My Method: A linear congruential generator pickerPrev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

AntonisCh

Athens
Greece
Member #194,246
December 6, 2018
3 Posts
Offline

May 10, 2019, 6:13 am
Hi all,

I am watching quietly LP for a long time now and I am an active researcher in lottery subjects.

Have done all the usual drills, such as passing from neural nets to ARIMA models and from statistical methods to randomizers...

A brief conclusion so far from me: The main reason these methods fail is simple, known and let me put it in a simple yet intuitive way which will help me later to present my latest finding:

(useful remark: for practical reasons I will refer to a 5/45 Lottery game, but of course my method applies to all types)

Let's say that you have a history of draws of your local lottery.

Also let's assume that the history goes like this (numbers don't matter just get the idea):

3-5-12-17-24

1-7-12-29-34

....

...

18-23-24-35-41

and you apply your "super" method to derive your next draw from your history.

BUT! Assume that another fellow somewhere in the universe participates in his/her local lottery and until now has observed the SAME draws history as you.

Well, the problem is that from the SAME history the two lotteries (one here and the other on Jupiter...!) may produce totally different next draws.

See the problem of lottery forecasting? If the two fellows use the SAME method on the SAME history files they are going to get the SAME next draw as a prediction.

But the next draw will NOT be the same for the two different games no matter they have the same history!

That's the reason that ANY method will fail, UNLESS your prediction IS NOT based on your lottery history...

But that's my story.

The reason I am sharing this is to enrich the discussion with new ideas, maybe crosscheck results and get some input from community.

Let's start.

What is a linear congruential generator?

Well is a simple method to produce pseudorandom number sequences. Meaning, it is a formula that you can use to get a series of numbers that they LOOK like random BUT they are not. They are PREDICTABLE as long as we know the exact parameters of the formula.

What I am using is this:

(NEXT NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)=((MULTIPLIER*PREVIOUS NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)+SUMMAND) MOD BASE

Ok, so how I start as the first number has no previous...?

Well I need another number which I call SEED

MOD is the usual modular operator and simply means this: 9 mod 4= 1 as if we divide 9 by 4 we get 1 as the remainder.

Conclusion ONE:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Nothing new so far as this is everywhere in Internet, math books etc.

BUT...

WHAT IF I TRY TO FIND MY FOUR NUMBERS (MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED ) IN SUCH A WAY THAT MY NUMBER SEQUENCE PRODUCED FROM THE FORMULA IS SIMILAR BUT NOT EXACT TO MY DRAWING HISTORY???

Let's go back to my hypothetical history file and let's also imagine that I have also found my four numbers which produce the following:

HISTORY

3-5-12-17-24 and my SEED IS 10 (FIRST NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)- (NO HIT)

1-7-12-29-34 SECOND NUMBER 12 (HIT)

....

...

18-23-24-35-41 MY N-TH NUMBER IN SEQUENCE 19 (NO HIT)

and so on...

Conlcusion TWO:

I can find a well-defined pseudorandom sequence of numbers which can have TWO important features:
1. The sequence will resemble BUT NOT be the same as the actual draws history
2. The sequence is defince by four numbers which I can search through the combinations and find some good fits.
FINAL REMARK

Obviously the next number in my sequence will be the prediction.

So, what do you think?

If you care I can elaborate more, but I need your input and your feeling on this concept.

Thanks all!
cottoneyedjoe

United States
Member #197,030
March 28, 2019
1,638 Posts
Offline

May 10, 2019, 1:33 pm

As you say,

"ANY method will fail, UNLESS your prediction IS NOT based on your lottery history"

but what you are describing (retrofitting a modular linear recursion to the data) necessarily uses the lottery history, so, by your own words it should fail to predict the right numbers. Nevertheless, it sounds like a fun math/programming project. I suspect you will feel too boxed-in with only four parameters and eventually increase the number. When you complete it I'm sure there will be people willing to buy it whether or not it works.
PREDICTOR 2019

Tampa
United States
Member #195,048
January 8, 2019
118 Posts
Offline

May 10, 2019, 4:39 pm

after 84 and 82 =8×4=32 8×2=16 3216 then 3and6=9 and 1and2=3 won 93 yestarday night last results 96 and 27 then 9×6=54 and 7×2=14 5414 then 5and 4=9 and 4 and 1=7 then 79 today last result 82 and 93 8×2=16 and 9×3=27. 1627 6and 2=4 , 7and 1=4 44 for tomight last result 27 and 79 2×7=14 and 7×9=63 [1463] =4and 6=0-2 -8 1and 3=2-8-4 combined [04-24-84-02-22-43-48-88-82-28-08 ]crossing [39-33-73-37-71-17-15-51-57-75. []751 ] tonight with florida lottery
garyo1954

Texas
United States
Member #4,549
May 2, 2004
4,228 Posts
Offline

May 13, 2019, 11:13 am

"BUT! Assume that another fellow somewhere in the universe participates in his/her local lottery and until now has observed the SAME draws history as you."

This alone negates your idea. If no draw could be the same, than that guy on Jupiter (or wherever) wouldn't be working with the same draw history, therefore wouldn't arrive at the same next draw.

Simply put, since no future draw could be the same, none of the past draws (which were future draws at one time) could be the same either.

G

I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain.
adobea78

United States
Member #116,339
September 8, 2011
5,094 Posts
Offline

Jun 9, 2019, 3:02 pm
Quote: Originally posted by AntonisCh on May 10, 2019
Hi all,

I am watching quietly LP for a long time now and I am an active researcher in lottery subjects.

Have done all the usual drills, such as passing from neural nets to ARIMA models and from statistical methods to randomizers...

A brief conclusion so far from me: The main reason these methods fail is simple, known and let me put it in a simple yet intuitive way which will help me later to present my latest finding:

(useful remark: for practical reasons I will refer to a 5/45 Lottery game, but of course my method applies to all types)

Let's say that you have a history of draws of your local lottery.

Also let's assume that the history goes like this (numbers don't matter just get the idea):

3-5-12-17-24

1-7-12-29-34

....

...

18-23-24-35-41

and you apply your "super" method to derive your next draw from your history.

BUT! Assume that another fellow somewhere in the universe participates in his/her local lottery and until now has observed the SAME draws history as you.

Well, the problem is that from the SAME history the two lotteries (one here and the other on Jupiter...!) may produce totally different next draws.

See the problem of lottery forecasting? If the two fellows use the SAME method on the SAME history files they are going to get the SAME next draw as a prediction.

But the next draw will NOT be the same for the two different games no matter they have the same history!

That's the reason that ANY method will fail, UNLESS your prediction IS NOT based on your lottery history...

But that's my story.

The reason I am sharing this is to enrich the discussion with new ideas, maybe crosscheck results and get some input from community.

Let's start.

What is a linear congruential generator?

Well is a simple method to produce pseudorandom number sequences. Meaning, it is a formula that you can use to get a series of numbers that they LOOK like random BUT they are not. They are PREDICTABLE as long as we know the exact parameters of the formula.

What I am using is this:

(NEXT NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)=((MULTIPLIER*PREVIOUS NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)+SUMMAND) MOD BASE

Ok, so how I start as the first number has no previous...?

Well I need another number which I call SEED

MOD is the usual modular operator and simply means this: 9 mod 4= 1 as if we divide 9 by 4 we get 1 as the remainder.

Conclusion ONE:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Nothing new so far as this is everywhere in Internet, math books etc.

BUT...

WHAT IF I TRY TO FIND MY FOUR NUMBERS (MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED ) IN SUCH A WAY THAT MY NUMBER SEQUENCE PRODUCED FROM THE FORMULA IS SIMILAR BUT NOT EXACT TO MY DRAWING HISTORY???

Let's go back to my hypothetical history file and let's also imagine that I have also found my four numbers which produce the following:

HISTORY

3-5-12-17-24 and my SEED IS 10 (FIRST NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)- (NO HIT)

1-7-12-29-34 SECOND NUMBER 12 (HIT)

....

...

18-23-24-35-41 MY N-TH NUMBER IN SEQUENCE 19 (NO HIT)

and so on...

Conlcusion TWO:

I can find a well-defined pseudorandom sequence of numbers which can have TWO important features:
1. The sequence will resemble BUT NOT be the same as the actual draws history
2. The sequence is defince by four numbers which I can search through the combinations and find some good fits.
FINAL REMARK

Obviously the next number in my sequence will be the prediction.

So, what do you think?

If you care I can elaborate more, but I need your input and your feeling on this concept.

Thanks all!
Let's start.

What is a linear congruential generator?

Well is a simple method to produce pseudorandom number sequences. Meaning, it is a formula that you can use to get a series of numbers that they LOOK like random BUT they are not. They are PREDICTABLE as long as we know the exact parameters of the formula.

What I am using is this:

(NEXT NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)=((MULTIPLIER*PREVIOUS NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)+SUMMAND) MOD BASE

Ok, so how I start as the first number has no previous...?

I like the idea behind the generator, you need to clarify the disconnect between 'historical data and the seed parameter'. Your inference is, past results has no effect on the next event, but your seed is a past event.

Why not focus on the matrix of the game as your seed for the generator, then observe the roll out? or you can find a compromise by using markov chain sequence.
mitachoo

United States
Member #62,270
June 23, 2008
204 Posts
Offline

Jun 9, 2019, 3:50 pm

Adobea78, I've been working an Excel VBA Macro to do some backtesting for Pick 3 along your line of thinking. I'm using LCG numbers from a list of "Parameters In Common Use" I found on Wikipedia (m = 134456, a = 8121, and c = 28411), using the previous draw as the seed, and testing different draw history windows.

For example, my testing of a 7 draw window goes something like this: Where Draw #1 is the draw I'm trying to predict, Draws #2 through #8 are the 7 draws of history I'm using, and Draw #9 is my seed, I work through the LCG for the 7 draws 2 through 8, compare the predicted to actual, track the RSS of the difference, and then repeat for different window sizes to find the window that gives the smallest RSS. Using that window I then "extrapolate'" to Draw #1 by going one more increment of c.

Why did I pick m = 134456, a = 8121, and c = 28411? Because I only barely know VBA . . . for the life of me I can't figure out how to get VBA to stomach the HUGE numbers you see in the "Parameters In Common Use" from Wikipedia.
mitachoo

United States
Member #62,270
June 23, 2008
204 Posts
Offline

Jun 9, 2019, 5:34 pm

Quote: Originally posted by mitachoo on Jun 9, 2019
Adobea78, I've been working an Excel VBA Macro to do some backtesting for Pick 3 along your line of thinking. I'm using LCG numbers from a list of "Parameters In Common Use" I found on Wikipedia (m = 134456, a = 8121, and c = 28411), using the previous draw as the seed, and testing different draw history windows.

For example, my testing of a 7 draw window goes something like this: Where Draw #1 is the draw I'm trying to predict, Draws #2 through #8 are the 7 draws of history I'm using, and Draw #9 is my seed, I work through the LCG for the 7 draws 2 through 8, compare the predicted to actual, track the RSS of the difference, and then repeat for different window sizes to find the window that gives the smallest RSS. Using that window I then "extrapolate'" to Draw #1 by going one more increment of c.

Why did I pick m = 134456, a = 8121, and c = 28411? Because I only barely know VBA . . . for the life of me I can't figure out how to get VBA to stomach the HUGE numbers you see in the "Parameters In Common Use" from Wikipedia.

Well, looks like the window size is irrelevant, the measured error is nearly the same from small to large windows. Plan to look at a) use of other seeds, and b) other values of m.
lakerben

50

New Mexico
United States
Member #86,096
January 29, 2010
24,780 Posts
Offline

Jun 9, 2019, 7:57 pm
Quote: Originally posted by AntonisCh on May 10, 2019
Hi all,

I am watching quietly LP for a long time now and I am an active researcher in lottery subjects.

Have done all the usual drills, such as passing from neural nets to ARIMA models and from statistical methods to randomizers...

A brief conclusion so far from me: The main reason these methods fail is simple, known and let me put it in a simple yet intuitive way which will help me later to present my latest finding:

(useful remark: for practical reasons I will refer to a 5/45 Lottery game, but of course my method applies to all types)

Let's say that you have a history of draws of your local lottery.

Also let's assume that the history goes like this (numbers don't matter just get the idea):

3-5-12-17-24

1-7-12-29-34

....

...

18-23-24-35-41

and you apply your "super" method to derive your next draw from your history.

BUT! Assume that another fellow somewhere in the universe participates in his/her local lottery and until now has observed the SAME draws history as you.

Well, the problem is that from the SAME history the two lotteries (one here and the other on Jupiter...!) may produce totally different next draws.

See the problem of lottery forecasting? If the two fellows use the SAME method on the SAME history files they are going to get the SAME next draw as a prediction.

But the next draw will NOT be the same for the two different games no matter they have the same history!

That's the reason that ANY method will fail, UNLESS your prediction IS NOT based on your lottery history...

But that's my story.

The reason I am sharing this is to enrich the discussion with new ideas, maybe crosscheck results and get some input from community.

Let's start.

What is a linear congruential generator?

Well is a simple method to produce pseudorandom number sequences. Meaning, it is a formula that you can use to get a series of numbers that they LOOK like random BUT they are not. They are PREDICTABLE as long as we know the exact parameters of the formula.

What I am using is this:

(NEXT NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)=((MULTIPLIER*PREVIOUS NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)+SUMMAND) MOD BASE

Ok, so how I start as the first number has no previous...?

Well I need another number which I call SEED

MOD is the usual modular operator and simply means this: 9 mod 4= 1 as if we divide 9 by 4 we get 1 as the remainder.

Conclusion ONE:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Nothing new so far as this is everywhere in Internet, math books etc.

BUT...

WHAT IF I TRY TO FIND MY FOUR NUMBERS (MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED ) IN SUCH A WAY THAT MY NUMBER SEQUENCE PRODUCED FROM THE FORMULA IS SIMILAR BUT NOT EXACT TO MY DRAWING HISTORY???

Let's go back to my hypothetical history file and let's also imagine that I have also found my four numbers which produce the following:

HISTORY

3-5-12-17-24 and my SEED IS 10 (FIRST NUMBER IN SEQUENCE)- (NO HIT)

1-7-12-29-34 SECOND NUMBER 12 (HIT)

....

...

18-23-24-35-41 MY N-TH NUMBER IN SEQUENCE 19 (NO HIT)

and so on...

Conlcusion TWO:

I can find a well-defined pseudorandom sequence of numbers which can have TWO important features:
1. The sequence will resemble BUT NOT be the same as the actual draws history
2. The sequence is defince by four numbers which I can search through the combinations and find some good fits.
FINAL REMARK

Obviously the next number in my sequence will be the prediction.

So, what do you think?

If you care I can elaborate more, but I need your input and your feeling on this concept.

Thanks all!
Nice!

I'll be waiting for your program so I can test.

I'm sitting here listening to Merle Haggard sipping some coffee!
mitachoo

United States
Member #62,270
June 23, 2008
204 Posts
Offline

Jun 10, 2019, 4:11 am

Quote: Originally posted by mitachoo on Jun 9, 2019
Well, looks like the window size is irrelevant, the measured error is nearly the same from small to large windows. Plan to look at a) use of other seeds, and b) other values of m.

OK, I figured out the big number thing and I was able to test ALL the "parameters in common use" listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_congruential_generator#Parameters_in_common_use. Assuming a window of 1 draw (i.e. the previous draw is used as the "seed" and we extrapolate forward for 1 draw), and further assuming we limit play to only +/- 10 from the number the LCG spits out (21 picks total), 2 years of backtesting for Connecticut's Pick 3 yields the ROIs listed below. Item 2 (m = 2^32, a = 22695477, c = 1) and Item 15 (m = 2^48, a = 25214903917, c = 11) stand out as being the closest to breaking even. I will focus on these two and see if tweaking of the parameters can improve on the ROI.

One point of clarification: when I say "the number the LCG spits out" above, I'm talking the last 3 digits only.
mitachoo

United States
Member #62,270
June 23, 2008
204 Posts
Offline

Jul 4, 2019, 4:31 pm

I don't know if anyone is still doing anything with this, but I've been plugging away at an LCG-based system. I'm not ready to report anything yet, I'm stuck in "development hell" where in the midst of my Excel VBA programming, I'll go down a rabbit hole and waste HOURS trying to fix something stupid ("why is my progress tracker not updating? WTF???")
lakerben

50

New Mexico
United States
Member #86,096
January 29, 2010
24,780 Posts
Offline

Jul 5, 2019, 12:21 am

I read back in the 90's a farmer in Texas put a piece of paper with all the lottery numbers on it. He put the paper outside his chicken coop and watched the chicken poke several holes in the paper . He used the holes to select his numbers and won millions.

Random generator?

I'm sitting here listening to Merle Haggard sipping some coffee!
AntonisCh

Athens
Greece
Member #194,246
December 6, 2018
3 Posts
Offline

Jul 9, 2019, 9:15 am

Thanks for your remark!

(and thank you all for your comments)

I understand it is really difficult to elaborate on this and make it clear.

But I will try as this is the essence of my method:

Let's focus on this claim:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Do we all agree with that?

Forget for a moment your lottery game.

Just think that there are infinite quadruples of numbers which when put in the LGC formula can produce ANY given number sequence.

This is what I mean when I claim that we don't need the lottery history to construct our own sequence

I did not use -up to this point-ANY information coming from ANY lottery history.

Now, if we all are on the same page here let's make a step ahead:

Let's assume that we construct for instance 100 different LGC formulas by taking 100 quadruples.

And let's give them a simple name:

LGC-1

LGC-2

and so on upto LGC-100

Now, this is where we need the lottery history:

LGC-1 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x1 numbers

LGC-2 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x2 numbers

etc.

See my point now?

We can play instead of numbers the LGC's outcomes and select from them the best performers.

PS:of course I am not selling any type of software or anything else!!!

garyo1954

Texas
United States
Member #4,549
May 2, 2004
4,228 Posts
Offline

Jul 9, 2019, 2:58 pm

Quote: Originally posted by AntonisCh on Jul 9, 2019

Thanks for your remark!

(and thank you all for your comments)

I understand it is really difficult to elaborate on this and make it clear.

But I will try as this is the essence of my method:

Let's focus on this claim:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Do we all agree with that?

Forget for a moment your lottery game.

Just think that there are infinite quadruples of numbers which when put in the LGC formula can produce ANY given number sequence.

This is what I mean when I claim that we don't need the lottery history to construct our own sequence

I did not use -up to this point-ANY information coming from ANY lottery history.

Now, if we all are on the same page here let's make a step ahead:

Let's assume that we construct for instance 100 different LGC formulas by taking 100 quadruples.

And let's give them a simple name:

LGC-1

LGC-2

and so on upto LGC-100

Now, this is where we need the lottery history:

LGC-1 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x1 numbers

LGC-2 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x2 numbers

etc.

See my point now?

We can play instead of numbers the LGC's outcomes and select from them the best performers.

PS:of course I am not selling any type of software or anything else!!!

"A linear congruential generator (LCG) is an algorithm that yields a sequence of pseudo-randomized numbers calculated with a discontinuous piecewise linear equation. The method represents one of the oldest and best-known pseudorandom number generator algorithms.^[1] The theory behind them is relatively easy to understand, and they are easily implemented and fast, especially on computer hardware which can provide modulo arithmetic by storage-bit truncation."

RNG, PRNG, LCG basically the same thing.

The bigger problem is your 4 digit combination. Just because you find the highest producing set doesn't guarantee its are going to hit.

I posted a thread in the Systems forum using every 6 number string produced by the 5/35 matrix. The highest producing sets showed 10 hits in 1167 draws. On average that set should hit every 116.7 draws, but more likely it will hit a couple of times and be out 367 draws. Or may hit three in a month and stay out 782 draws.

Now here's the data for a 5 number string....

16	17	28	32	33	517	499	128	16	7	1167	166.714285714286
1	6	11	16	19	492	501	152	16	6
2	4	5	14	34	506	507	134	14	6
2	8	12	20	30	508	496	143	14	6
6	11	13	18	30	522	490	128	21	6
9	16	28	32	33	527	488	133	13	6
16	17	26	28	29	508	497	132	24	6
1	3	6	9	25	509	492	151	10	5
1	4	7	15	20	532	462	151	17	5
1	6	11	16	30	516	469	164	13	5
1	7	15	23	26	542	452	149	19	5
1	7	15	26	29	538	465	140	19	5
1	10	14	26	29	504	495	148	15	5
1	11	16	17	25	509	481	157	15	5
1	14	17	26	29	511	482	151	18	5
1	14	23	26	29	516	463	166	17	5
1	14	26	29	30	496	504	148	14	5
1	14	26	29	31	508	495	141	18	5

The top set 16, 17, 28, 32, 33 scores 0 - 517 times, 1 - 499 times, 2 - 128 times, 3 - 16 times, 4 - 7 times and doesn't hit as a JP winner in 1167 draws.

The best five ball combination, with 5 possible four ball combinations, hits as a four about every 166 draws.

A four ball, (quad/four numbers) may hit 3 to 4 times per thousand, (no matter how you come up with your number sets).

So, if you choose to use 4 number sets be prepared for the possibility of playing the same set perhaps a couple of years (still with no guarantee of it happening).

G

I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain.

AllenB

California
United States
Member #167,122
June 27, 2015
1,635 Posts
Offline

Jul 9, 2019, 3:51 pm

Quote: Originally posted by AntonisCh on Jul 9, 2019
Thanks for your remark!

(and thank you all for your comments)

I understand it is really difficult to elaborate on this and make it clear.

But I will try as this is the essence of my method:

Let's focus on this claim:

If we know just FOUR numbers: MULTIPLIER, SUMMAND, BASE and SEED I can produce with my formula above a pseudorrandom sequence of numbers.

Do we all agree with that?

Forget for a moment your lottery game.

Just think that there are infinite quadruples of numbers which when put in the LGC formula can produce ANY given number sequence.

This is what I mean when I claim that we don't need the lottery history to construct our own sequence

I did not use -up to this point-ANY information coming from ANY lottery history.

Now, if we all are on the same page here let's make a step ahead:

Let's assume that we construct for instance 100 different LGC formulas by taking 100 quadruples.

And let's give them a simple name:

LGC-1

LGC-2

and so on upto LGC-100

Now, this is where we need the lottery history:

LGC-1 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x1 numbers

LGC-2 will match SOMEWHERE with our lottery history in x2 numbers

etc.

See my point now?

We can play instead of numbers the LGC's outcomes and select from them the best performers.

PS:of course I am not selling any type of software or anything else!!!

Seams like no matter what or where you numbers are derived from, you still go back to the Draw History before the Final Out Put.

With regard to all Jackpot or Pick 5 of 35+ Game the Draw History is very short compared to the number of possible draws. About the Only Sure Thing is that you do not want to pick a combination that has already been drawn. I have not looked at the History but I am Guessing you could apply the same thing to a 4 Number Sequence and find that you do not want to repeat one either.
garyo1954

Texas
United States
Member #4,549
May 2, 2004
4,228 Posts
Offline

Jul 9, 2019, 10:02 pm

Quote: Originally posted by AllenB on Jul 9, 2019
Seams like no matter what or where you numbers are derived from, you still go back to the Draw History before the Final Out Put.

With regard to all Jackpot or Pick 5 of 35+ Game the Draw History is very short compared to the number of possible draws. About the Only Sure Thing is that you do not want to pick a combination that has already been drawn. I have not looked at the History but I am Guessing you could apply the same thing to a 4 Number Sequence and find that you do not want to repeat one either.

That's true Allen. Knowing the game and history of the game keeps the player from stepping in a lot of potholes.

There was once a guy whose entire system was playing every combination of 30s. Naturally in a 5/35 there are only six sets from 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 to 31, 32, 33, 34, 35.

It is the perfect plan (on the opposite end of playing 1,2,3,4,5,6).

The only thing that spoils the plan is if a number starting with 30 or 31 doesn't hit. And through the first 6606 draws it hasn't, going all the way back to when Texas was a 5/39. So in 6606 draws he spent $33,030 and if it happened tonight he would only win $25,000(- taxes).

But it is still the perfect plan if all you are chasing is the claim of winning a Jackpot.

So yeah, 100% agree knowing the history of the game is necessary and add that having a good working knowledge of the foundational stats is just as important.

Sometimes something sounds like a good idea until we see the stats. And then we can see where or how or if the idea fails.

Apparently the major point I was making in the thread "Always play for Jackpots" got lost amid the miscellaneous discussions. But I digress, leaving that brick for others to beat their head against and see if they come to the same conclusion I have.

G

I'm probably here unless I'm not.
Dreaming would be a perfectly useless function if it's only purpose was to entertain.

New Topic New Poll

Subscribe to this topic

My Method: A linear congruential generator pickerPrev TopicNext Topic

My Method: A linear congruential generator pickerPrev Topic Next Topic