lottosync 1.7 at 12000 samples

Reply #20

spock — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:20:25 GMT

I was trying 100,000 but i still had 8 or 9 hours Togo so i changed it to 70,000 ten numbers appeared immediately only sat will prove if any good?One repeat the rest below 20. We are due low Numbers on Irish lotto.

Reply #19

lottoshlep — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:23:42 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by Guru on March 12, 2004It is also possible for instance that you start it at 70000, when you see after a while that it is gonna take too long, you can stop it and restart it (continue aborted prediction) at a lower sample like 30000 or so. Intermixing diff. sample sizes in 1 prediction, will not ruin your prediction.OK, this may prove to be a lame Q (I will try this at a later date when time permits):Say that 50K samples were set, prog has reached 45K and player runs o... [ More ]

Reply #18

paul762 — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 08:11:22 GMT

very much looking forward t

Reply #17

vick — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:57:48 GMT

i got 7/10 on the keno tonight using lottosynch 1.7 [which i have to heavily modify to use with keno], IMAGINE what we could do with a full KENO version

Reply #16

reddog — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:48:10 GMT

When will V. 1.8 be ready

Reply #15

Guru — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 09:16:56 GMT

reddog:Time estimation depends on the max. availability of the cpu. If you start the process while no other time consuming processes are running, it will give an estimation based on aprox. 100% cpu availability.Ofcourse, when you work on your computer this may start to change heavily depending on how much cpu power is left.

Reply #14

vick — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 02:02:10 GMT

reddog my 20,000 took 11 hrs for 649 yes waiting for KENO version

Reply #13

reddog — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 21:20:56 GMT

My computor has been runnin

Reply #12

paul762 — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 20:18:13 GMT

guru id just like to know if 12000 sample will outperform v1.6please answer by sunday as i want to play monday!!thanks

Reply #11

vick — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:23:45 GMT

oh i see you can stop it then change the sample rate and it will continue on that new sample

Reply #10

Guru — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:20:36 GMT

Vick:Is using 100,000 overkill ???In some situations it will be overkill, in others not.(testing was done at the default 30000 samples)The golden rule is. Set it as high as time allows you ! If you can only afford 20000 samples, then go for it at 20000.If you have enough time and patience to go for a 70000, then don't lower it.It is also possible for instance that you start it at 70000, when you see after a while that it is gonna take too long, you can stop it and restart it (continue aborted pr... [ More ]

Reply #9

Guru — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:06:58 GMT

What I have forgotten to say is that you should ALWAYS check your prediction on the second next draw too!!! Often there are tendences where LS only has 1 or 2 numbers correct for the next draw but 3 or 4 (or more) for the second next draw. TRACK THIS !! If you notice this behaviour, then play your predictions for the second next draw and not the next. If your bonusball was drawn last, I'm not surprised it will often be one of the predicted numbers. All 10 predicted numbers are truly due to come... [ More ]

Reply #8

vick — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:29:11 GMT

lottoshlep i agree with what you say. no matter what sample rate you use with this 1.7 it always takes about the same amt of time / sample unlike 1.6, but with 1.7 it always takes the same amt of time with the same computer and same sample whereas 1.6 time varied, sometimes it took say 30 mins and sometimes 4 hours with the same sample rate.Also i'm finding that between different sample rates for the same numbers the predictions will have more of the same numbers with different samples.Guru is u... [ More ]

Reply #7

paul762 — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 08:28:14 GMT

will 12000 samples still gi

Reply #6

Guru — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:54:34 GMT

Lottosyncman:I'm not saying sampling 12000 is useless. You'll still have a lot better odds then just plain guessing or using some very dubious other ways to isolate numbers.In this version you should see the sampling for instance as the resolution of a picture . Let's say 12000 produces a picture with lower resolution in which some details get lost, but it still produces an image of the situation. 50000 would produce an image with more detail, and so on.Don't feel like it's doing nothing at all... [ More ]

Reply #5

EXCALIBUR — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:23:53 GMT

Don't worry too much about samples, you are probably going to get just as good number predictions as anybody else, regardless of which sample you use, as a matter of fact you already are, Vick with his very fast and new Pc didn'tdo no better than you did, he will get the numbers faster yes, but I don't think that he will get better numbers than you, if you don't believe me, have him get numbers for the same lotto game as you and compare numbers and do this for a month, and then you will see, I t... [ More ]

Reply #4

lottoshlep — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 05:06:07 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #3

vick — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 04:36:13 GMT

mabye it's for lower ball games like 40 balls etc etc

Reply #2

lottosyncman — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:30:04 GMT

thanks vick but i still wonder why that sample is present in the program if its not effective???why even have it there if it wont do the job correctly

Reply #1

vick — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:22:32 GMT

he said that you shouldn't go under 20,000 and best range is 25,000 to 50,000

lottosync 1.7 at 12000 samples

lottosyncman — Fri, 12 Mar 2004 01:07:12 GMT

guru will lottosync 1.7 give a fairly accurate prediction at 12000 samples or are we just wasting time running it that low??? and if it wont be accurate why was it introduced as an optional sample