Welcome Guest
You last visited May 24, 2018, 1:55 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

# something wrong with lottosync v1.6 ?

Topic closed. 61 replies. Last post 14 years ago by Colin F.

 Page 4 of 5
Dump Water Florida
United States
Member #380
June 5, 2002
3206 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 26, 2004, 2:49 am - IP Logged
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on April 25, 2004

Paul,

After reading the posts of other LottoSync users, I think the program is doing what it was designed to do - take over 12 hours to generate 10 numbers.  It's just that you think that 10 random numbers generated in 12 or more hours should be better than 10 numbers pulled out a hat.

RJOh

RHOh: Just for fun do you think it would help or hurt to have let's say six hats each containing the numbers normally drawn within the six positional ranges. Draw two numbers from each hat discarding any repeats, then wheel (normally or positionally).  Better strategy then all in one hat or worse?  BobP

Member #2859
November 23, 2003
463 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 26, 2004, 4:06 am - IP Logged
Quote: Originally posted by BobP on April 26, 2004

RHOh: Just for fun do you think it would help or hurt to have let's say six hats each containing the numbers normally drawn within the six positional ranges. Draw two numbers from each hat discarding any repeats, then wheel (normally or positionally).  Better strategy then all in one hat or worse?  BobP

Bop i do that now with random selection in microsoft excel. I select 10 numbers, with each 1 of the 10 in a tight position range and then i further select them by any even odd + 5 of the positions must be even + 2 to 3 of the 1st 5 positions must be even, same with last 5. I also do this 10 number select but with 5 postional ranges. Then i also do 10 selects of pure random, any position any even odd.

i do mabye 100 sets of 10 of each, so about 300 sets and backtest em for 3 or 4 months and i find =

that the positional sets with even odd filters do MUCH better then the completely random sets, ie in hitting lows 3/10 and high's 5+b/10 + 6/10. Makes sense that they should. It;s a work in progress, but i then take some of the best performing sets of late and play em.

Pennsylvania
United States
Member #1340
April 6, 2003
2450 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 26, 2004, 4:50 am - IP Logged
Quote: Originally posted by vick on April 16, 2004

i used neuarl netwoks years back on the lottos = not much sucess, byt mabye today's faster computers can work things differently with it?

After reading a great book on pattern matching NNs and months of ehxaustive web research and toying with excel and stand-alone demos I have come to the conclusion that a NN as designeed today cannot help with the lottery... it is an attempt to model the human brain, and we already have better abstract pattern recognition than the fastest cray supercomputer...

I did take away 3 things from the research that could possibly be incorporated into a predictive engine...

1. Fuzzy Logic... Implemented as a simple nested IF...THEN statement. THe classical IF...Then or If...Then...Else logic switch traditionally has 2 outcomes

>> If SomeCondition = True Then SomeAction, Else If SomeCondition = False Then SomeOther Action

Example, If X < 10 then Y=1, Else Y=0  Has only 2 outcomes

Fuzzy Logic can be implemented as a nested IF statement...

>> If SomeCondition = WithinSomeRange Then Some Action, Else If SomeCondition = Within the next SegmentOfTheRange Then SomeOtherAction, Else If SomeCondition = WithinNRange Then NthAction.

Example, If X<10 then Y=1, Else If X <8 then Y=0.8, Else If X <6 then Y=0.6, Else If X <4 Then Y=0.4, Else If X<2 then Y=0.2, Else Y=0          now Y has a range of 6 outcomes based on X.

2. Weights... having a set of statistics for the next draw and weighting each based on past performance. Let's say you have 3 stats, Stat B perfomed better than Stat A, which did better than Stat C... but you want to incorporate each, giving weight to the better performers...

Result = INT(AVERAGE(((B*3)+(A*2)+C)/6))    <<< as done in Excel

3. Long Term Memory (Full Draw History) and Short Term Memory (Last N Draws)... combining these with weights should marry long term performance with short term trends... but at what value of N? Guru uses 3, I have seen better results with 5...

Playing more than one ticket per game is betting against yourself.

United Kingdom
Member #3002
December 11, 2003
480 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 26, 2004, 5:34 am - IP Logged
Quote: Originally posted by RJOh on April 25, 2004

Paul,

After reading the posts of other LottoSync users, I think the program is doing what it was designed to do - take over 12 hours to generate 10 numbers.  It's just that you think that 10 random numbers generated in 12 or more hours should be better than 10 numbers pulled out a hat.

RJOh

rjoh, apparently lottosync is NOT a random number generator, but it seems i am not having the results others seem to be having,  an earlier post had some trial results which showed 3 numbers approx. every other draw with v1.6, but i havent even seen 3 numbers yet, 2 is the most.
mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20211 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 26, 2004, 4:12 pm - IP Logged
Quote: Originally posted by BobP on April 26, 2004

RHOh: Just for fun do you think it would help or hurt to have let's say six hats each containing the numbers normally drawn within the six positional ranges. Draw two numbers from each hat discarding any repeats, then wheel (normally or positionally).  Better strategy then all in one hat or worse?  BobP

I agree Bob,

I think the six hat solution is a better one and you have a good strategy for picking the numbers.  Just add a wheel or two and you will have a whole lottery number picking system.

RJOh

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

Bangalore
India
Member #2444
October 4, 2003
234 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 27, 2004, 12:50 am - IP Logged

Dear Lotto Friends,

I vaguely remember when GURU said in his EARLIEST of posts (roughly about the time of my joining this lovely forum in October 2003), when he had to battle some hostile and sceptical posters (yes, myself included), that LottoSync is based on a doctoral thesis submitted in some Belgian University. Let us not totally disregard a creative attempt at predicting numbers based on just THREE of past draws! We all know, Mike's wonderful programs too have similar features for ALL types of lottos...! Yes, predicting future outcome from a minimal set of data is indeed a novelty, but having tasted some partial/inconsistent success ( I guess Vick/UnderDog had 5 number matches each...if I am correct; there were also reports of very encouraging results too, with KENO games, as reported by Vick; I do hope one day, the KENO version could score a PERFECT 10...), we should now come out of this "neophobia"...! You know, the earliest of the airplanes did not have the kind of speed that we witness today; nor would they cover long distance flights like today's jets and hypersonics...! Now, compare this with LottoSync's inconsistent/partial results. Progress comes with time...What do you think?!

Good Luck!

Just Monkeying Around With Numbers...!

mid-Ohio
United States
Member #9
March 24, 2001
20211 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 28, 2004, 9:45 am - IP Logged

I will believe it when I see it

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

United Kingdom
Member #3002
December 11, 2003
480 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 29, 2004, 4:22 am - IP Logged

1 number + bonus last night for yet another loss, total loss is growing with each draw. lottosync v1.6 600 sample constant

Pennsylvania
United States
Member #1340
April 6, 2003
2450 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 29, 2004, 11:17 pm - IP Logged

you must realize that you are picking 10 numbers for a 6 number lotto, results are bound to look better on paper for that...

I just don't see 3 draws as a clear enough picture... Just using the simple FORECAST function in Excel... Run it on 3 draws... you can end up with negative numbers and zeros... with 5 draws you tend to end up in the right ranges, even if not at the right exact numbers... with the entire draw history, you tend to match the average (mean) of the same history...

If a "magic bullet" formula exists, I am convinced it will involve combining full history with recent trends... I just haven't found the right formula yet...

Playing more than one ticket per game is betting against yourself.

Australia
Member #3084
December 22, 2003
328 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 30, 2004, 9:32 pm - IP Logged

I don't have a problem with creative effort - I encourage it. I do have a problem when qualifications are bandied around to support Systems. As far as I am concerned you can be studying to be a sex worker or garbage collector (male, female or non-gender, of course) and have as much credibility. (One of the things I like about the Lottery Post is that letters after your name are not paraded.)

We all make mistakes and sometimes just have to ditch what we've done because of some fatal error even though we put hundreds of hours into it. Believe me, I've been there 2 or three times.

This to me this is a classic case of overlooking the simple. The facts do not give any credibility to the premise that good results can be obtained from the past three draws. From my Computer Model I could overload you with findings that support what I'm saying. It is not necessary to do that as what RJoh has said is sufficient.

I would put this methodology on par with using Birthday dates.

Colin F

United States
Member #14
November 9, 2001
31615 Posts
Offline
 Posted: April 30, 2004, 10:40 pm - IP Logged

wonder why guru isnot responding??

love to nibble those micey feet.

Dump Water Florida
United States
Member #380
June 5, 2002
3206 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 1, 2004, 1:25 am - IP Logged

I think you're missing the bigger picture.  So far we know almost nothing works when it comes to predicting lottery.  In big games patterns vanish almost before they begin.

Working with the three most recent past draws is the minimum possible to establish a pattern with the hope of a forth draw being the next step rather then a leap in another direction.  Yet even with a three draw pattern we can look at what's going on and tell if we've got three steps worth trying to extrapolate a forth from or three hops you can tell nothing from.  Even then winning depends on whether the forth draw will be "like" the first three or totally different.

This thing isn't a magic genie, it works with the only data available, the previous draws and as few of them as possible without running a template back over the whole draw history looking for similar circumstances.

Heck, cut a hole in a piece of paper four draws high and slide it down the draw history and see how often you have four like draws, those are places where it would be interesting to enter the first three draws into Lottosync and see how close it comes to predicting numbers that appeared in the forth draw.

Perhaps the key to Lottosync is to wait until a good lineup and not to be dissapointed if the next draw is divergent if that means we win when it's not.

BobP

Pennsylvania
United States
Member #1340
April 6, 2003
2450 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 1, 2004, 10:04 am - IP Logged

I think I will try 10 as a starting point for last draws to consider and work down from there... 10 has a MODE value in PB, 5 4 or 3 does not... So the formula operates on the Mode

((ModeFull * 7) + (ModeLast10 * 11)) / 18 = my positional "pick"

7 and 11 are arbitrary for now, need to start somewhere... 2 to 1 just does the average, this gives ModeLast10 a 1.57 to 1 weight advantage.

Also trying the Average (Mean)

((MeanFull * 7) + (MeanLast10 * 11)) /18 = pick

it may work (just like a QP may work, or not) but the bottom line is I have reduced sheets of data down to 2 picks... win or lose... come on MUSL... cooperate ;-)

Playing more than one ticket per game is betting against yourself.

N.ireland
United Kingdom
Member #2962
December 6, 2003
69 Posts
Offline
 Posted: May 1, 2004, 2:23 pm - IP Logged

Lets wait till 1.7. is fixed if the results are the same..i agree it will be  major disappointment.