Welcome Guest
You last visited January 20, 2017, 8:51 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# Lottosync v1.7 bug report !

Topic closed. 68 replies. Last post 13 years ago by Guru.

 Page 1 of 5

Belgium
Member #2220
September 2, 2003
553 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 5:17 am - IP Logged

Hi,

I received an email from a user that was unable to get numbers higher than aprox. 32 in his predictions.

If anyone notices this behaviour too, please report it in this thread or send me an email.

I suspect there may be a bug left in the code that in some occasions kicks in and ignores higher numbers. (although it never showed up in my original testruns)

I'll have a close look at the code next week to see where this comes from.

N.ireland
United Kingdom
Member #2962
December 6, 2003
69 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 8:20 am - IP Logged

same here 32 highest number picked????

Member #2859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 12:31 pm - IP Logged

i've never noticed that in 649 games, but i have notice this in 649 games =

there seems to be ALOT more numbers falling under 25  !!! here's some examples =

Draw 1=

sample = 50000 1 2 3 5 7 15 16 17 19 43  = 9 numbers below 25
sample = 25000 1 2 5 6 8 10 16 18 24 41  = 9 numbers below 25
sample = 40000 1 2 4 7 16 18 21 27 40 48  = 8 numbers below 25
sample = 20000 2 3 5 6 14 15 16 17 29 47  = 8 numbers below 25
sample = 30000 1 2 3 4 7 8 10 16 20 35  = 9 numbers below 25
sample = 12000 1 2 3 5 18 22 26 28 34 46  = 6 numbers below 25

Draw 2=
sample = 50000 1 6 7 10 14 16 17 19 31 39  = 8 numbers below 25
sample = 25000 1 2 6 7 10 13 14 17 26 33  = 8 numbers below 25
sample = 40000 1 6 7 9 10 14 17 18 30 33  = 8 numbers below 25
sample = 30000 1 2 6 10 14 15 17 21 22 49  = 9 numbers below 25

Seems to be WAY to many numbers under 25 ie not distrubuted evenly etc

BC
Member #2120
August 19, 2003
258 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 1:47 pm - IP Logged

Same here, predominantly low preds in 01s and 10s so far. Often 2 decades missing, one of the last sets had 3 decades missing which can happen but is very rare. Sent some latest examples via PM.

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

N.ireland
United Kingdom
Member #2962
December 6, 2003
69 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 2:02 pm - IP Logged

Well tonight 6/42 lotto running 40000 samples one number right again? One of the numbers was above 32.which probably didn't help if it wont pick above 32.Low numbers due but it picked balls in 1 to 10 range in draw it was 14 to 20 range.

N.ireland
United Kingdom
Member #2962
December 6, 2003
69 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 2:04 pm - IP Logged

Vick how do you get time to do all them runs is the computer ever off..

Member #2859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 20, 2004, 8:32 pm - IP Logged

spock, hehehe, i have 2 computers, and their both pretty fast takes about 1.5 to 2 days to run em all, but i' concentrating on keno more these days, waiting for next keno version to come out )

N.ireland
United Kingdom
Member #2962
December 6, 2003
69 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 3:52 am - IP Logged

I tried an experiment changed from 6/42 Irish lotto to UK 6/49 to see if LS would pick higher numbers well 11 hours later the numbers are 1,2,3,4,5,7,9,19,23,30.now on the Irish low numbers looked due that is not the case on uk lotto.Something is very wrong withLS1.7.

BC
Member #2120
August 19, 2003
258 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 10:40 am - IP Logged

Hey synch players, a couple of

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

Member #2859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 11:39 am - IP Logged

yes it's picking WAY to many LOW numbers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

langley b.c.
Member #3313
January 10, 2004
155 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 11:56 am - IP Logged

yeah but my low numbers are winning me money  he! he!

Belgium
Member #2220
September 2, 2003
553 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 4:35 pm - IP Logged

whoosh.

something seems to have gone very wrong with the final 1.7. Did some tests and also got way too many low numbers with the version supplied to our customers. My last testing version seems to perform ok. (strange, they should be identical ??!!??). Something must have slipped from my attention.

Well, I'm going to find out and supply you all with a patch to fix it.

United States
Member #2460
October 7, 2003
766 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 6:15 pm - IP Logged

I just took a look at my numbers and yes you are all right

I got too many low numbers and no high numbers also and on the probability scale the few winning numbers seem to be coming out on the far right 20% and on the far left 50%

and some-times around the middle 35%, but mostly on the far right 20%.

What about you all, got do you get?

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.

langley b.c.
Member #3313
January 10, 2004
155 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 21, 2004, 6:28 pm - IP Logged

yes same here on the probability table

NJ
United States
Member #1924
July 28, 2003
113 Posts
Offline
 Posted: March 22, 2004, 7:14 pm - IP Logged

Ok we have all been around the bush on this software. So, "the proof is in the pudding"

How about posting some of the winnings from this system?

 Page 1 of 5