No textNo textNo text

VRA and Crazy Outriders

dee man's avatar - scene sunoverlake.jpg
dee man
I had only just started experimenting with this program when two unfortunate events occurred:
1) The original VRA thread (started by NemeSys) was closed and
2) The range of numbers from two of the last three draws of our 6/40 Lotto, were so far out of the ball-park that I am finding it difficult to get a working range of Dim and Delay values.
Three draws back: Lowest #= 1,  Highest #= 16.
Two draws back:   Lowest #= 20, Highest #= 37.
My concern is that these two way-out (consecutive) draw ranges are going to "colour" all my future attempts at predicting possible winning numbers.  If it was only one draw, I would not have any hesitation at just deleting it and moving on but, two consecutive draws?  I am presently using a training range of 1-900 (150 draws).  I suspect that as these two draws represent "only" 12 numbers out of 900, it shouldn't make too much difference in the overall scheme of things if I just deleted them.
Has anyone else had a similar problem and, how do you resolve it?
Thank you for any input you may have.
paurths's avatar - underground

Hi dee man,

deleting a draw or 2 from the history-list?

Why not?
Why not delete all the draws from which you think they have "strange numbers"?

All the draws together are going to "colour" all your future attempts, might as well delete them all.

Just kidding, sorry...

I have not used it in quite a while now, but deleting a draw (or two) has never crossed my mind b/c then it would be me that was "colouring" further attempts...


dee man's avatar - scene sunoverlake.jpg
dee man
Hi Ricky, thanks for your post.
I understand what you're getting at but my experience is that, the range of numbers for our lottery fall within a fairly stable range, not only overall but positionally as well.
My feeling is that these two draws are going to skew the results, in the near future anyway.
Thanks for your input.
paurths's avatar - underground

Well, 2 draws ago, here in Belgium where a 6/42 is, the numbers have been: 2 - 5 - 7 - 14 - 16 - 20

Only happened 15 times, on 2084 draws or so.
Thing is, they happen...

Could be that if you decide to delete them two draws, that you suddenly have a good prediction result.
Could be that if you decide to delete them two draws, that you suddenly have a bad prediction result, b/c the following draw is another "not stable range".

Most draws will have numbers that have 3 nbrs lower than 20 and 3 nbrs higher than 20. Might fluctuate a little (ball 3 & 4 fishing around the 20-value)
Thats just the statistics...

RJOh's avatar - chipmunk

If you are basing you predictions on historical data then all the data is important.  I doubt you expect your predictions to be correct 100% of the time so you need to know how correct they must be to cover your expenses in a reasonable amount of time. 

When playing a multi-state game with jackpots of $20M+, being correct less than 1% of the time is good enough if you can be confident that a 100% correct prediction is in the works in a reasonable amount of time.  However if you playing a pick3 or pick4 game with smaller prize amounts, a higher percent of accuracies have to be expected.

I prefer to use all the historical data and concentrate in the range where most of the winning numbers occur.

If you could reasonable predict the winning combinations with only 2 or 3 draw history, everybody would be winning and the odds of winning would be 1:3 instead 1:1000, 10,000, 14,000,000 and more.

hypersoniq's avatar - binary

those spikes are the nature of the beast, any attempt to "smooth" the data will result in a guaranteed error "ripple effect" later on.

unless they change the rules, like PB did when they added #'s 54 and 55

in that situation I scrapped all previous white ball draws... PB data is still valid tho, so now all my "research" is in that area.

dee man's avatar - scene sunoverlake.jpg
dee man
My apologies for the delay in replying, due in no small part to the rapidly descending "silly season" (and the longer hours at work) and the time difference which I had neglected to remind everyone of.
Thank you Ricky, RJOH and hypersonic for your advice.  Our data here seems to be similar to that of the 6/42 Belgian lottery in that these "crazy" draws seem to occur less than 1% of the time.
The consensus and common wisdom seems to be to leave these draws in and I must admit that, that was what I originally thought.  However, my gut tells me that giving weight to something which happens less than 1% of the time, devalues something which happens more than 99% of the time and yes hypersonic, I have taken on board your advices on "smoothing" and the subsequent cumulative "ripple effect".  Thanks for that.
I did a quick test by removing the two "offending" recent draws and ran VRA. The resultant graph-shapes under various parameters, closely mirrored that of the drawn numbers (post-dicting, as NemeSys calls it) although intersecting at no more than three points.  My repeated attempts to "shift" either the non-intersecting post-dicting data points or all of them globally using different neighbouring dim and del settings, threw the whole lot out of whack.
 My thinking is that, as the majority of those testing VRA are more likely to be using all the drawn numbers, I will remove all these "outriders" from the draws I'm presently testing (I don't know if anyone else has done it), and see how this effects the accuracy (or lack of) its predictions.
While it may take me a little while to run the tests, I will get back to you with the results of my little experiment.
Again, thank you guys for your input.
dee man's avatar - scene sunoverlake.jpg
dee man
My apologies to hypersoniq  - it wasn't until I was on my way home from work that I realised that I had boo-booed when typing your user name.  Sorry about that mate!
TopEnd of thread (1 page)

Log In

Log InCancel

Forgot your username?

Forgot your password?