|Posted: September 17, 2016, 8:51 pm - IP Logged|
I always go for the easy stuff, I am lazy and as much as I understand some things, I know that I don't understand many things.
I did look at some or at all of the old posts here at the Lottery Post n regards to the G.A.T. Engine.
Maybe mostly I was curious as to how it works.
I don't remember what my thoughts were on that back then years ago, if I had any thoughts about that at all.
But I just reread some of the things posted about it, but only a small portion and I also when to Anastasios' G.A.T. Engine Internet page and reread about what is said there about the G.A.T. prediction engine.
What I did next, I don't know if I also did years ago or not.
I went to the Lottery Post's Lottery Results page and took a look at some of the pasts draws of the California Fantasy 5 game.
Anastasios Tampakis said 3 to 10 past draws more or less, so doing this my myself and without special software I looked at a few short sections of 3 consecutive past draws and also at the very next past draw after each of those few groups of 3 past draws.
I don't know if you all understand what I said.
I did my own version of what I thought that I understood that the program does, I believe that it might not exactly be what the program does as I really have no idea what the software really does, but I tried a very simple approach that I could understand and do by myself, I am a "filters" person so I used that, but in connection to what Anastasios said about looking for common characteristics of past consecutive draws.
Anyhow, while what I did might not be exactly the same nor even close to what the software does, it did seem to work, but in my own applied way, which is not the same as the program does, perhaps the program produces a series of lottery numbers such as 18, 28 or whatever numbers such as 1, 7, 8, 11, 30 Etc, my way uses filtration to produce lottery lines, not just one line, but a series of many lines, How many lines? I don't know, but the more common relations found, the fewer the lines produced would be, even my way can't be done just by hand, to complete it, software needs to be used, statistics found by sight, but the execution needs software and not the same as Anastasios software.
Either way, that is even in my own way, I found out that Anastasios Tampakis is right, but I only did a little testing, I only tested about 4 groups of 3 draws each, I thought that more than 3 past draws for each group was too much work for me and that 3 might be just enough and 3 seemed to be enough, most of the time I try to go for prediction of the very next draw only, I never much liked to predict far into the future, but I did so once or twice on the pick 3 game long ago and it worked very well.
Well, I am not a gambler, to me all of this is just a curiosity and a past time.
But at least on the 4 groups of 3 that I tested, the general idea of what M.R. Tampakis said was 100% correct, the general idea, because it might not have been exactly the same technique, but a similar technique based on the idea of his general prediction technique as he himself said (wrote) that it was, as I went by his words.
No, I will not explain exactly what I mean and what I did, so don't ask, in due time I probably will forget all about this, maybe that is what happened years ago, cause I can't remember.