Welcome Guest
You last visited January 16, 2017, 12:06 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Constructing dynamic coverings

Topic closed. 29 replies. Last post 8 years ago by Todd.

 Page 1 of 2

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 13, 2008, 11:35 am - IP Logged

Well, greetings to everyone. It's been a while since my last post but I have some good news to announce. In the past I used to talk about a system (named Wheel Generator [WG]- search older posts here f you want more info) that can construct coverings on demand and also incorporating constraints (filters) to the final outcome. This is the first time I have actual testing data to present, as it currently forms, and I'd like to hear your comments.

I'll use an 18,6,4,6=42 covering to illustrate some interesting observations. This covering was picked randomly for this example.
First, I plan to play with my 18 randomly selected numbers (lotto 6/49 game) which are: 3,6,7,8,12,15,19,23,24,25,26,28,30,34,35,39,43,46
I also plan to introduce the following filters: Sums accept 80-160, Odd/even accept 2-4 and Common accept 2-3 where my common set is: 6,7,8,24,25,26,28,30 (that means I want 2-3 numbers from this common set to appear in every ticket produced, if possible).

First I present a typical (18,6,4,6,L=1)=42 covering as found in the internet and applied my 18 numbers set to it:

03 - 06 - 07 - 08 - 12 - 15 * 51, 3,3
03 - 06 - 07 - 19 - 23 - 24 * 82, 4,3
03 - 06 - 07 - 25 - 26 - 28 * 95, 3,5
03 - 06 - 07 - 30 - 34 - 35 * 115,3,3
03 - 06 - 07 - 39 - 43 - 46 * 144,4,2
03 - 08 - 19 - 25 - 30 - 39 * 124,4,3
03 - 08 - 23 - 26 - 34 - 43 * 137,3,2
03 - 08 - 24 - 28 - 35 - 46 * 144,2,2
03 - 12 - 19 - 26 - 34 - 46 * 140,2,1
03 - 12 - 23 - 28 - 35 - 39 * 140,4,1
03 - 12 - 24 - 25 - 30 - 43 * 137,3,3
03 - 15 - 19 - 28 - 35 - 43 * 143,5,1
03 - 15 - 23 - 25 - 30 - 46 * 142,4,2
03 - 15 - 24 - 26 - 34 - 39 * 141,3,2
06 - 08 - 19 - 28 - 30 - 46 * 137,1,4
06 - 08 - 23 - 25 - 34 - 39 * 135,3,3
06 - 08 - 24 - 26 - 35 - 43 * 142,2,4
06 - 12 - 19 - 25 - 34 - 43 * 139,3,2
06 - 12 - 23 - 26 - 35 - 46 * 148,2,2
06 - 12 - 24 - 28 - 30 - 39 * 139,1,4
06 - 15 - 19 - 26 - 35 - 39 * 140,4,2
06 - 15 - 23 - 28 - 30 - 43 * 145,3,3
06 - 15 - 24 - 25 - 34 - 46 * 150,2,3
07 - 08 - 19 - 26 - 30 - 43 * 133,3,4
07 - 08 - 23 - 28 - 34 - 46 * 146,2,3
07 - 08 - 24 - 25 - 35 - 39 * 138,4,4
07 - 12 - 19 - 28 - 34 - 39 * 139,3,2
07 - 12 - 23 - 25 - 35 - 43 * 145,5,2
07 - 12 - 24 - 26 - 30 - 46 * 145,1,4
07 - 15 - 19 - 25 - 35 - 46 * 147,5,2
07 - 15 - 23 - 26 - 30 - 39 * 140,4,3
07 - 15 - 24 - 28 - 34 - 43 * 151,3,3
08 - 12 - 15 - 19 - 23 - 24 * 101,3,2
08 - 12 - 15 - 25 - 26 - 28 * 114,2,4
08 - 12 - 15 - 30 - 34 - 35 * 134,2,2
08 - 12 - 15 - 39 - 43 - 46 * 163,3,1
19 - 23 - 24 - 25 - 26 - 28 * 145,3,4
19 - 23 - 24 - 30 - 34 - 35 * 165,3,2
19 - 23 - 24 - 39 - 43 - 46 * 194,4,1
25 - 26 - 28 - 30 - 34 - 35 * 178,2,4
25 - 26 - 28 - 39 - 43 - 46 * 207,3,3
30 - 34 - 35 - 39 - 43 - 46 * 227,3,1

In the above covering, after the * are displayed the columns [Sum/Odd-Even/Common] and in red the tickets that failed in at least one filter (in bold the filter failed). The above wheel offers the 4if6 100%, however it fails quite miserably to the filters requirements (21/42 of tickets pass the filters): Sums pass 35/42 (83.3%), Odd-Evenpass 36/42 (85.7%), Common pass 26/42 (61.9%).

WG, was set to produce the above covering from scratch with the requested constraints. All filters and coverage have been set to equal priority (50%) [think of this as boosting everything as much as it can get without degrading the importance of any of the constraints] and the produced covering was:

03 06 07 35 39 46 * 136,4,2
03 06 08 15 24 34 * 90, 2,3
03 06 15 25 30 39 * 118,4,3
03 06 19 23 26 30 * 107,3,3
03 06 26 30 43 46 * 154,2,3
03 07 12 15 26 43 * 106,4,2
03 07 19 23 24 25 * 106,5,3
03 08 12 26 34 35 * 118,2,2
03 08 15 25 26 43 * 120,4,3
03 08 23 28 30 34 * 126,2,3
03 08 24 28 35 43 * 141,3,3
03 12 19 28 30 39 * 131,3,2
03 12 25 30 34 43 * 147,3,2
03 19 25 28 39 46 * 160,4,2
03 23 24 26 34 39 * 149,3,2
06 07 23 28 34 43 * 141,3,3
06 07 24 25 26 28 * 116,2,5
06 08 15 23 28 39 * 119,3,3
06 08 25 34 35 46 * 154,2,3
06 08 26 30 39 43 * 152,2,4
06 12 19 25 43 46 * 151,3,2
06 12 23 24 30 35 * 130,2,3
06 15 19 26 28 35 * 129,3,3
06 24 34 39 43 46 * 192,2,2
07 08 12 19 34 39 * 119,3,2
07 08 12 23 43 46 * 139,3,2
07 08 15 19 30 35 * 114,4,3
07 08 24 25 30 39 * 133,3,5
07 12 26 28 35 39 * 147,3,3
07 15 23 25 35 46 * 151,5,2
07 15 26 30 34 46 * 158,2,3
07 19 24 28 34 46 * 158,2,3
07 19 25 26 34 43 * 154,4,3
08 12 19 25 28 46 * 138,2,3
08 19 24 26 35 46 * 158,2,3
12 15 19 23 34 46 * 149,3,1
12 15 24 25 35 39 * 150,4,2
12 15 24 28 30 46 * 155,1,3
12 23 25 26 28 46 * 160,2,3
15 19 23 24 26 43 * 150,4,2
15 25 28 34 35 43 * 180,4,2
19 23 30 35 39 43 * 189,5,1

The above covering offers 4if6 in 99.14% (missing 160/18564) and the filters requirements (33/42 tickets pass): Sums pass 39/42 (92.8%), Odd-Even pass 38/42 (90.5%), Common pass 37/42 (88.1%). That translates as we made 12 more tickets passing our filters
Now, although we don't have a complete 4if6 100% covering, possibly due to the equal priority and the constraints set, we see a good boost in the conditions set by the filters and a 'maximization' of coverage offered under these constraints. Regarding the 4if6 coverage, it might be an utopia to expect it to be 100% based on the filter constraints we have set, for the same amount of tickets required by a minimal construction without constraints (42 in this example). This is mainly because aminimal construction is quite tight to 'allow' many alterations and 'room' for further constraints (filters) and still maintain the 100% guarantee. Of course nothing tell us that such a covering doesn't exist. We could try and set the engine to give more priority to the coverage or alternatively we could add a few more tickets as as implified way to compete with the 100% requirement whilst retaining these constraints. My observation is that we do actually play more tickets which 'look-like-winning-tickets' when using such an optimization whilst maintaining a very high coverage ratio, compared to playing just a minimal covering and applying our numbers on it without any optimization. I'm looking forward to your comments.

cheers
lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

United States
Member #5599
July 13, 2004
1192 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 14, 2008, 8:44 am - IP Logged

Hi,

It has been a long time. Welcome back. *S*

You are a slave to the choices you have made.  jk

Even a blind squirrel will occasioanlly find an acorn.

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 14, 2008, 1:39 pm - IP Logged

Hi JKing,

the logic is universal and the system allows working with 2-12 ball lotteries. Up to 7 balls games, you can deal with a pool of 99 balls. Beyond 7 ball games, the total numbers you can deal with is reduced to a minimum 37 for a 12 ball lottery. I think this i more than enough for any sort of lottery game around the world. As for the release date, I expect it to be within next month, probably mid to end of November.

However, I'd like everybody's comments on the results presented above; what they think, what is missing, what is good, what is bad etc.

cheers

lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 16, 2008, 11:30 am - IP Logged

Hi JKing,

the logic is universal and the system allows working with 2-12 ball lotteries. Up to 7 balls games, you can deal with a pool of 99 balls. Beyond 7 ball games, the total numbers you can deal with is reduced to a minimum 37 for a 12 ball lottery. I think this i more than enough for any sort of lottery game around the world. As for the release date, I expect it to be within next month, probably mid to end of November.

However, I'd like everybody's comments on the results presented above; what they think, what is missing, what is good, what is bad etc.

cheers

lottoarchitect

03 06 07 35 39 46 * 136,4,2
03 06 08 15 24 34 * 90, 2,3
03 06 15 25 30 39 * 118,4,3
03 06 19 23 26 30 * 107,3,3
03 06 26 30 43 46 * 154,2,3
03 07 12 15 26 43 * 106,4,2
03 07 19 23 24 25 * 106,5,3
03 08 12 26 34 35 * 118,2,2
03 08 15 25 26 43 * 120,4,3
03 08 23 28 30 34 * 126,2,3
03 08 24 28 35 43 * 141,3,3
03 12 19 28 30 39 * 131,3,2
03 12 25 30 34 43 * 147,3,2
03 19 25 28 39 46 * 160,4,2
03 23 24 26 34 39 * 149,3,2
06 07 23 28 34 43 * 141,3,3
06 07 24 25 26 28 * 116,2,5
06 08 15 23 28 39 * 119,3,3
06 08 25 34 35 46 * 154,2,3
06 08 26 30 39 43 * 152,2,4
06 12 19 25 43 46 * 151,3,2
06 12 23 24 30 35 * 130,2,3
06 15 19 26 28 35 * 129,3,3
06 24 34 39 43 46 * 192,2,2
07 08 12 19 34 39 * 119,3,2
07 08 12 23 43 46 * 139,3,2
07 08 15 19 30 35 * 114,4,3
07 08 24 25 30 39 * 133,3,5
07 12 26 28 35 39 * 147,3,3
07 15 23 25 35 46 * 151,5,2
07 15 26 30 34 46 * 158,2,3
07 19 24 28 34 46 * 158,2,3
07 19 25 26 34 43 * 154,4,3
08 12 19 25 28 46 * 138,2,3
08 19 24 26 35 46 * 158,2,3
12 15 19 23 34 46 * 149,3,1
12 15 24 25 35 39 * 150,4,2
12 15 24 28 30 46 * 155,1,3
12 23 25 26 28 46 * 160,2,3
15 19 23 24 26 43 * 150,4,2
15 25 28 34 35 43 * 180,4,2
19 23 30 35 39 43 * 189,5,1

07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13

national 6-49 canada , Nice try

25-32-33-38-45-46 western 6-49 uncommon combos

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 16, 2008, 11:47 am - IP Logged

When playing the Canadian 6-49 lottery in my mind all combos should be construced as follows

1xxxx40 to 49

2xxxx40 to 49

3xxxx40 to 49

etc

9xxxx40 to 49.

from these you choose your start number to be even or odd when playing, that is to filter to play less combos.

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 16, 2008, 11:55 am - IP Logged

When playing the Canadian 6-49 lottery in my mind all combos should be construced as follows

1xxxx40 to 49

2xxxx40 to 49

3xxxx40 to 49

etc

9xxxx40 to 49.

from these you choose your start number to be even or odd when playing, that is to filter to play less combos.

 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13 Sat, Oct 11, 2008 07-08-23-38-39-45, Bonus: 47 Wed, Oct 8, 2008 04-13-19-32-40-45, Bonus: 28 Sat, Oct 4, 2008 12-19-23-25-36-46, Bonus: 02 Wed, Oct 1, 2008 02-08-22-29-34-48, Bonus: 47 Sat, Sep 27, 2008 11-19-29-33-44-46, Bonus: 34 Wed, Sep 24, 2008 10-27-36-40-42-43, Bonus: 37 Sat, Sep 20, 2008 02-10-24-31-33-49, Bonus: 03 Wed, Sep 17, 2008 07-09-17-23-27-32, Bonus: 22 Sat, Sep 13, 2008 05-18-20-26-37-39, Bonus: 14 Wed, Sep 10, 2008 02-15-25-31-38-49, Bonus: 48 Sat, Sep 6, 2008 02-05-09-17-32-35, Bonus: 36 Wed, Sep 3, 2008 05-21-28-32-43-46, Bonus: 13 Sat, Aug 30, 2008 02-26-29-36-37-45, Bonus: 31 Wed, Aug 27, 2008 02-12-25-28-35-48, Bonus: 03 Sat, Aug 23, 2008 03-07-13-30-38-46, Bonus: 24 Wed, Aug 20, 2008 03-06-09-27-28-36, Bonus: 45

when you filter your combos for less play then you can choose

oddxxxxodd

oddxxxxeven

evenxxxxodd

ect...

my next play for this draw would be.

evenxxxxeven

so

2xxxx40

2xxxx42

2xxxx44

2xxxx46

2xxxx48

4xxxx40

4xxxx42

etc...

8xxxx40

8xxxx48

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 16, 2008, 11:59 am - IP Logged

To filter more i would go high low

2,4 low.6,8 high

40,42,44, low

46,48, high.

I choose high low

so

6xxxx40

6xxxx42

6xxxx44

8xxxx40

8xxxx42

8xxxx44

by doing this it allow me to play more of the inside combos.( xxxx)

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 16, 2008, 1:16 pm - IP Logged

These are interesting ideas Amazing Grace, however I'm not talking about filtering down a set of tickets to reduce the cost, neither I understand why you compare the 2nd covering to what had been drawn in Canada. The selection of numbers was random.

I propose a totally different approach here. We have the total cost (tickets) to play predetermined e.g. I want to play 40 tickets with my own selection of numbers. I also want the tickets generated to conform to some constraints I want (filters) such as sums, odd/even etc. So far is common knowledge and any filtering program can do this. However, the crucial part missing is the guarantee offered by playing these generated tickets. Playing a predesigned wheel doesn't offer the ability of conforming the tickets to our filters, thus even if we have the guarantee of the wheel (the reason we use a wheel in first place), we still play tickets that are not in a 'winning tickets' form by the means of the filters we have set. This is the example I demonstrated with the first covering. On the other side, generating tickets by filtering, we do have our tickets pass the filters, however we miss any potential guarantee that we could have by playing those tickets. Hope you understand the problem addressed here. The 2nd covering I present tries to improve as much as possible both of these properties.

For example,  I doubt you'd ever play these tickets on your own

03 - 06 - 07 - 08 - 12 - 15
25 - 26 - 28 - 30 - 34 - 35
25 - 26 - 28 - 39 - 43 - 46
30 - 34 - 35 - 39 - 43 - 46

which are produced by the 1st covering. This is the real problem. Predefined wheels do not 'care' about what tickets we play as soon as we play all the tickets together to ensure the guarantee. The 2nd covering tries to avoid all such 'non-winning-tickets' by using the constraints of the filters we have set. You'll not see such combinations, or at least to these extremes, in the 2nd covering which I'd rather not spend my money playing just to ensure the guarantee. I'd much more prefer to play the 2nd covering and still benefit from the guarantee offered.

The last example you present here could be used as a filter in this construction process, the positioning filter as I call it.

Also think of this dynamic process a bit differently. Nobody wants to play many of the numbers drawn in the last couple of draws. What you do, if you still want to include these numbers in your selection for the next draw? If you use an existing wheel, you have absolutely no control over how your numbers will be applied to the tickets produced. Setting the constraint of e.g. "I want only 1-3 of the numbers last drawn to be in any of the produced tickets but I still want the highest coverage possible", we try to ensure we never play bad tickets. This is just one of the possibilities of the new system.

In short, we try to benefit from both worlds; conforming the produced tickets to our filters and wheels at the same time to get the best of both worlds

cheers

lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 17, 2008, 2:12 am - IP Logged

These are interesting ideas Amazing Grace, however I'm not talking about filtering down a set of tickets to reduce the cost, neither I understand why you compare the 2nd covering to what had been drawn in Canada. The selection of numbers was random.

I propose a totally different approach here. We have the total cost (tickets) to play predetermined e.g. I want to play 40 tickets with my own selection of numbers. I also want the tickets generated to conform to some constraints I want (filters) such as sums, odd/even etc. So far is common knowledge and any filtering program can do this. However, the crucial part missing is the guarantee offered by playing these generated tickets. Playing a predesigned wheel doesn't offer the ability of conforming the tickets to our filters, thus even if we have the guarantee of the wheel (the reason we use a wheel in first place), we still play tickets that are not in a 'winning tickets' form by the means of the filters we have set. This is the example I demonstrated with the first covering. On the other side, generating tickets by filtering, we do have our tickets pass the filters, however we miss any potential guarantee that we could have by playing those tickets. Hope you understand the problem addressed here. The 2nd covering I present tries to improve as much as possible both of these properties.

For example,  I doubt you'd ever play these tickets on your own

03 - 06 - 07 - 08 - 12 - 15
25 - 26 - 28 - 30 - 34 - 35
25 - 26 - 28 - 39 - 43 - 46
30 - 34 - 35 - 39 - 43 - 46

which are produced by the 1st covering. This is the real problem. Predefined wheels do not 'care' about what tickets we play as soon as we play all the tickets together to ensure the guarantee. The 2nd covering tries to avoid all such 'non-winning-tickets' by using the constraints of the filters we have set. You'll not see such combinations, or at least to these extremes, in the 2nd covering which I'd rather not spend my money playing just to ensure the guarantee. I'd much more prefer to play the 2nd covering and still benefit from the guarantee offered.

The last example you present here could be used as a filter in this construction process, the positioning filter as I call it.

Also think of this dynamic process a bit differently. Nobody wants to play many of the numbers drawn in the last couple of draws. What you do, if you still want to include these numbers in your selection for the next draw? If you use an existing wheel, you have absolutely no control over how your numbers will be applied to the tickets produced. Setting the constraint of e.g. "I want only 1-3 of the numbers last drawn to be in any of the produced tickets but I still want the highest coverage possible", we try to ensure we never play bad tickets. This is just one of the possibilities of the new system.

In short, we try to benefit from both worlds; conforming the produced tickets to our filters and wheels at the same time to get the best of both worlds

cheers

lottoarchitect

maybe i am reading this wrong, But constructing dynamic coverings, in my mind would be the best possible way to build a combination set to ensure more low and high level wins,

So why not concentrate on the inside four numbers drawn.

and have your outside sent up as banker numbers,

so banker numbers 1 to 9 first postion, 40 to 49 in last , if playing a 6-49 lottery.

heres a simple search on my criteria.

 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 New Jersey Pick 6 03-09-20-23-37-38 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 Washington, D.C. DC Daily 6 02-03-09-17-21-32, Bonus: 04 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 West Virginia Cash 25 07-09-12-17-20-22 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 Wisconsin Super Cash 05-15-16-20-23-29 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Arizona The Pick 01-03-09-10-18-34 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Colorado Lotto 04-07-14-23-29-38 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Delaware Multi-Win Lotto 08-11-23-28-30-35 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Florida Lotto 07-12-17-19-42-53 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Indiana Lotto 03-04-21-25-30-46 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ireland (Irish) Lotto Plus 1 04-10-13-27-30-42, Bonus: 22 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ireland (Irish) Lotto Plus 2 07-12-25-38-39-41, Bonus: 27 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Louisiana Lotto 01-06-09-26-33-40 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Maryland Multi-Match 02-05-12-39-41-42 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Massachusetts Megabucks 04-05-06-14-33-36 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Michigan Classic Lotto 47 02-16-25-30-31-44 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Missouri Lotto 04-06-16-18-22-30 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Multi-State Canada Lotto 6/49 07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Multi-State Tri-State Megabucks 04-07-08-09-25-28, Bonus: 22 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ontario Ontario 49 05-08-20-40-41-46, Bonus: 12 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Oregon Megabucks 02-04-06-10-35-48

Now some are 6-49 some others but notice first and last numbers.

so to be dynamic, would it not be better to have banker numbers and construct your ideas in the middle.

Would this work better?

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

rainbow lake
Member #25177
November 2, 2005
10764 Posts
Offline
 Posted: October 17, 2008, 2:24 am - IP Logged

maybe i am reading this wrong, But constructing dynamic coverings, in my mind would be the best possible way to build a combination set to ensure more low and high level wins,

So why not concentrate on the inside four numbers drawn.

and have your outside sent up as banker numbers,

so banker numbers 1 to 9 first postion, 40 to 49 in last , if playing a 6-49 lottery.

heres a simple search on my criteria.

 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 New Jersey Pick 6 03-09-20-23-37-38 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 Washington, D.C. DC Daily 6 02-03-09-17-21-32, Bonus: 04 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 West Virginia Cash 25 07-09-12-17-20-22 Thu, Oct 16, 2008 Wisconsin Super Cash 05-15-16-20-23-29 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Arizona The Pick 01-03-09-10-18-34 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Colorado Lotto 04-07-14-23-29-38 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Delaware Multi-Win Lotto 08-11-23-28-30-35 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Florida Lotto 07-12-17-19-42-53 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Indiana Lotto 03-04-21-25-30-46 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ireland (Irish) Lotto Plus 1 04-10-13-27-30-42, Bonus: 22 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ireland (Irish) Lotto Plus 2 07-12-25-38-39-41, Bonus: 27 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Louisiana Lotto 01-06-09-26-33-40 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Maryland Multi-Match 02-05-12-39-41-42 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Massachusetts Megabucks 04-05-06-14-33-36 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Michigan Classic Lotto 47 02-16-25-30-31-44 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Missouri Lotto 04-06-16-18-22-30 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Multi-State Canada Lotto 6/49 07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Multi-State Tri-State Megabucks 04-07-08-09-25-28, Bonus: 22 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Ontario Ontario 49 05-08-20-40-41-46, Bonus: 12 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 Oregon Megabucks 02-04-06-10-35-48

Now some are 6-49 some others but notice first and last numbers.

so to be dynamic, would it not be better to have banker numbers and construct your ideas in the middle.

Would this work better?

If doing so then we would apply your ideas or observations to the inside 4 number sets drawn.

 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13 inside sum 123, 3 odd 1 even Sat, Oct 11, 2008 07-08-23-38-39-45, Bonus: 47 inside sum 153, 2 odd 2 even Wed, Oct 8, 2008 04-13-19-32-40-45, Bonus: 28 inside sum 149,2 odd, 2 even Sat, Oct 4, 2008 12-19-23-25-36-46, Bonus: 02 inside sum 149,3 odd 1 even Wed, Oct 1, 2008 02-08-22-29-34-48, Bonus: 47 inside sum 141,1 odd 3 even

Just a small example.

Secret to \$uccess=Law of Attraction

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2008, 1:27 pm - IP Logged

I'd like to announce the availability of Wheel Generator on this Friday.

I have a good example analysed of what it aims to achieve as well.

cheers

lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

Dump Water Florida
United States
Member #380
June 5, 2002
3112 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2008, 1:50 pm - IP Logged

I'd like to announce the availability of Wheel Generator on this Friday.

I have a good example analysed of what it aims to achieve as well.

cheers

lottoarchitect

Cool !!! Can't wait to try it.  BobP

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
19891 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2008, 5:04 pm - IP Logged

What is dynamic covering?  I think of a wheel as a fixed covering of the possible combinations of a set of numbers.

* you don't need to buy more tickets, just buy a winning ticket *

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2008, 5:40 pm - IP Logged

What is dynamic covering?  I think of a wheel as a fixed covering of the possible combinations of a set of numbers.

A dynamic covering is the one that is being constructed on the fly to fulfill the constraints set. A fixed covering, such all all those found on the internet fail to this simply because they cannot be adjusted to accept additional constraints; the only constraint they hold by design is the coverage aspect (the primary reason they were build for). However, when you apply your own selection of numbers to a fixed covering, although you are guarenteed the coverage offered, you actually play a lot of tickets that will be completely out of anything you you wished for to play; i.e. tickets like 1 2 3 4 5 6 (I doubt anyone will ever play such tickets). In dynamic coverings, such as those constructed by Wheel generator, we try to eliminate all these 'improbable occurring tickets' with others, as defined by our additional constraints (or filters if you prefer) and still maintain the guarentee - if possible of course since we introduce additional constraints. This is the example I demonstrated here and at the website. In simple words, you have a much greater exposure of your tickets to contain more winning numbers, simply because the filters we have set define what we expect the winniing ticket should look like. To clarify my statements above, I am talking about minimal coverings; not serotic/grouped designs which have completely different properties (to be included as well).

Of course, the whole idea is radically different from any application of filtering by the usual means everyone knows about. We do not filter out anything; we conform our tickets to maintain the guarantee and pass the filters. A completely new and advanced approach to play with wheels in my opinion.

You can think of a dynamic covering as a specialized covering which has been built specifically for the particular draw you want to play a wheel for and aims to get the most out of your selection of numbers (win more).

cheers

lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

Greece
Member #2815
November 18, 2003
502 Posts
Offline
 Posted: November 19, 2008, 6:06 pm - IP Logged

If doing so then we would apply your ideas or observations to the inside 4 number sets drawn.

 Wed, Oct 15, 2008 07-09-15-21-38-40, Bonus: 13 inside sum 123, 3 odd 1 even Sat, Oct 11, 2008 07-08-23-38-39-45, Bonus: 47 inside sum 153, 2 odd 2 even Wed, Oct 8, 2008 04-13-19-32-40-45, Bonus: 28 inside sum 149,2 odd, 2 even Sat, Oct 4, 2008 12-19-23-25-36-46, Bonus: 02 inside sum 149,3 odd 1 even Wed, Oct 1, 2008 02-08-22-29-34-48, Bonus: 47 inside sum 141,1 odd 3 even

Just a small example.

AmazingGrace, you say the following:

Now some are 6-49 some others but notice first and last numbers.

so to be dynamic, would it not be better to have banker numbers and construct your ideas in the middle.

Would this work better?

Definitely! Something similar is to be added as well. Actually I have already a good list of additions to be made including bankers. However, the approach you demonstrate requires a lot of thinking so not to hinder drastically the coverage aspect of the constructed covering. Remember: the whole ticket participates at the coverage and fixing a particular number in a particular position will introduce a severe contraint to the actual outcome in terms of coverage. I'll think of this in depth and see what I can come up with. Having simply banker numbers is different to fixed bankers in particular positions in a ticket.

cheers

lottoarchitect

If you have something to do, at least do it well...

 Page 1 of 2