48:58 GMT

Sorry reddog, I must have confused you with underdog. Also I thought that lottosych had its own wheeling systems. RJOh

Reply #37

spock — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:59:43 GMT

guru. I do not expect to win big,it would be nice to win anything.I have tried different sample settings it makes no difference.1.6 is so slow it is hard to do back check so how would you back check 1.7 if it is so much slower

Reply #36

lottosyncman — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 03:18:40 GMT

let me say this this is underdog speaking right now!!!! i have used this program and it most positively worked for me in the beginning aka nov 22 lotto drawing $800 profit five numbers in my wheel i since then have had a couple of 3 number and 1 4 number now i started to get a little discouraged myself with this program until i thought about how many draws have taken place since my last five number hit and it has only been about 10 draws and in amongst those 10 draws i hit a 4/10 and a couple of... [ More ]

Reply #35

reddog — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 02:58:45 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #34

goose — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 02:11:25 GMT

is it a recurring system

Reply #33

Guru — Fri, 06 Feb 2004 00:09:27 GMT

+ The whole sample issue gets too much attention. (probably because it is a setting the users can change)Samples = The amount of Random Numbers LS uses for creating 1 reordered number string.

Reply #32

hypersoniq — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:48:08 GMT

I picked up an RNG DLL from somewhere to get the numbers, It uses methods taken from encryption/decryption to pass more randomness tests than the prng built-into VB.here's the url... maybe it will help...http://www.freevbcode.com/ShowCode.asp?ID=2810

Reply #31

Guru — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:39:59 GMT

Hypersoniq:First of all, speed depends on how you obtain your random numbers. A prng is fast in spitting out random numbers , but not good enough.Lottosync doesn't use just a prng. + all numbers have to be constantly reordered in a certain way to obtain more or less reliable number strings. Chaotic systems do not move on in a linear way like 1 2 3 4 5 6. they rather move like 1 4 3 6 5 2.The linear movement has to be projected against the numbers that where drawn in the last draws. They conta... [ More ]

Reply #30

hypersoniq — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:35:43 GMT

My big question is... samples of what?In my trials of my VB Coincidizer I was running 2 BILLION number chains in roughly 11 hours on a PII @ 400MHz (and this was checking against at least 10 previous drawings)... why are you going to strings at all? If you are starting with numeric data types, why not stay there? arrays are much faster.just some food for thought.

Reply #29

lottosyncman — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:22:44 GMT

well this week i am running the sync at 2000 samples if it takes me 3 days so be it we will see if the results improve it seems to me they should since the more samples that are processed the more accurate it should be any thoughts on this guru

Reply #28

lottoshlep — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 23:04:17 GMT

Caveat Emptor ... holds true in lotto also, or maybe 'especially in lotto'.The way I see it nobody is forcing anyone to buy the system, if anything Guru has shown restraint in that respect in my opinion. He's openly discussing his progress in improving the program if not revealing the nitty gritty of the engine itself (that part would probably be beyond comprehension of lot of ppl here, self included). Compare that to others who have shamelessly tried to flog systems that are known not to work a... [ More ]

Reply #27

paul762 — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 22:27:53 GMT

its not just belgian lotto that lottosync isnt performing , its not working too well on uk lotto either , why does the sampling go upto 2000 if 400-500 is enough? and why are some people not getting any better results after they increase their sampling if it increases prediction accuracy. who is getting 4 numbers every week

Reply #26

Guru — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 21:02:31 GMT

Reddog:As I say on the lottosync website. It is not the holy grail (yet). One can expect a big win a lot faster than normal, but not within just a few tries. Normally in lotto you simply should not expect to win a big prize ever (that's if you are not fooling yourself). The succes rate of lottosync depends on the current trends in your lottogame. Lottosync is definetely capable of detecting many different trends, but not all, and not entirely flawless yet. If you are not winning for the moment,... [ More ]

Reply #25

MarkS — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 17:17:36 GMT

Guru, you saying that 1.6 doesnt perform too well on Belgian lotto now too, but can you use 1.7 to see how will it perform or because its not speed optimized you cannot use it? Can you tell us atleast an approximate time when 1.7 be released? Or maybe just try to release it what you have and we will see how 1.7 will perform on our PC's if thats possible.

Reply #24

RJOh — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 15:24:44 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #23

Guru — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:38:06 GMT

Currently v1.6 isn't performing well on the Belgian lottery too. So I wait till the tide changes. It's a matter of different trends.

Reply #22

Guru — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 13:13:09 GMT

reddog:patience is the key.

Reply #21

spock — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:23:44 GMT

You may be right Reddog another draw another 2 numbers? Starting to think its nothing more than a random number generator.(expensive

Reply #20

reddog — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:42:25 GMT

I agree with Paul762,,,, I

Reply #19

paul762 — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 08:01:41 GMT

im with you on this one bobp , for me its not lottosync, its nearly lottosunk!! i really dont like the idea of having to select different samples because even though its not supposed to be an rng having to choose your own samples means you might as well choose your own numbers also! im getting the same results with gail howard advantage plus software as i am with lottosync at present.good luck all ( you might need it too

Reply #18

BobP — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 05:05:34 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #17

lottosyncman — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 04:19:03 GMT

my feeling is who cares??? its a beta lets give it a go! if there is an improvement in the future then release 1.7a but for now lets have some fun with this tough one!!! here! here

Reply #16

BobP — Thu, 05 Feb 2004 03:41:19 GMT

It seems to pick in sets of two, so nine numbers wouldn't affect the speed. Since on a slow machine it can take minutes to hours to find the next pair you can always write down the numbers it has so far. The question is how many winning numbers usually turn up in the first 8 and how many in the last 2? BobP

Reply #15

lottosyncman — Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:37:00 GMT

how about making it a 9 number predictor will that make much of a difference or 7 or 8 number if the program is good i would be happy with just a minimum of 3 numbers every other draw

Reply #14

Guru — Wed, 04 Feb 2004 19:48:02 GMT

you're right excalibur.

Reply #13

EXCALIBUR — Wed, 04 Feb 2004 15:57:33 GMT

I really don't think that it works that way.It seems to me that the more numbers that it has to pick, that slower that it would run.If you want faster, then maybe it would have to pick fewer numbers, not more, but then, you might miss a winning number,that could had come out, otherwise?But, i don't know.Guru will tell us

Reply #12

spock — Wed, 04 Feb 2004 11:41:14 GMT

If you let it pick more than 10 say 12 or more would it run any faster??I am sure we all would be very very happy if it could pick 5 or 6 from 12 numbers.

Reply #11

EXCALIBUR — Tue, 03 Feb 2004 06:20:39 GMT

Well, it does look to me, like i wiil have to get a new computer soon, after all, and after that, yes, i will also put up with 3 day prediction runs, as we all know, the most important thing, is having the software produce winning numbers, those of us that have slow computers, will just have to buy new fast computers, weather we want or not, if we want to get the (Winning?) numbers.

Reply #10

BobP — Tue, 03 Feb 2004 04:42:53 GMT

I would put up with three day prediction runs if it wins. BobP

Reply #9

vick — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 23:27:56 GMT

LET'S GO, i got a p4 3 HT + 1 gb memory big ass fast hard drive, let me at the 1.7 version.

Reply #8

Guru — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 16:37:37 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by EXCALIBUR on February 02, 2004the problem is that one single approach towards Guessing or Predicting numbers can not be as good as Attacking the problem from several directions at once, and comming out with the numbers based on several different concerted analysis, rather than just one single approach. You don't need 50 approaches to calculate the sum of 1+1 either do you.It is better to use 1 reliable method, than 20 methods that are based on (nothing) and only... [ More ]

Reply #7

EXCALIBUR — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 15:38:11 GMT

Yea!If the program, would store past Experiences or runs, so to speak, and sort of Learn or self adjust itself based on this stored past runs or whatever, the problem is that one single approach towards Guessing or Predicting numbers can not be as good as Attacking the problem from several directions at once, and comming out with the numbers based on several different concerted analysis, rather than just one single approach.But Again, i don't know anything about programming.You are on... [ More ]

Reply #6

paul762 — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 12:23:57 GMT

what sort of prediction improvements are you talking about, also i think it would be better if the program could work out which sample would be best for the game you play based on the previous results. dont really want to be messing about with things too much, i would rather be able to type in the previous draws and let lottosync do the biz, as was said in a previous post i think you want to avoid too many bells and whistles, just my opinion though.

Reply #5

hypersoniq — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 11:55:55 GMT

Guru, precalculated strings... it sounds like pre-rendered scenes in 3D video games... when they did that (pre-rendering) speeds increased as did the realism ... as long as what's under the hood is a big secret, you are on your own with improvements... but it sounds like a good idea to me.

Reply #4

Guru — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 09:19:57 GMT

Excalibur:It won't run faster in dos or from a floppy or cd. The only thing that matters is brute processor speed, Or a faster way to create the sync strings. (but that seems impossible)Guess we'll have to accept that solutions don't always come in the form or way we would wish them to come.

Reply #3

EXCALIBUR — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 07:20:44 GMT

I have another idea, what about having your program on a floppy or cd and putting it on the floppy drive or cd driveand then turn the pc on, and have the pc boot of the floppy or cd, bypassing windows, would that be faster

Reply #2

EXCALIBUR — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 07:16:46 GMT

I have A question, i have win98SE, if i got a pc with win2000 or winxp, do you make different versions of the software for dofferent systems or is the program exactly the same, regardless of operating system, and would your program run faster using dos intead of windows or not.

Reply #1

Guru — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 06:30:46 GMT

maybe we could even make packages of precalculated string sets available for download (free for our customers) for the most popular lotto games. Like 6/42 or 6/49

LottoSync v1.7 issues !!

Guru — Mon, 02 Feb 2004 06:25:15 GMT

Hi lottosync users