lottosync 1.7 at 12000 samplesPrev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

lottosyncman

langley b.c.
Canada
Member #3,313
January 10, 2004
155 Posts
Offline

Mar 11, 2004, 8:07 pm

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???
vick

Canada
Member #2,859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline

Mar 11, 2004, 9:22 pm

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

langley b.c.
Canada
Member #3,313
January 10, 2004
155 Posts
Offline

Mar 11, 2004, 9:30 pm

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!
vick

Canada
Member #2,859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline

Mar 11, 2004, 11:36 pm

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

BC
Canada
Member #2,120
August 19, 2003
258 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 12:06 am

Quote: O

if at first you don't succeed ... destroy all evidence you ever tried
EXCALIBUR

United States
Member #2,460
October 7, 2003
766 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 12:23 am

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't

do 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 think that after a month his numbers over the whole month will get about the same number of hits as yours, maybe a little better, but not enough to really matter.

Talk to Vick and try it.

EXCALIBUR is no more that "Handle" is dead, gone.
Maybe sometime in the future I might come back as LANTERN again, but maybe not, if I don't come back as LANTERN in the future then I won't come back at all, but as I said there is no more EXCALIBUR.
Guru

Belgium
Member #2,220
September 2, 2003
553 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 12:54 am

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 when using only 12000.
paul762

United Kingdom
Member #3,002
December 11, 2003
542 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 3:28 am

will 12000 samples still gi
vick

Canada
Member #2,859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 9:29 am

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 using 100,000 overkill,
I'm trying this new version with Keno again but i'd really like a pure keno version, anytime frame on when that will be available?
Goodluck guys
Guru

Belgium
Member #2,220
September 2, 2003
553 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 11:06 am

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 out in your game, but the strand that was predicted by LS may start to appear later than expected. If the last ball that rolls out of the machine is a correct one, and those before that did not look close to your prediction, it is likely that the prediction will progress in the draw after that.
I have the same situation here. I did a real live test on saturday's draw. Only 2 numbers came up !! Unfortunately I had no time (too busy) to play the prediction again on wednesday (yesterday). I should have : 4 + bonus correct.
This tendency will change overtime.I thought about implementing an estimation in the engine for this behaviour too, but therefor LS should do at least 2 predictions runs on "older" draws before beginning it's final prediction. This would lead to unacceptable prediction times where people with slower pc's would not be able to finish the process in time before the draw takes place. I believe this is something that can be detected faster by the user of the soft than the soft itself.
Bottomline is that you should track the tendency where most of the predicted numbers gather together. This may be in the next, the second next or (rarely) in the 3rd next draw.
Keep watching your numbers closely !!
Guru

Belgium
Member #2,220
September 2, 2003
553 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 11:20 am

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 prediction) at a lower sample like 30000 or so. Intermixing diff. sample sizes in 1 prediction, will not ruin your predicton.
vick

Canada
Member #2,859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 2:23 pm

oh i see you can stop it then change the sample rate and it will continue on that new sample
paul762

United Kingdom
Member #3,002
December 11, 2003
542 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 3:18 pm

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

Durham, North Carolina
United States
Member #1,616
June 5, 2003
4,752 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 4:20 pm

My computor has been runnin

Taking it one day at a time, because there's no way to know what might have been.
vick

Canada
Member #2,859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline

Mar 12, 2004, 9:02 pm

reddog my 20,000 took 11 hrs for 649

yes waiting for KENO version !!

New Topic New Poll

Subscribe to this topic

lottosync 1.7 at 12000 samplesPrev TopicNext Topic

lottosync 1.7 at 12000 samplesPrev Topic Next Topic