- Home
- Premium Memberships
- Lottery Results
- Forums
- Predictions
- Lottery Post Videos
- News
- Search Drawings
- Search Lottery Post
- Lottery Systems
- Lottery Charts
- Lottery Wheels
- Worldwide Jackpots
- Quick Picks
- On This Day in History
- Blogs
- Online Games
- Premium Features
- Contact Us
- Whitelist Lottery Post
- Rules
- Lottery Book Store
- Lottery Post Gift Shop
The time is now 12:04 pm
You last visited
April 29, 2024, 11:22 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)
Cycles - Interesting NumbersPrev TopicNext Topic
-
Quote: Originally posted by Hydromaln7 on Sep 10, 2018
Noooo don't bring the rabbits in here. They'll mess up my nice neat established way of thinking how they should behave and think.
Kill the wabbit, kill the wabbit.
Naah What's up Doc.
Shhhhh we're hunting wabbits.
Hydr, You already admitted that you had rabbit holes in your neat establishment.
Sound like they have been hiding from you, or maybe you already kilt em.
They come Back, you know.
-
True that, but I thought I was close to having them all filled in
Pesky little buggers saw me coming and changed their behaviour, likely something to do with being dynamic little bunnies and not just static little bunnies.
Only way to get them all at the moment is saturation attack on the highest probability holes, still if I can figure out their dynamic behaviour a bit better it would reduce the amount of holes I need to attack at once.
Had a little epiphany last night and modelling it at the moment, seems like these little bunnies make a tangled web of burrows way deep down, but being lazy little bunnies I'm starting to see that they do like the path of least resistance and according to laws of averages seem to like to follow the same burrow patterns a fair bit.
Not necessarily the same burrows but the pattern that they use for all their burrows and subsequent new holes.
Dang, now look at what you made me do, I just opened the door to the rabbits.....
-
The Path of Least Resistance. I am not sure that there is just 1. I have observed that Bunnies like to explore in Groups. The Path (as I have said elsewhere) Always goes from the Center, to the Final Gate. A group of Bunnies open 1 of about 20 Gates and starts down the Path. Those Bunnies all have at least 1 thing in common. The Group enters the Tunnel and Comes to the Second Gate where another Common Factor is used to select a smaller group from the previous group.
Gates can be selected in any order. The Path is any series of Gates + The Correct Factor (DNA?). The Bunny Master (You) decides when enough gates have been entered and the Bunny Clan is potentially profitable. The Path of Least Resistance is the Smallest Series of Gates required to Name the Golden Rabbit or include it within a very small Clan.
The Key is not so much the Gate, but the DNA.
-
Interesting analogy, bunnies and gates sound like we talking in code here ;-)
FYI just finished my modelling and am a little blown away, getting a repeatable result in a 6/45 game of 5 hits from a group of between 12 to 15 played.
So far it's hitting 5 numbers on every 6th game with a a 12 to 15 bunny field. In between I manage to hit between 3 to 4 bunnies, but alas no magic 6 number hit yet in the modelling.
So a new bunny hole to inspect, I seem to have the right base by which I am investigating the patterns, just having to try different approaches (gates, triggers or whatever you want to call them)to the interpretation of the results.
I'm guessing that you have been looking at repeat patterns of bunnies and the consistency of behaviour triggers that separate them into various groups and directs them to different gates? Been there as well, it becomes a very mind bending place trying to track and guess the next series of events that if you get the order wrong in the first instance it screws up everything downstream from that, for each and every bunny mind you.
I think it shows some scope for determining "a" golden bunnies final location but due to the number of past patterns, triggers and directions vs. the potential future number of patterns, triggers and directions ......... well a lot of guess work and I only ever found 3 bunnies, sometime 4 and then never with any consistency like I'm getting now.
I got very frustrated with those badly behaved bunnies, a lot of that approach stems from following what others have done statistically in the past and does not come from clean thinking and approach to the problem in front of us.
My current approach is a lot more multi dimensional (NO not metaphysical). I am looking at what the numbers do in a different way over time and then using those outcomes that are dynamic. I then work back to determine where each number is dynamically in the dynamic field that I have, the next step is not so much bunny behaviour as I am a step removed from the bunnies, I guess I could call it behavioural analysis of a warren of rabbits, or a bunch of bunnies ;-)
There is a dynamic behaviour pattern, it is not something that I am able to track a change of over time as like the numbers it seems to hold no memory of what happened to the earlier numbers apart from a loose attachment to the law of averages. But the behaviour pattern is showing some signs of conformity to what I call various static triggers that have given the result in the numbers I have been able to achieve.
I am now trying to find if my static triggers that seem to be most successful can be dynamically enhanced in a similar way to the dynamic behaviour pattern of the numbers? If I can find that then it may enhance the outcome by having a dynamic trigger that is attached to the dynamic tracking.
My results above of 5 numbers are just a start in the right direction, my goal is to be able to have a 1 in 5 game 6 number winning consistency for a 18 number max play field.
-
Rabbits Breed.
Rabbit Populations are determined by the Game. Rabbits are similar in Pick 3 and Pick 4 wherein a Rabbit is The Combination. This is manageable because the populations are relatively small. The Pick 3 population is 1,000 while Pick 4 is 10,000. Rabbits in a Jackpot Game are a Different Story. Here if one modeled a Pick 3 or 4 Game, there would be 575,757 Rabbits and it goes way up when in a 6/49 Draw. Perhaps a Super Computer could control these Jackpot Rabbits, or watch them but My Desk Top Computer just does not have the Brain to do so. In a Jackpot Game it is therefore prudent to study Bunnies. For a 5 of 39 Game you ONLY have 39 Bunnies to Watch. It would appear to be easier to watch 39 Bunnies than 575,757 Rabbits. Maybe, but You are not looking for 1 Rabbit (Pick 3/4), you are looking for 5 Bunnies (5 of 39). You have to assemble a team of Bunnies to find the Rabbit Squad.
We have been communicating IN GENERAL TERMS between Rabbit (Planets or maybe Galaxies). I am currently exploring Pick 4. Hydromaln7, you are deep in Space Exploring a 6/49 Planet. Just to Be clear, I am looking a 4 Digit Rabbits. I don't want to assume anything about your Exploration so could you give a definition of Your Rabbits and Bunnies?
It would appear that you are following 49 Bunnies, Your Goal is to Arrive at the Final Gate with enough Bunnies to Win Some money. 18 Bunnies is a lot of Rabbit Squads. A few of Your Bunnies scoop up some loose change making some of the Squads winners. That can offset the Cost of the Expedition and keep you from going broke.
It is lonely in Space.
Planet 4 Out.
-
I'm fairly sure anyone who reads these posts will be like wtf?
For me rabbits and bunnies are the same thing.
As for counting them .... No thanks, in my 6/45 game there are way to many ways that they can pop up.
I have learnt that from past endeavours, I've traced all their past combinations, frequencies, patterns, doubles, triples, combinations, sequences and pretty much any and every other approach possible or written about. I came to a conclusion that it was impossible to determine the future of when they would pop up.
All past samples of results only give us a minute % of all potential results, hence all potential projections from them only give us a very very small chance of a win. This is a well know statistical fact .
Even though accepting this and understanding it logically and through the process of elimination of approaches I still intuitively see something every time I see a lotto number matrix for any game of any size.
So what changed in how I hunt bunnies?
I stopped hunting them. Stopped chasing them down rabbit holes. Too many rabbit holes in too many directions with too many gates and intersections and potential outcomes to choose which one a rabbit or bunny would pop out of.
Instead of hunting I observed and learnt their behaviour, and it is dynamic.
I don't count the actual bunnies anymore, instead I have now found a way to understand them and what they do in specific situations better. So I now know a key thing from game to game. I know their specific place or location in my dynamic world of warrens and burrows. This is only the first step though. Knowing where they are does not tell where they will go, but beginning to better understand their behaviour from having seen each bunny in that specific location in the past and knowing what they did when they where there allows me to assume a number of outcomes for them in the future.
But it is never quite that easy, because all the bunnies react not just individually but collectively as well. This is my current area of study and analysis. I'm trying to find their collective behaviour outcomes.
With that knowledge I can then make assumptions of their final or next locations within the warrens and dens with a greater degree of prediction accuracy.
For now however I am impressed with my current levels of accuracy. Yesterday I was able to accurately and consistently choose between 12 to 14 bunnies that I thought would pop up at any one time. I scored between 3 to 5 correct on a 4 week cycle, so essentially 5 numbers right out of 6 every 4 weeks.
If I simply take this approach and play those numbers it could work out to be profitable. However being conservative and broke does not allow me that luxury of a scatter gun approach. Alternately I could come up with my number combination and add 1 extra number from the remaining numbers to play a say 15 number game 31 times and potentially win the 1st division every 4th or so week. But the initially cost prohibits me from doing either of these things, so I keep studying the bunnies behaviour in an effort to more clearly understand them and predict their locations.
I have never read or seen anything about the approach I take anywhere. The method I use is complex but simple in it's approach and logic, it's the depth of analysis attached to it that makes it complex at the moment.
Having said that I sit here scratching myhead and wonder why so complex? I am the one complicating it thinking that in doing so it might reveal a hidden easter egg.
It was the simple elegance of my initial approach that revealed the current location of the bunnies and their behaviours, maybe I'm over complicating things again and need to step back and observe then bunnies a bit more collectively again?
Who knew observing bunnies was so much fun hey?
-
What are Bunnies, then. Sure they have a Number on their Back; but, what are they made of?
Question, Do you dissect these Bunnies, or do just you just Follow them around and log where they have been. Are there any Restrictions on their travel or do they Wander about Willy Nilly between pop ups.
So you never count your bunnies? I bet you still count a few things about your Bunnies. You have to count something or I take my hat off to you. You are a true visionary and I understand why you can't be specific.
Maybe all you track is where they have been. You know where they are so you have 2 out of 3.
So if you don't count your bunnies, and they are all made of the same bones,meat and fur, you must have found some secret locations to Track. As an Old Surveyor, I have mapped a lot of the Land where I live. It always comes down to a 3 Coordinates that Locate the Location. On Earth it is XYZ (in Surveying it's Northing, Easting and Elevation). In a Lottery Game, you can create you own definition of the XYZs. I bet you can or have already added dimensions 4,5...
Now We are talking Some Serious Rabbit Holes
-
I track where and when they have been, I also track from similar historical data based on where and when they have been what they do next. It is from this or these data sets that I can then make some assumptions about their future behaviour based on current positions which are dynamic from game to game and what they have done in the past.
So far I have 2 out of 3, where and when, number 3 is working in a limited fashion as they sometimes do the same thing as before and other times do something completely different. In general they are doing the same or close to it as prior but it is the tendency for them to make the slight deviations that is eluding me. These are what I call triggers and you might call gates? I have around about 5 triggers that will send them off into a different outcome than the normal tendency.
To gain better insight I have just completely mapped the past tendencies into a 3D grid, if I could post a pic I would but I'm not interested in paying money to show pictures. I need to use that money to play my strategy.
I like that you are a surveyor and use the XYZ analogy, I'm an engineer and use datum's which is not much different to you. Everything starts from something and ends somewhere. You would love to see my 3D map, it looks like an island chain topography, it maps the intensity attached to various aspects of the bunnies movements. So what is the island showing me? It's complex...
In essence I have been looking at this from an engineering perspective in that all systems yield to a applied intensity over time. I am trying to map intensity attached to each bunny and compare that across all said bunnies, but at the same time it is not the actual bunny but an aspect hidden within the combination of all the bunnies behaviour.
So I end up with a mountain of data points that make islands so to speak, each island could be considered a bunny hole or a place that show how many times a bunny that could represent ANY number visits that location. The more visits the higher the island. Maybe I should start calling them mole mounds?
Anyway it hurts my brain looking at it. Especially when I comparison map ALL the islands together trying to ID which specific intensities take precedent over others and why?
The success I have to now was before I started mapping. mapping has made things a whole level more complicated due to the number of data points involved.
These data points have been derived by applying the same initial concept I had to the next level and then the next level etc. I could keep applying them to additional levels and out to infinite but you end up with diminishing returns on the data generated (more data points but less meaningful data).
So I'm stepping back from that process at the moment and returning to what I have tried and proven so far. I still map the intensity but only as a 2D and only examine a reduced number of data points that apply at any given time. The 3D is too rich a data set for me to fully comprehend at this point in time, yet it speaks to me of something I have seen before in a science journal or science feed via FB. I have seen the 3D data sets somewhere in something, I think was quantum mechanics related but can not find reference to it.
Specific to your points:
Bunnies do have numbers, but it is not the numbers it is the places that they visit and are in. Any number bunny could be in that place or on a specific island that I identify them to be in, I don't know what number bunny is there until I map their locations. I have their locations but currently not the trigger that will tell me which bunny will pop up on which island. Well sort of. On higher islands I am fairly accurate with when that bunny will pop up, mainly due to a fuller data set and past actions and behaviours of the bunny that visits there. It's on the smaller outlying islands that I loose accuracy, I know the locations of the bunnies out there, I know which island they are hiding under for all 45 bunnies, but I don't know what causes them to pop up just yet.
Dissect bunnies? Only chocolate ones at Easter time :-)
Willy Nilly wanderers? Yes they wander around a lot but that is where I have been able to track them with my approach, so now I know where each bunny is. Let me clarify a little. I started typing and was going to say "Each bunny has an island matrix attached to them" but this is not correct. Superficially it is in that for each number I can map where they have been, no that's not right either. For a specific matrix of past behaviour I can develop an island matrix for each bunny, kinda right without being 100% correct. Point is any number bunny can pop up under any island at any time, I have simply figured out where a specific number bunny is at a give point in time, as such I can then check the intensity of that little island under which that specific bunny resides against similar non inhabited bunny islands with a similar topography. If the bunny island I check shows a significant amount of intensity to grow then I make an assumption that the bunny is trying to dig out to the surface and make a hole, in a manner of speaking.
Counting? Yes, it's all about counting and solid math, not any airy fairy metaphysical count 3 back, times by 4, divide by the seasonal rotation of Jupiter etc. I count, but not the bunnies themselves, their behavioural traits and reactions.
Serious wabbit holes? My model is more mole mounds than rabbit holes, then again it could just as easily be rabbit mounds? And yes a serious lot of numbers generating the topography. I have the rabbits locations and am working to fully discover their pop up triggers, this in itself is bringing me back to the original problem of random distribution, yet again within this there is a faint adhesion to laws of averages for various actions. This discovery comes when you can clearly ID what behavioural traits cause the triggers to trigger and along that journey there are a lot of numbers involved.
-
By all your mention, I would just recommend that while you are looking don’t forget to ‘record’ or remember at least all the stops you made. You never know what at what time is relevant in the outcome, of course until you see the outcome and then think back and say geez, “I knew I should’ve taken that left turn at Alberquerque.” You know what I mean. After all, as you say it is random but the results that may be the most important may be one of the stops along the way in terms of a particular set. I would say whatever fits with actual results does work. But I also find it doesn’t fit all the time. Consistency though definitely matters, which means you can always rely on it. All the best.
Sometimes you do the right thing just because it’s right.
Life's a game of mathematics, if you can't figure that out I don't know what to tell you.
-
Am I allowed to post links to images??
May get banned for doing this.....
-
Quote: Originally posted by Hydromaln7 on Sep 11, 2018
I track where and when they have been, I also track from similar historical data based on where and when they have been what they do next. It is from this or these data sets that I can then make some assumptions about their future behaviour based on current positions which are dynamic from game to game and what they have done in the past.
So far I have 2 out of 3, where and when, number 3 is working in a limited fashion as they sometimes do the same thing as before and other times do something completely different. In general they are doing the same or close to it as prior but it is the tendency for them to make the slight deviations that is eluding me. These are what I call triggers and you might call gates? I have around about 5 triggers that will send them off into a different outcome than the normal tendency.
To gain better insight I have just completely mapped the past tendencies into a 3D grid, if I could post a pic I would but I'm not interested in paying money to show pictures. I need to use that money to play my strategy.
I like that you are a surveyor and use the XYZ analogy, I'm an engineer and use datum's which is not much different to you. Everything starts from something and ends somewhere. You would love to see my 3D map, it looks like an island chain topography, it maps the intensity attached to various aspects of the bunnies movements. So what is the island showing me? It's complex...
In essence I have been looking at this from an engineering perspective in that all systems yield to a applied intensity over time. I am trying to map intensity attached to each bunny and compare that across all said bunnies, but at the same time it is not the actual bunny but an aspect hidden within the combination of all the bunnies behaviour.
So I end up with a mountain of data points that make islands so to speak, each island could be considered a bunny hole or a place that show how many times a bunny that could represent ANY number visits that location. The more visits the higher the island. Maybe I should start calling them mole mounds?
Anyway it hurts my brain looking at it. Especially when I comparison map ALL the islands together trying to ID which specific intensities take precedent over others and why?
The success I have to now was before I started mapping. mapping has made things a whole level more complicated due to the number of data points involved.
These data points have been derived by applying the same initial concept I had to the next level and then the next level etc. I could keep applying them to additional levels and out to infinite but you end up with diminishing returns on the data generated (more data points but less meaningful data).
So I'm stepping back from that process at the moment and returning to what I have tried and proven so far. I still map the intensity but only as a 2D and only examine a reduced number of data points that apply at any given time. The 3D is too rich a data set for me to fully comprehend at this point in time, yet it speaks to me of something I have seen before in a science journal or science feed via FB. I have seen the 3D data sets somewhere in something, I think was quantum mechanics related but can not find reference to it.
Specific to your points:
Bunnies do have numbers, but it is not the numbers it is the places that they visit and are in. Any number bunny could be in that place or on a specific island that I identify them to be in, I don't know what number bunny is there until I map their locations. I have their locations but currently not the trigger that will tell me which bunny will pop up on which island. Well sort of. On higher islands I am fairly accurate with when that bunny will pop up, mainly due to a fuller data set and past actions and behaviours of the bunny that visits there. It's on the smaller outlying islands that I loose accuracy, I know the locations of the bunnies out there, I know which island they are hiding under for all 45 bunnies, but I don't know what causes them to pop up just yet.
Dissect bunnies? Only chocolate ones at Easter time :-)
Willy Nilly wanderers? Yes they wander around a lot but that is where I have been able to track them with my approach, so now I know where each bunny is. Let me clarify a little. I started typing and was going to say "Each bunny has an island matrix attached to them" but this is not correct. Superficially it is in that for each number I can map where they have been, no that's not right either. For a specific matrix of past behaviour I can develop an island matrix for each bunny, kinda right without being 100% correct. Point is any number bunny can pop up under any island at any time, I have simply figured out where a specific number bunny is at a give point in time, as such I can then check the intensity of that little island under which that specific bunny resides against similar non inhabited bunny islands with a similar topography. If the bunny island I check shows a significant amount of intensity to grow then I make an assumption that the bunny is trying to dig out to the surface and make a hole, in a manner of speaking.
Counting? Yes, it's all about counting and solid math, not any airy fairy metaphysical count 3 back, times by 4, divide by the seasonal rotation of Jupiter etc. I count, but not the bunnies themselves, their behavioural traits and reactions.
Serious wabbit holes? My model is more mole mounds than rabbit holes, then again it could just as easily be rabbit mounds? And yes a serious lot of numbers generating the topography. I have the rabbits locations and am working to fully discover their pop up triggers, this in itself is bringing me back to the original problem of random distribution, yet again within this there is a faint adhesion to laws of averages for various actions. This discovery comes when you can clearly ID what behavioural traits cause the triggers to trigger and along that journey there are a lot of numbers involved.
By the Way, I am actually a retired Civil Engineer. I always worked by myself or for firms small enough where I could Survey my own projects. A lot of what i did was design the change to the surface of the Earth with a Grading Plans. Grading Plans placed something on the surface and changed the Elevation. Autocad (Land desk) was the Drawing Program. What is overlooked in all of this is that all points within the Project Area only move vertically. Once the Grading Plan was completed it was back to the Surveyor to Stake Out the Project in the Field. That meant a new Set of Points (Based on the Original Grid) was taken to the Field in a Data collector and New Points were set and marked with information used by the Grader to Create the new Surface (Actually the Sub Grade). Most Engineers used the Civil Package of Auto Desk to do the Surface Design. The completely ignore the Points. They can do this because they have a surface model, created by the Surveyor that lets them pick and draw with the cursor. A Site Plan aligned with the Surface model to show where the "Improvements" will be placed provided the lines and intersections that required a new elevation. It was all about where the water would go and the slope required to keep it moving at a targeted rate of 2 feet per second. So here is the Point. It is with regard to the Design Process. You see new points had to be created from the final design. When the Engineer was done with the design, in stepped the surveyor, going into the Project file and creating a new list of points that contained the XYZ Coordinate together with a Description of the Point. Because, I did all of the steps myself it occurred to me to set the points on the site plan before I did the Grading design. A really cool feature in Land Desk lets you set a point and assign it the elevation of that point on the surface Model. This allowed me to create my own grading Program in Excel.
Now I submit to you that What I all Rabbit DNA is quite possibly a Set of Position Coordinates for a Bunny. In my Pick 4 World there are 10 Dimensions. Try Mapping that. Tracking a bunny's DNA Changes could be viewed as tracking it's location. I look for 1 3 Digit Bunny. You look for 6 2 Digit Bunnies. You have way to many possible groups of bunnies to track them in groups; but, you only have 45 Bunnies to Watch.
So It all comes down to the Coordinate System. Each Axis has it's own definition. I am pretty sure that the Units are made from the same source, that being combinations of digits 0-9 and are derived by some formula. The actual Units themselves are the Secret.
I can not see any other way to study the Draws, but by going back and looking at the DNA / Positions of the Winning Rabbits. In order to do what we do, we also need to know where every other Rabbit Was. In between Draws We look for what changed in our own way. Now We know where each Bunny is, We know Where it was, and after the Next Draw we know what changed. In fact I keep a separate table of all of the changes between Draws. I am beginning to Refine my Tool to React to Change. In the Pick 4 game, I am tracking 24 Axii (My word for more than 1 Axis). There are really only 10 Basic Axii, the Other 14 are used to create combinations or derivatives of the Original 10. Tracking Change is to Follow the Key.
So I don't think we are that different except that I am just getting there and you say you have already been there. I did not see a report or a log of your finding. I am sort of writing mine here.
Great Conversation. I for one Do Not Hunt Rabbits. I heard them. I did not know it, but I take from your writing that a group of rabbits is a Warren. I propose that We name the Rabbits that We Seek "Warren", and it would not surprise me if they all changed their Name after Every Draw.
Which Way did he go? Which Way did he go?
-
Quote: Originally posted by Hydromaln7 on Sep 11, 2018
Am I allowed to post links to images??
May get banned for doing this.....
These are Fantastic.
What did you use to create them? Was this all done in Excel?
-
Yes, all in Excel, my default go to program for number crunching and general graphing.
The chart type is simply generated from a matrix of data that results from my tracking and currently only shows the past location of where the bunnies popped up. It's a simple enough surface graph that I have reduced the sample or plot rates for the various XYZ values otherwise excel and my graphics card would melt down trying to plot all the points in between points.
The first one is the real McCoy the 2nd one is me messing about with the 1st ones outputs to generate a 360 deg plot, no new data just a repeat to give me a different perspective on it.
Next will come plotting in the current bunny location. Now this is only a plot of 1 bunny, so when I try plotting all 45 bunnies and then putting their current locations in there Mr Excel dies a slow and agonising death. This is where I am stuck, I can generate the data but can not get a full visual on it combined.
But back to one bunny, so I can see where the bunny is in relation to the current game, I can also track where he has been over time in the past. Superficially his behaviour appears erratic, he changes altitude, latitude and longitude (XYZ) and then changes the number he is carrying around with him because the plot is not of the numbers but of the behaviour.
I then have to look at every other of the 44 bunnies and see where they are at. I then need to determine their intensity to see daylight based on their individual intensity in their own plots and their overall intensity in the bigger picture of all the plots. There is at the moment far too many numbers in that for me to be able to generate what I am looking for, and then it could be that what I think I am looking for, or how I think the bunnies should behave is completely different to what actually happens.
All I currently really know is that above a specific altitude where there are less mounds / islands I can generally get an exceptional hit rate on predicting when a bunny will pop up. Below that and something different is happening with a transition zone between them. I am currently trying to figure out the different behaviour in the transition zone and the lower altitude so to speak.
Regarding your post prior to this I'm impressed. It seems we have a similar way of looking at the data, but I would hazard a guess that you are using many many more dimensions than I am because I have introduced a separate step in the data crunching that eliminates many of your dimensions. For every dimension introduced you have a variable that can and will effect the outcomes of subsequent dimensional corrections used.
It's all very large.
-
Add on to my earlier post.....
Something just occurred to me that I have not considered before.
I can get reasonably good, actually better than reasonably good, very good bunny pop up rate and location accuracy with the higher altitudes on my maps.
I have not looked at if any of the past games put all the bunnies in higher altitudes? Maybe if I simply try for games where all the bunnies are up there I might have a much better full hit rate for the winning numbers?
I will need to model this, but again another tangent to follow......
-
And then........ After 6 hours of the computer and excel trying to grind through my calcs.....