Math Models vs Actual Results

Reply #11

JKING — Tue, 05 Oct 2004 00:04:33 GMT

Pure statistical analysis is a proven truth. It's a great way to determine what your your error ratios are going to be when you select your reduction criteria. But, seems to be lacking in the area of current dvents. I think the most useful information, after the basic statistics has been performed, is applying statistical concepts to the current data, occurrences over a range, last time picked, pairings,....etc. The question is, is what is the best combination to yeild to best results.Would anyo... [ More ]

Reply #10

Bertil — Sun, 26 Sep 2004 01:10:36 GMT

Hypersoniq, Your table of data is greatly appreciated and might serve as a basis for other kinds of analysis and predictions. Bertil

Reply #9

hypersoniq — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 21:25:55 GMT

I only count the draws since 10/9/02... there are currently 205 draws under the new matrix with draw 206 tonight.I don't know if they are posted anywhere, I used game history and excel to get frequency data. I keep a chart of occurrences in several columns (overall, positional (sort order) and positional (draw order)).here is the game history since then...Draw Date---Draw#--WB1-WB2-WB3--WB4-WB5---PB10/09/2002----001----09----10----38----42----43----0510/12/2002----002----23----26----46----49... [ More ]

Reply #8

Bertil — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:54:19 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by Bertil on September 25, 2004Quote: Originally posted by hypersoniq on September 25, 2004In my experiences with excel, I find the skew comes from the limited number of sample draws versus the total number of possibilities. The theoretical models tell you what would happen after the dust settles, where the numbers are expected to be frequency-wise... observations don't agree because there are only usually a few hundred or a few thousand results and millions of possibili... [ More ]

Reply #7

Bertil — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:47:47 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by hypersoniq on September 25, 2004In my experiences with excel, I find the skew comes from the limited number of sample draws versus the total number of possibilities. The theoretical models tell you what would happen after the dust settles, where the numbers are expected to be frequency-wise... observations don't agree because there are only usually a few hundred or a few thousand results and millions of possibilities.The theory helps set ranges, but observation helps... [ More ]

Reply #6

hypersoniq — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 20:08:05 GMT

In my experiences with excel, I find the skew comes from the limited number of sample draws versus the total number of possibilities. The theoretical models tell you what would happen after the dust settles, where the numbers are expected to be frequency-wise... observations don't agree because there are only usually a few hundred or a few thousand results and millions of possibilities.The theory helps set ranges, but observation helps narrow them down to useful size.here's an example from the M... [ More ]

Reply #5

JAG331 — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 17:31:47 GMT

I've been using actuals since I started my jackpot quest in February. In the last month I've also been using the theoretical math models to chart actual drawing variance. I think there is a danger in using actual drawings in place of, not in conjunction with, theoretical models...your analysis may come out skewed.

Reply #4

MADDOG10 — Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:29:43 GMT

actuals

Reply #3

LottoFan — Tue, 21 Sep 2004 21:54:38 GMT

Actuals.

Reply #2

hypersoniq — Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:45:14 GMT

I have always used actuals...

Reply #1

trance — Thu, 09 Sep 2004 14:52:14 GMT

actuals

Math Models vs Actual Results

JKING — Tue, 07 Sep 2004 01:48:01 GMT

There seems to be a difference in how people at the post are attaching the same problem. The differences are good because it makes for alot of good discussions.Where do you stand