Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 12, 2010, 11:28 am - IP Logged

In dealing with SETS, the distribution was changed to 12 digits per SET in the Texas 537 rather than the 13 used in 5/39. Our PATTERNS are defined as Low set - Mid set - High set, i.e., 5-0-0, 4-0-1, 0-3-2, etc.

The FIRST SET is 1 to 12. (Low set) The SECOND SET 13 to 24. (Mid set) THIRD SET is 25 to 37. The THIRD SET has an extra number. (High set)

In 3897 draws, PATTERN 5-0-0 produced 4 combinations of FIRST SET numbers. In 3897 draws, PATTERN 0-5-0 produced 8 combinations of SECOND SET numbers. In 3897 draws, PATTERN 0-0-5 produced 18 combinations of THIRD SET numbers. Concentrating play on any one set of numbers, the possibilities result in 30 of 3897 draws, .77% chance of winning.

Concentrating play in the low and mid sets (numbers 1 to 24) in 3897 draws produced:

PATTERN 4-1-0 produced 55 combinations (Low and Mid sets) PATTERN 1-4-0 produced 55 combinations (Low and Mid sets) PATTERN 3-2-0 produced 126 combinations (Low and Mid sets) PATTERN 2-3-0 produced 124 combinations (Low and Mid sets) Overall, using numbers 1 to 24 resulted in 360 combinations, or 9.2% winning percentage.

The Low and High sets (1 to 13 coupled with 25 to 37) produced:

PATTERN 4-0-1 produced 43 combinations (Low and High sets) PATTERN 1-0-4 produced 102 combinations (Low and High sets) PATTERN 3-0-2 produced 151 combinations (Low and High sets) PATTERN 2-0-3 produced 190 combinations (Low and High sets) Coupling the Low and High sets produce 486 combinations, 12.4% winning percentage.

The mid and high set (numbers 13 to 37) produced:

PATTERN 0-4-1 produced 64 combinations (Mid and High sets) PATTERN 0-1-4 produced 94 combinations (Mid and High sets) PATTERN 0-3-2 produced 153 combinations (Mid and High sets) PATTERN 0-2-3 produced 164 combinations (Mid and High sets) Numbers 13 to 37 resulted in 475 combinations, or 12.1% winning percentage.

Now for the GOOD STUFF! In picking numbers from all three sets the chances of a hit increased dramatically!!

PATTERN 3-1-1 produced 297 combinations (ALL sets) PATTERN 1-3-1 produced 283 combinations (ALL sets) PATTERN 1-1-3 produced 427 combinations (ALL sets) In picking three numbers from one set and 1 each from the other two, resulted in 1007 hits, 25.8% winning percentage. So 1 in 4 draws contained one of these combinations.

PATTERN 2-2-1 produced 485 combinations (ALL sets) PATTERN 2-1-2 produced 516 combinations (ALL sets) PATTERN 1-2-2 produced 538 combinations (ALL sets) Picking two numbers from any two sets and 1 from the third, produced 1539 hits, 39.4% winning percentage. 4 in 10 draws contain one of these combinations.

At this point, I hope the baseline at the beginning of this thread is a little more clear. I am still working on the EVEN/ODD Patterns and will post them soon. But for a little fun I tracked consecutive numbers and lowest number per draw.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 12, 2010, 11:44 am - IP Logged

If you've ever wondered if 5 consecutive numbers have been drawn, YES! At least in Texas.

Consecutive Numbers:

5 consecutive numbers have been drawn once. WHOA! Draw number 1942 on Friday, August 13, 2004 produced 20, 21, 22, 23, 24!!!!

4 consecutive numbers have been drawn 8 times. 3 in the first four positions, 5 in the second four. 3 consecutive numbers have been drawn 144 times. 51 first three, 45 in the second three, and 48 in the last three. 2 consecutive numbers have been drawn 1396 times. 336 in the first two, 356 in the second two, 367 in the third two, and 337 in the last two.

Another little cutie, tracking the lowest number drawn! This does not reflect the total time the number has been drawn, only the times it was the LOWEST number drawn.

Just the first 20 numbers were tracked in this one. At some point it might be a good idea to go back and track the highest number? Or possibly the lowest and highest in each position? LOL which will lead to tracking pairs, and trips, and....oh my!

Still to come the EVEN/ODD PATTERNS for the Texas Cash5.

Maybe this guy Bennett Haselton can help. His email address is here, so you could describe your problem and send it to him. You'd be surprised at how helpful these sorts of people are if they find your problem challenging.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 14, 2010, 4:42 am - IP Logged

LOL, Jimmy it isn't a problem finding ways to sort data. The minds here at Lottery Post never run out of possibilities. But I like your suggestion.

Originally I wrote a sort program to answer to answer one question, which led to programming a baseline for the entire set. But sometimes the answers leave you with more questions. And once it was established where the numbers fell from each subset, the progression led to EVEN/ODD combinations. And all that is good and well, I'm actually having some fun with it.

I know the writing is dry. But I am attempting to be as factual as possible, letting everyone interpret it for themselves.

I've probably played Cash5 the same number of times as the fingers on one hand, but when the question was how to apply this, I adapted it to the Texas Cash 5/37. This evening while working on a routine that would allow the tracking of each digit by position, I discovered that Texas DID at one time have a 5/39. That data is included in the download with the current 5/37 game. Bummer.I will deal with that issue today at some point.

Combinatorics is an excellent example of why these solutions take time. Mainly, we're dealing with an evolving process. Knowing the number of combinations won't tell us where the EVEN and ODD numbers fall and knowing the distribution of each subset does not produce the the high/even, low/even, high/odd and low/odd pattern. (Yes, Raven I'm wracking my brain on this idea.)

It is a very good article Jimmy, and a step in the right direction.I enjoyed it.

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10350 Posts Offline

Posted: November 14, 2010, 5:26 pm - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by GASMETERGUY on November 5, 2010

The "so what" tests are just what is needed right now. We have mathematically explored just about every aspect of the lottery to no avail. We have done +/- 1, added last night's results to mid-day, made chart after chart, multipled or divided pie, sie, my, and lie, divided into groups, color coded columns, v-tracked, x-tracked, and side-tracked every which way including loose with absolutely nothing to show for our efforts.

What we need now are just those explorations which have been contributed on this thread. Has anyone every thought about "perimeter" versus "inside" numbers? If they have I missed the thread. I know I never did until I read this thread.

So keep on bringing those "so what" tests. We need all we can get. One day in the not too distant future another Isacc Newton will come along and string all of them together in such a way he wins every jackpot every day in every country in every world (assuming there are parallel worlds).

GASMETERGUY,

There was a slot tech. in Vegas who wrote a booklet on playing video Keno. His whole premise was that on any given matrix there can only e ba finite set of numbers, thus a finite set of patterns.

He wrote about people playing lucky numberd, birthdays, etc...ad nauseam whn what they should be doing was playing patterns.

Granted that's an awful lot of patterns, but he went on further to suggest (bear in mind this was for video Keno) only playing one to five spots, not trying to make a huge score, and playing "clusters". For those familiar with video Keno or Keno, a cluster would be something like 2 11 12 21 22, all the numbers "connect".

Or break a set of numbers in into two clusters, such as 3 4, 23 24 25.

Using that kind of play for a quarter or a few quarters payed off often. Like the guy said, not any huge scores but he didn't suggest playing that game for huge scores.

So, why not transfer that approach to a 5/39 and track something like perimeter and inside numbers, pick a few patterns and throw the proverbial dart at the board.

It's obviopus a whole lot of work went into a lot of the tracking methods in this thread, but folks the lotteries know all this and is always a few steps ahead of you.

Like I said previously, I haven't seen any payoff schedules for od even, etc....

There's none for perimeter and inside, either, but in no way am I suggesting playing as many combos that have been suggested for the OE, HL, etc.....

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 15, 2010, 11:49 pm - IP Logged

I did rerun all the data using only the 2597 draws of the Texas 5/37. The difference between what was originally posted and the new data is tenths of a percentage point. I can post it if anyone wants.

Yes, CT. The more I consider the Even/Odd, High/Low approach, the more dread sets in. It may be placed on the back burner for now. As it stands we already have 185 individual numbers places in a 5 by 37 matrix, which have already determined to be even or odd and within three designated sets. This alone added an additional 740 pieces of data. And with all this it would seem there is an easy way to get what we need. I'm still working on it. LOL

Unfortunately, Cash5 is like a plane that landed where people were given seats determined by how they dressed. If they wore sandals they received an odd number, sneakers got an even. If they wore a ball cap they got a low number. A visor got a high.

Five people get off. Their seat numbers total 73. One person was in seat 12.

So what do we know?

We know at least one person in the group is wearing sneakers and a ball cap. Since the seats total an odd number, we know that 1 or 3 of the people in the group are wearing sandals. Since 4 odd numbers would make the total even, we also know there is at least one other person in the group wearing sneakers.

Anyway.....

Drawing from what we have done....

It is safe to say that 65% of the draws will be 3E/2O or 3O/2E comprised of high and low numbers. About 30% will be 4E/1O or 4O/1E. About 5% will be all EVEN or all ODD.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 16, 2010, 1:42 am - IP Logged

Dealing with repeating pairs......

A pair was formed by combining each number in the 1 to 37 set combined with every other number. Each of the 666 pairs (uh-huh 666) were compared to the 3899 draws in the Texas 5/37. I am posting the top 17 because, well, I read CT posts......and gave it some thought.

So what I see going on, is such a diversity in the spread between the two numbers, many are not going to fall side by side. Naturally we are going to have to work on inside pairs and outside pairs to determine what positons they do fall in.

Here's the question: When you think of pairs, do you think of numbers that hit side by side, or number that fall in together in the same draw?

Zeta Reticuli Star System United States Member #30470 January 17, 2006 10350 Posts Offline

Posted: November 16, 2010, 10:24 am - IP Logged

garyo1954,

What I think of pairs is that they pay $1 in the Illinois Little Lotto (5/39, payout for 2 of 5). I know you're hinting at knowing pairs and combining them with other numbers, but that's still a long shot.

Like I said before, it's obvious you've put a lot of work into this but I still don't see it passing the so what test.

I haven't seen anywhere on a playslip yet to choose HL, OE, or any of that.

A player could have absolute knowledge that the next drawing will produce two evens, three odds, one of the even will be high, on low, all the opdds will be low, etc...but without knowing the exact even or odd number it does little good.

The lotteries have considered all this before they offered any of the games to be played.

Those who run the lotteries love it when players look for consistency in something that's designed not to have any.

There is one and only one 'proven' system, and that is to book the action. No matter the game, let the players pick their own losers.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 16, 2010, 2:14 pm - IP Logged

I agree CT. In looking, checking, changing, flipping, flopping, and sprinkling magic dust, I haven't experienced one single EUREKA! moment. (TRUTH: I don't think there is one. ) But I could be wrong.

Naturally, people who choose their own numbers, and people who are considering the game for the first time (I'm new too this myself) might find something useful. Still I wouldn't advocate anyone go out and spend $21, or $32, or $1024 on any idea here. I haven't found anything so far that has given me the courage to do that.

NOTHING IN THIS THREAD IS GOING TO BETTER YOUR ODDS IN A SINGLE DRAW.

There is no miracle formula, to my knowledge anyway, that is giong to make you a winner tonight. But if you pay attention to the numbers over a period of time, you can't help but come across patterns in the way numbers fall. An inordinate amount of Evens or Odds, or Highs or Lows in a certain position has to mean a coming change.

REASON AND RATIONALE STILL FAIL

The perfect combination of Even/Odd, High/Low don't always hit. Some people consider this an abberation, a departure from the norm. Like having the perfect set of numbers and the perfect wheel and then OH NO! that one set of numbers that I knew could never happen in a million years, happened.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 16, 2010, 3:17 pm - IP Logged

PAIRS....

These are the same pairs posted last night. They were produced from the Texas Cash 5/37 through 3899 draws. Of the 666 total pairs these hit the most. This time instead of only looking at the totals the chart has been expanded to determine where they land in each draw. 1&2 denotes the first and second position, 1&3 denotes the first and third position, etc.

Dallas, Texas United States Member #4549 May 2, 2004 1689 Posts Offline

Posted: November 16, 2010, 10:47 pm - IP Logged

Brain strain over!!!!!Yep! Yep! Yep!

I gave up tracking the HEHOLELOHE and the HOHOHOHOHO and the HEHEHEHEHE. What good are they anyway? Once the draws are put in order they are likely to be LELOHEHEHO and LELELOHOHEs!

United States Member #93947 July 10, 2010 2180 Posts Offline

Posted: November 17, 2010, 2:18 am - IP Logged

Quote: Originally posted by garyo1954 on November 16, 2010

I agree CT. In looking, checking, changing, flipping, flopping, and sprinkling magic dust, I haven't experienced one single EUREKA! moment. (TRUTH: I don't think there is one. ) But I could be wrong.

Naturally, people who choose their own numbers, and people who are considering the game for the first time (I'm new too this myself) might find something useful. Still I wouldn't advocate anyone go out and spend $21, or $32, or $1024 on any idea here. I haven't found anything so far that has given me the courage to do that.

NOTHING IN THIS THREAD IS GOING TO BETTER YOUR ODDS IN A SINGLE DRAW.

There is no miracle formula, to my knowledge anyway, that is giong to make you a winner tonight. But if you pay attention to the numbers over a period of time, you can't help but come across patterns in the way numbers fall. An inordinate amount of Evens or Odds, or Highs or Lows in a certain position has to mean a coming change.

REASON AND RATIONALE STILL FAIL

The perfect combination of Even/Odd, High/Low don't always hit. Some people consider this an abberation, a departure from the norm. Like having the perfect set of numbers and the perfect wheel and then OH NO! that one set of numbers that I knew could never happen in a million years, happened.

OKAY THAT'S ALL THE BAD NEWS I GOT

I did go back and work on finding pairs.

garyo1954,

After a quick perusal of your post above, I was ready to post a full "I Agree" to the whole thing. Then I read more slowly and found, "An inordinate amount of Evens or Odds, or Highs or Lows in a certain position has to mean a coming change."

Now why did you have to go and say that? With the exception of that sentence, most mathematics professors would agree with your entire post! I found this post while scanning for another one that might be in this thread where I think someone revealed the underlying reason for believing such patterns as odds and evens, unique digit counts, summations of sets, etc., are actually providing useful information. The phrase I was looking for was in a discussion of these kinds of patterns and a reference was made like (paraphrasing,) "...but it probably won't work because the lottery people are always 2 steps ahead of you..." It appeared to me that the person who wrote it (you?) believes that there is a conspiracy of some sort among the technical staff at Lottery Commissions to tinker (somehow) with the results in such a way to intentionally try to thwart the efforts of people like yourself who are trying to beat the odds through clever selection methods. I would be the last person to deny that conspiracy in this business is impossible, as evidenced by my very first post at LP. However, my years of experience in encryption, using math and computer science, strongly convinces me that these kinds of patterns (above) are NOT going to uncover fraud. And if you would step back and look at the overall results of gross ticket sales and total payouts, and how closely they approximate what probability theory predicts, you have to ask yourself how these illicit conspiracy profits are kept so well hidden!

And then there are the people who believe that because combinatorics produces nice smoothe and predictable distributions of counts of various differences, spreads, digits, etc., they can be exploited as an edge. One such belief is based on the observation that in the 575,757 sets of combinations of 5 in a (5,39) Lotto, there are many more with 5 & 6 unique digits than with 2, 3, 4, 7 & 8. Consequently, when adherents observed that actual draws in this game had that same pattern of more winners with 5&6 digits, they concluded that it would be best to make their selections from these sets, avoiding the others. What they forget is that what they've observed is exactly as expected. The 5&6 unique digits they see are merely by products (so to speak) of the arbitrary use of a base 10 number system.They are asking the wrong question. The question should not be, "Will I match more numbers if my sets contain 5 or 6 unique digits," it should be, "Is the set I have chosen any more or less likely to be drawn than any other?" In the absence of fraud, the answer to this 2nd question is NO! In the (5,39) game, "Digit System" people would avoid [ 1, 2, 11, 12, 22 ] like the plague because it contains the least unique digits possible, 2! What they like are sets like [ 3, 6, 19, 26, 39 ] or [ 3, 7, 19, 26, 39 ], which contain 5 and 6 digits respectively.

This post is sure to result in an attack from the "Digit System" world, but before they launch, I hope you look at these 3 sets I've suggested, then close your eyes and envision the balls in their chaos, and ask yourself if there is REALLY ANY REASON why the machine would expell, say, 3 rather than 2, or, 19 rather than 12. REALLY?

--Jimmy4164

p.s. Wouldn't it be simple to write a program to test the hypothesis that sets from (5,39) containing 5 & 6 digits will generate more winnings than the other sets? The historical results are available, and the program could simply generate random sets, discarding all but those with 5 & 6 digits. Adherents will point out that other filters would be used in actual practise, but if the 5/6 sets really are better, wouldn't randomly chosen ones do marginally better than betting on just any old random set?